-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Thankyou Rob and Alan, ASA80, the Sironar N 135mm was at its optimum aperture of f22, and I think the Kodak was at F16, can you pick which is which? Alan the dilution was about 1:125-ish. 375mm of water to about 3mm of R09. I was having trouble with the Mod 54 leaving streaks due to the dev washing over the film holders, but solved that by developing for one minute in one direction, then a minute in the opposite direction for the ten minutes.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Thanks! I've been meaning to try R09 with blue x-ray as time permits.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
A stupid newbie question:
Does using x-ray film necessarily mean having to deal with rounded corners?
I am waiting now for some Carestream 8x10 to arrive from Z&Z...
Thanks!
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
That's a good question! I've never shot anything but Fuji HR-T, which has rounded corners. I have never thought about it much. I am curious if some other films have "normal" straight corners.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
I've been using Fuji HR-U green and CXC Ortho Green from Agfa (both from cxconline) - they both have rounded corners.
Doesn't bother me any more than notch codes do on trad film.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
All I have seen are round corners. Buy larger and cut it down. I cut to all smaller sizes, even down to Hasselblad.
One advantage to RC is no sharp edges scratching other negs if shuffling.
Save scraps for fixer checking.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Yknow, I have only ever used xray film, haven't shot a sheet of real film since I started using large format. Cut up my own film from 8x10 to 4x5 and have never considered the round corners. I think they get lost in the holders track, dont see them during scanning.
-
1 Attachment(s)
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Attachment 175075
Tuesday went for a trip to the vineyards, wanted to get a shot of the big oak barrels, but settled for a couple of vines
Shen Hao 4x5, green Agfa iso 80, nikkor w 90mm f11, rotary 1:125 for ten minutes
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
All of the films have the round corners.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jim Fitzgerald
All of the films have the round corners.
Man, that's gotta be a deal breaker for some.................
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
The round corners are nearly lost in the rebate.
Now if you are a rebate connoisseur, buy real FILM.
Just got my big Acculight boxes up and first on is 8x10 X-Ray. Looks good to me.
https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4675/...ee669d0e_c.jpgX-Ray Rebates by moe.randy, on Flickr
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Would someone please give me a short primer on the different sorts of X-ray film.
I’m looking to buy some 10x12 film for landscapes, so presumably that means using a “green” film rather than a “blue”?
Some films have a blue base (e.g. Fuji UM-MA and AD-M), which presumably makes for difficult printing, especially on multigrade paper. Is that correct, or doesn't it matter?
Some films have emulsion on both sides, which doesn’t sound like what I want, correct?
A lot of films listed on eBay are described simply as “green x-ray” film (e.g. Konica PPG and Doctor’s Choice DC-G). Are these suitable?
Many thanks.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
I'm not sure anybody has tested ALL X-Ray film for our spurious usage.
Most seem to pick one and use it, as they now have 100 sheets of very cheap 'film' that may produce images that emulate historical film 100 years out of production.
Some experts here have proposed creating a 'Sticky"' topic to deal with these common questions. Never happened. I am not that guy.
I was once in your position. I picked KODAK made Carestream CSG in many sizes. http://www.classicxray.com/kodaktmatg.html
It's 2 sided and Blue in tint. Blue to make viewing easier on Dr eyes. AFAIK all X-Ray film is blue tint. I may be wrong, I often am. All seems to have round corners, but my sample % is small.
Blue or Green is an X-Ray Trade designation of how the medical X-Ray emitter and the X-Ray Cassette converts Rays to film. An X-Ray Cassette is not the same as our film holders, but it once was. Confusing. We know.
We all use different ISO/ASA #, some use 40 others 80. That's just a starting point just as ASA is just a number on 'normal' film. X-Ray is High speed or not, whatever that means.
EU has different manufacturers and sizes. Asia differs.
