Printable View
Fuji Super HRT (green) 14x17 and tray developed in HC110 (Dilution B). Shot with a 30" Artar and simply contact printed to minimum black onto some junk paper I had laying around (Kodak Polycontrast RC) to Grade 3 with my Ilford VC head. I like all the variation in the skin tones, but I suspect my wife would stop allowing me to photograph her if I showed her this!
I started working last weekend on some photos detailing the area around the Withlacoochee River with my 8x10, with the goal being a large series of 8x10 contact prints both with silver gelatin and Van Dyke Browns. Here is a sample image. You can find about 10 more on my blog linked below in my signature. All are taken with Fuji Super HR-T:
http://www.oceanstarproductions.com/...ing/0045ss.jpg
Spend a couples days in Yosemite... here the shot that was taken with this lens http://antiquecameras.net/blog93.html from Dan on the 14x17 Xray film .
http://img535.imageshack.us/img535/841/oaktre3.jpg
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7215/7...99953ce4_z.jpg
Eastman View No. 1 8x10 Camera
Konica Hexanon GRII 210mm
Kodak B/RA X-Ray Film
Caffenol C/M
This is an amazing thread.
Thanks to all involved for so much information.
I just got myself some 5x7" MXG and some 8x10" KODAK EKTASCAN B/RA Film / 4153 (single sided emulsion).
I'll try to post comments after I try them out.
Holden,
What ISO and dev times are you using for the B/RA film? (Just got a pack).
Annnnd -- That's a really nice picture!!
Iso 25 in Caffenol for 3:30 seconds. Seems Iso 50 dev times are between 6-8 minutes in any developer so I'm told.Quote:
Originally Posted by gbogatko
3:30 seconds? Perhaps minutes?Quote:
Originally Posted by Holdenrichards
haha
George
Three minutes thirty seconds
Iso 25, then D76 1:1 for 6 minutes. Thin neg, but everything is in there.
Attachment 72925
Yes, Sony dslr lenses use same mount Minolta Maxxum lenses.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gene McCluney
Patrick
Lovely tones!
Thanks!!
Feeding my friend threat. A 14x17 Carbon Transfer Gold Tone with Xray film unspoiled.
http://img41.imageshack.us/img41/4606/img0894jw.jpg
Impressive Tri! I'm still trying to get 4x5 carbons to work. Got the UV lights on right now. Hope I've solved the frilling problem.
Tri, Gotta love 14x17 x-ray film! Print size is impressive especially in carbon.
Sly, make sure you have a good safe edge.
gbogatko, Great Image , could you Tell me which Film you gave been using?
Thanks Sly. I'm sure everything will fall in place as soon as your workflow set up. As for the carbon process .The patience, persistence is the key to succes.Quote:
Originally Posted by sly
Jim, the 14x17 is the format I work now a day. As you already know there is no brainer to use other format beside the 20x24.My 11x14 is now semi retired, except Studio Portrait work which I use the 8A instead.
Thanks Tri and Jim, I'm finding it's going better when I mask off ALL the rebate.
Got some prints today I'm pretty happy with. I'll scan and post once they are dry.
Tried my hand at shooting and developing 8x10 Fuji Super RX Blue with Max Pyro at 2:2:100 dilution and 6 minutes. I guessed at 125ISO but really should have used 50ISO judging from the thinness of the negs. Anyway, I look forward to experimenting more with this since it does look promising (and cheap!).
Also, this is the first time I used my Jobo CPP-2 that I recently refurbished after picking it up for $250. :)
Attachment 73493Attachment 73494
I'd like to find some 5X7 x-ray film, and not have to go to Brasil to find it. Who sells it in the U.S.A.?