I find one LED bulb works best for safe light, at 4 ft. YMMV. Others disagree. https://www.superbrightleds.com/more.../attributes/13
I buy only from this source. I buy green which is blue, I buy this film. https://www.zzmedical.com/x-ray-acce...-ray-film.html
I also buy this film, but for that you need to read the history in the thread. It's not better, it's different. https://www.zzmedical.com/x-ray-acce...ideo-film.html
Expect others to differ. This is a free forum.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
The advantage of the film Randy recommends is that it's single sided, and has an anti-halation coating. The single side aspect makes it much easier to develop (in tubular daylight tanks, for instance, since you don't need to worry about damage to the emulsion layer on the back where it contacts the tank walls), and it will also be sharper. And it costs more: I use Fuji HR-U, which is a "green" film, because I delight in cheap, but that's the only good reason for it, and probably my cheap film was negated by the need to purchase a full set of hangers and tanks to avoid scratching the back of the film, but I do happen to like processing that way, and would have done that anyway.
I cannot begin to say enough nice things about Randy's safelight recommendation! It is perfect for the job.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Randy is spot on, at least as far as my experience goes. I would have loved to try single sided mammography film, but it's virtually impossible to get in Europe at a reasonable price. I've recently switched to fomapan for 8x10 due to the easier processing, wider spectral response and better sharpness. I use fomapan in all formats, which also helps in terms of standardizing on processing parameters. Nevertheless, I've managed to get some good results with xray. And yes, most of it is double sided, and as far as I know, corners are always rounded and the base always has a blue tint. This doesn't interfere with printing or scanning in my experience; perhaps the blur base increases contrast with VC paper, but I use xray mostly for alt process printing and it appears to transmit uv light very well. With VC paper, I get good results as well; the blue base doesn't seem to be a problem in any respect. You can't beat the bang for the buck that xray film offers; despite its challenges, I find this remains true, particularly in 8x10 and ULF.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
I think the speeds are different, green is normally about iso 100, this depends on your own personal exposure and developing routines. I read some entries on this thread that use green as low as iso 40. My own preference is at iso80. Blue is a higher speed and is produced in half speed blue at approx iso100 and full speed which I have not used but is said to be around iso200.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
I've tried one type of blue, which is labeled 'high speed' iirc and a realistic EI in daylight with normal contrast was about 50, the same as the green stuff I had from the same brand. I've yet to come across as credible test that places it at 200 - although there are quite a few people who expose xray of any kind at 200 and don't worry about the lost shadow detail.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
I use the half speed blue at the same iso as my Agfa green at about 80, what did you notice are the main differences between blue and green?
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
It may help newbies that drop into these discussions without much research to always state the tint color of all X-Ray film.
As we know, a one-time reference is lost in this vast and endless thread.
This may eliminate a lot of repetitive confusion.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Great overview post Randy. I wish we could get a sticky or some kind of info page on the main page. What happened to our resident Father? Good point about the "tint" of the film. Confusing, to newbies.
I have directed many people to this thread from Facebook - all say "Almost 500 pages?! I'm not reading that!" So it goes. I can only type out the same general recommendations so many times before I decide to leave it to others - I'd rather be out photographing. Which is where I'm going now :).
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
A good jumping off point is my spreadsheet I posted back in #4786
There have been a couple of updates, thanks to those who did. :)
Quote:
Chewed through thread from where I left off a few years ago. Really nice images in here.
I made a spreadsheet culled from APUG, here, blogs, flickr, and google searches. It is a few years out of date. Meant to share this a long time ago but life gets in the way sometimes.
Find on my google docs -
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...it?usp=sharing
It is set to anyone can edit.
EDIT:
It contains 4 tabs
1) name, EI/ISO ratings, sensitivity types, light exposed under (when given or obvious), and development info.
2) Film names, types, and box thumbs in an "equivalent" table. Discontinued films are also included
3) Notes, DIY developers with credit, Andrew O'Neil's X-Ray Film Reciprocity Effect chart (2010)
4) ANSI standard cut film sizes. in, mm, min/nom/max for 2" x 3" to 12" x 20" and 9cm x 12cm to 24cm x 30cm
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Michael,
Great work. I missed it last year as I took 6 months off this forum. I missed Andrew O'Neal's contribution as I was not on Apug of LFPF in 2010.
This is a great compilation. Very useful.
Your link is bad in today's post, 404. The link works in the original post.
I downloaded it as .xls and it opens perfectly in Office Libre.
Perhaps add a preface about all X-Ray film is blue tint.
Your chart should be a sticky. Let's try to promote that.
Thank you!
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Here is a link to a flikr thread and what they rate xray film speeds: https://www.flickr.com/groups/147199...7624079554297/
CXS high speed blue is rated at iso 200 by one member, these speeds were recommended by the ADMIN:
1) Kodak Mammography Film
MIN-R 2000 Film
EI or ISO = 125
2) Kodak Scientific Imaging Film
X-OMAT Blue XB
EI or ISO = 320
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
After reading some of the actual xray radiology sites the sensitivity of xray film is represented by a letter and is all to do with the size of the silver nitrate crystal, one site states that half speed blue has the smaller grain size and recommended where fine detail is required. Don't ask me for references, it was just a perusal.
If you were to go way back to the beginning of this thread (1st page) recommended film speeds are offered, high speed blue is recommended at iso200.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Quote:
Originally Posted by
andrewch59
I use the half speed blue at the same iso as my Agfa green at about 80, what did you notice are the main differences between blue and green?
Well, spectral response, obviously. Greens render very dark and skies always blow out white. While with green film, the sky can be held back a little with a yellow filter.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
I got interested in this thread some years ago. Then went through an extended period of abject poverty before I could explore it. It's been years now. And now I want to read every post. But all the links and photos have been stripped out of the thread. Can anybody tell me how far back in time in this thread (or any other) I can go before the links and photos get removed from the posts? I want to do 8x10, and have no intention of paying the ridiculous pan film prices. I think a lot can be done with xray film, at least till they jack up prices and phase it out. Hmm..or has that time arrived?
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Randy Moe
It may help newbies that drop into these discussions without much research to always state the tint color of all X-Ray film.
As we know, a one-time reference is lost in this vast and endless thread.
This may eliminate a lot of repetitive confusion.
Is there a reference to successful development methodologies for the film you discussed? Obviously I would be thrilled if there was a summary of what has collectively been learned.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
http://www.largeformatphotography.in...=1#post1390800
Quote:
Originally Posted by
dpaqu
Is there a reference to successful development methodologies for the film you discussed? Obviously I would be thrilled if there was a summary of what has collectively been learned.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
After an interminable hiatus due to a broken leg, I'm back up and running—well, figuratively.
Slowly starting to work again.
Camomile flowers shot with a Rittreck View and a 90mm Super Angulon.
13x18 x-ray film (green sensitive Fuji HR-E).
Rotary development in Ilford MG 1+50 in diy PVC tube for 8min.
Scan from contact print on Ilford MG Warmtone paper at grade 2.
https://farm1.staticflickr.com/788/2...2949a506_b.jpg
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
I hope the leg heals quickly and completely! The image is simply wonderful, you're getting amazing results with this film. Is this double sided film? Do you strip the backside or leave it on? Can you tell more about the diy development tube; does it allow for free flow of chemicals along the backside of the film as well?
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Koraks, thank you.
Yes, it's double sided.
No, I do not strip it.
The PVC tubes are still at the testing stage. I did some research (including this forum) and came up with a number of internal diameters which are supposed to work best for each format.
This particular film was developed in a 3" tube.
The reason why I'm testing this method, is because rotary developing has given me the most consistent and uniform results so far.
I've tried deep tank with Kodak and diy hangers, glass bottomed trays, and a number of Jobo drums, all with different agitation regimes, and rotary is what comes closer to what I'm looking for.
Still, this isn't a perfect method either.
This particular type of film (Fuji HR-E) comes out almost perfect (so far, and under my particular testing conditions), but the Fuji RX-N (blue sensitive, double sided) comes out completely scratched under the same testing conditions.
The Agfa HDR (green sensitive, single sided, AH layer) comes out almost as good as the HR-E, but I have other issues with it (in all probability due to it been expired since 2013, while the Fuji films are fresh.)
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Thanks for the update; so your tubes are just that: tubes with two end cos and nothing else? Perhaps the hr-e has a topcoat that prevents from scratching. I know the film I use scratches if you so much as look at it.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
I'm a retired X-Ray Engineer. I have worked with film for the last 45 years and all X-Ray film is made for a mechanical film processor or even the old dip-tanks. For 99% of the film the developer is a rapid type at 100-105 degreed F for any where from 25 to 60 seconds in the developer depending on the type of film and the machine rack type ( deep tank or laminar flow tank) All the fixers have a harder in it to prevent scratches as it moves from the fix tank to the wash tank and then the dryer rack.
The rollers today ( pretty much obsolete due to digital imaging having taken over) are made of EDPM rubber compound or a compressed epoxy-paper type to prevent roller marks as the film is transported from one rack to the next.
If your fixer does not have a hardener in it the emulsion swells and will be very soft and easy to scratch until it is dry.
The dryer is hot as in over 125 degrees F and the film is made to take that kind of heat.
Mammography film is very fragile when wet but is extremely sensitive to low light making it ideal for B&W photography. If you have a densitometer, an image with an average density of 1.80 will give you the best tonal range using mammo film.
As for normal X-Ray film a 1.60 will be in the ball park.
X-Ray film is sensitive to the screens Green or Blue that fluoresce depending on the silver coating make up. But the film is very sensitive to any light other than what we see as red. It does see red but at a much slower speed so a red safe light can be used at 6 feet away and no brighter than 5 watts.
I have spent hundreds of hours in an "un-safe light darkroom" where outside light leaked around a seal or an LED of some sort fogged the film or someone putting in a 25 watt bulb or higher burning the safety coating of the safe light fogging all of the film.
Go into your darkroom and turn the lights off. If you see any white light or the overhead lights are florescent there can be an after glow. The film if close enough to the light "leak" will see it and become fogged.
A easy test to do is put your keys or change on a piece of film under your 6 foot away safe light and expose for 60 seconds ( average time to unload a cassette and place the film in a tank or machine) and develop the film If you have a ghost image of your objects, you have an un-safe , safe light of a light leak/ light source fogging the film.
Most X-Ray film is pretty tough stuff as it has to be loaded,unloaded, bent many times as it travels through the film processor machine and then thrown up on a view box or back into a film scanner by Techs that are always in a hurry due to a demanding doctor.
As for quality from batch to batch, lot number to lot number Fuji is hard to beat. Agfa is the worst for QC and was pulled from almost all of my clients due to their problems with QC.
X-Ray film loves the cold,hates the heat. If you order a box of film in the heat of Summer and it sits in a hot delivery truck for hours you will have exposure problems guaranteed.
New film sometimes called "Green film" as in new made last week can be overly sensitive to light and drive you nuts. It needs to outgass and age for a few days once opened to match your other boxes of older film.
I made my living troubleshooting these problems for decades and making sure if you had an X-Ray for a broken bone or breast cancer , you got the best results the Tech could hand to the doctor.
Always test your film before you go on that "picture of a lifetime" shoot. Just because it is new does not mean it is any good. I would send cases and cases back to the maker every week that tested poorly.
White Box or White Label film many times is Agfa film that did not meet specs; so called Factory Seconds. It will work but the next lot number can be way off than what you expected. By law it must be within 3.0 of the last lot number. 3.0! think about that? Yes Virgina, the human eye can see a 3.0 density difference and it is striking.
Hope the info helps. X-Ray film is very interesting to play with in general photography.
Results can be very impressive if you understand it.
And that is a whole other story.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Thanks for the info.
Finally we get an X-Ray Tech on board.
Welcome!
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rapidrob
I'm a retired X-Ray Engineer. ...
Interesting. From reading that, I've been getting my best results from Agfa rejects.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
And what about https://www.zzmedical.com/8x10-in-ca...deo-film.html?
The info provided is useful. We didn't know it was done hot or about hardening fixer.
That said many are getting scratch free results using careful handling.
I slosh 14X36" by hand seesaw in a tray and get great results. 2 clips, 10 minutes and done. Fot that I use Ilford PQ Print develop. It's fast and reusable.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Quote:
Originally Posted by
koraks
Thanks for the update; so your tubes are just that: tubes with two end cos and nothing else?
Koraks, yes.
They are plain PVC tubes, manually rolled on a diy roller base.
A couple of notes though:
These tubes don't accept end caps directly. They require a coupling and a screw cap with its own base.
The coupling has a sort of a stopper in its middle which is a tiny bit smaller in diameter compared to the tube itself (can't measure it with my caliper, because it's in the middle of the coupling.)
So, to avoid scratches during loading/unloading, I have only glued the base of the screw cap to the coupling, but not the coupling to the tube.
I load the film directly into the tube. Then I fit the open end of the coupling to the tube.
To deal with leakage from this unglued connection, I first rap around the end of the tube with some thread seal tape. It works fine.
Rereading all the above, I hope that it all makes sense to you and it doesn't sound like gibberish.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Thodoris, you said it is double sided X-ray film - with tube processing, one side of the film is against the inside of the tube. How is that side getting developer to it? I am confused.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Randy
Thodoris, you said it is double sided X-ray film - with tube processing, one side of the film is against the inside of the tube. How is that side getting developer to it? I am confused.
Randy, it has to do with the diameter of the tube.
For each format you have to use the "right" diameter, so that the film curls inside the tube in such a way as to not being pushed completely flat against the wall of the tube.
The 18cm dimension of the films I'm using has the right amount of tension/freedom inside a tube with a 3" diameter.
This allows for the chemistry to reach both sides of the film.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Thodoris,
OK, that almost makes sense to me - but at some point the outer side of the curled sheet of film has to make contact with the tube...doesn't it? The curled sheet of film can't just be suspended inside the tube, not making contact anywhere. In my minds eye I am trying to picture how the film could be suspended inside the tube allowing both sides to get even development - and the only way I can imagine that working is if the only part of the sheet of film that is in contact with the tube is the very edges. Is that correct? Sorry if I am just not understanding.
Thanks for your input - and I really like the image - reminds me of one I shot a few years back on regular 5X7 film.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ljpwkgh5552is56/rh5.jpg?dl=1
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Randy, I can't be 100% sure of what goes on inside the tube during processing, since the tube is closed.
My comment on how this whole thing works is an extrapolation from the results I'm getting, plus how the film fits the tube when I load it in (while still dry.)
I imagine that the tension I described above which keeps the film's back from total contact with the wall when I load it, remains to some degree even after the film gets wet.
It's possible that the flow of chemicals is not the same on both sides, but there seems to be enough of a flow of liquids on the back to produce evenly developed negatives.
Again, this is only a guess.
And, I like your picture too :)
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Rapidrob,
Thank you for sharing your experience with us.
You've packed so much great information in your post, I saved it for future reference.
I'd like to offer a couple of notes though.
First, for anyone new to xray (or who's reading this thread thinking of giving xray film a try at some point):
If you were to develop xray film as it was intended by its manufacturer (rapid developer at 100-105 degreed F for 25 to 60 seconds), you would get a characteristic curve like the ones shown in the data sheets published by each manufacturer (do a google search for the film you're interested in using, and you'll find a pdf of that data sheet.)
Those curves are extremely steep for pictorial use.
That is why most people who use xray film for in-camera negatives are using dilute developers at lower temperatures, making their own tests to determine length of development depending on whether they intent to contact print (and with which process) or scan their negatives.
Second, regarding safelight testing:
The process you describe is fine, if you'll be processing the film in some sort of daylight processor.
In my experience, if you intent to process in open trays, it leads to about 12min of safelight exposure (1-2min prewash, 8min or so of developing, and 1min rinse before the film reaches the fix, plus 1min or so for loading/unloading before processing starts).
For such a working process, the safelight testing described by Kodak in the link below is more appropriate:
http://wwwca.kodak.com/global/en/con...Safelite.shtml
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
As long as we are talking processing.
This is for new folk. Old news.
I use KODAK only Film Hangers for DIY GAS Burst of CARESTREAM EKTASCAN B/RA SINGLE EMULSION VIDEO FILM. Kodak hangers have more drain holes.
I load 4- 8X10 or 8-5X7 or 16- 4X5 on 4 hangers into 1-gallon tanks, cover the tank and run through 4 different tanks in a row. I turn on white lights and relax between tanks.
Gas Burst Rodinol, still water stop, Gas Burst TF5. Last tank is bottom-up trickle wash. Times vary. Rodinol is 1/100. One shot. I reuse TF5. TF5 is made with distilled water. All temps 68F.
Remove and hang dry with no fan. Works for me.
This was with Lake Michigan water. No squeegee, no soap.
I am still setting it back up for rural water. This water is a little chunky. I have filters.
Save your X-Ray cutoffs for Fixer checking. Time to clear.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Thodoris, I am going to speculate that your method will work best on 4X5, work with 5X7 (13X18), but may not work at all with 8X10...which is what I shoot.
As we know, a larger sheet of film is more flexible than a smaller sheet of film, even if they are of the same thickness. A 5X7 sheet will not sag as much in the center as an 8X10 sheet.
RATS!
But, I may try fabricating a tube to try anyway.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Randy, according to my research, the 3" tube is the recommended size for 8x10.
The format I'm most interest in at the moment is 18x24cm (the European equivalent) and I have developed a few sheets in the 3" tubes with great results.
For 5x7 (13x18) the recommendation is 2" tubes, but my first attempt in that size was unsuccessful due to leakage problems. I might try fixing this issue at some point, but since I already made a couple of 3" tubes for 13x18 that work, I might not.
As a side note, I initially tried developing 2 sheets of 13x18cm in the tubes I made for 18x24cm, but one of the negatives moved during development and covered a bit of the other.
To fix this, I cut one of the tubes for 18x24 in half and glued between the two pieces a coupling.
The stopper that I mentioned that these couplings have in their middle, was exactly what was needed to keep the two films separated.
Hope this helps.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
It does help - thanks. I will look into the 3" tubes. If you get a chance, perhaps post a picture of your tube assembly some time - or if there is one already posted somewhere, can you direct me to it. Thanks.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Randy, sure, I'll take a couple of pictures and post them here soon.
By the way, I'd like to make clear that all the posts I made about "my tubes" were only meant as clarifications. I was only trying to answer questions asked, as best I could. They should not be misconstrued as advertisement for this processing method.
I'm still in testing mode, as I've only processed about 20 sheets so far. It's too early to tell if it works consistently.
(Also, I'm not the first to have used this method. This is a diy version of the btzs tubes.
The only reason I didn't just buy a set of btzs tubes is because they cost too much to get them here in Cyprus. When you add shipping and taxes (we pay taxes on the shipping too…) they end up costing almost as much as a used Jodo expert drum.)
And even if I decide that it indeed works (for me), this method has a major disadvantage to others, like the gas burst that Randy Moe mentioned above. It's not productive. You can only process one sheet per tube, and each tube requires about 40"sec between lifting it from the rollers and putting it back on them with the next chemical.
This limits the number of tubes you can run together, while keeping your processing times consistent. It's more comparable to tray processing individual sheets.
On the plus side, they cost relatively little to make, so (in theory) you could load several and process them sequentially, without wasting time washing and drying tubes between processing cycles.
In any case, I'll keep on posting results as they come in.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Thodoris, thanks - I have processed several dozen 8X10 sheets in trays. Managed to finally have some luck with minimal scratching while processing 4 sheets at a time, but was not satisfied with any scratches, so tried processing in 1 ltr upright tanks - 2 film hangers at a time, but got very uneven development no mater what I did - more rigorous agitation, less rigorous agitation - just could not make it work. Tried one film hanger laying flat in a tray but still got some processing streaks. I tried processing in an 8X10 Colourtronic daylight processing tube that I purchased many, many years ago when I was printing color slides via Cibachrome. The tube is 4 inches inside diameter and has small raised ribs that run the length. The ribs left marks on the X-ray film during processing :(
Anyway, the search continues.