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7078/7...ec6e357f_z.jpg
1903 Eastman View No 1. 8x10 Camera
Konica Hexanon GRII 210mm
Kodak Single Emulsion X-Ray
Caffenol CM
How about here: http://www.provisionenterprises.com/...egory&cat_id=3
Attachment 74389
Burk & James 8x10 camera
300mm Caltar lens wide open at f/6.3 for 1/5 second
Kodak Ektascan B/R Single Emulsion x-ray film at EI 50
Processed in Caffenol-C for 11 minutes
really nice! I am sticking to EI 25 with this stuff, but your results at 50 are super!Quote:
Originally Posted by rotomotor
Has anyone tried the green x-ray film in a jobo recently? I decided to try 11x14 Fuji x-ray film given its cost was about .50 a sheet. I have a 3063 drum with the jobo insert. Do you think it will have streaks using the jobo insert? We will find out in any event.
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8157/7...0785e7a6_z.jpg
Eastman View No 1. 8x10 Camera
Konica Hexanon GRII 210mm
Kodak B/RA X-Ray Film
Caffenol.
I'm thinking scratches!Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon Wilson
Since this film has emulsion on both sides, the developer will not be able to get to the side of film that's against the tank. You will most likely end up with a lot of mottling on that side... Would be okay if you are planning on stripping that side...and then scratches wouldn't be a problem, either.
Jim, I too have been concerned it would be scratched to smithereens. But, the one sheet I was able to develop yesterday does not appear scratched. I am going to look at it closer and hope to get the sheet scanned/printed.
I developed my first sheet yesterday with Ilfosol 3 (5:30) and used my 3063 with its 11x14 jobo insert. I did not notice any scratches, but the film may need more fixing or stripping of the emulsion from one side for the developed sheet does not look like a typical developed sheet of film for it has a bluish tint to it. Is that normal? If not, does it need to be fixed more?Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew O'Neill
Andrew, I know having waded through this thread you have posted how you strip the emulsion from one side. Could you describe your method for doing it so that it is near the top of the thread?
In any event, I am stoked at the price of this film.....mine cost me about .50 per sheet which is nothing compared to the Real McCoy (Ilford, Kodak, etc.).
Thanks guys.
Jon
Jon,
It was actually someone else who posted their procedure. It's pretty simple, so here goes: Tape down your negative with the side that was not facing the lens, facing up. Tape it down with duct tape. Run your finger nail along the edge of the film, pushing the tape down. You don't want ammonia reaching the emulsion on the other side!! Dip a brush (I use a cheap foam brush) in household ammonia and apply it to the negative. The emulsion strips quickly. With a damp sponge, wipe away excess ammonia/emulsion. Then wipe with a wetter sponge. Examine to make sure all emulsion has been removed. Remove from glass and wash in a tray.
Because stripping literally removes half of the negatives density range, you will have to develop longer than your normal time.
andrew
Jon, that is the way it looks. IMHO stripping is a waste of time. Just print through it. Now I'm a carbon printer and it has never been any problem for me. I've printed from negatives developed in D76 and Pyrocat-HD. Just learn how to use it for how you will print. It is cheap enough to experiment with. Find what works for you. Everyone does it a little different. You have the basics. That is all you need.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon Wilson
Even if you enlarge with it? Not a waste of time. Contact printing? Yes, it would be a waste of time then.Quote:
IMHO stripping is a waste of time
Thanks guys. This helps. The 11x14 would be contact printing. Smaller formats would be available to me for enlargements, so I will plan to "strip" those negs. BTW, is the bluish tint to the Fuji green X-ray film normal appearance after it has been developed and not stripped?Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew O'Neill
Yes, the film base is blue... even before you develop it.
here is one I shot last night, still trying to work out all the quirks, really like this stuff though, this was shot with a C1, green sensitive xray film and a ab1600 strobe
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8142/7...0bcd6bc0_b.jpg
flower by J. Golden, on Flickr
First of all, thanks to all who have contributed to this thread. Your experiences have created a de-facto manual for working with x-ray film. I recently decided to try it because of some interesting potential qualities I'll mention in a few lines. Your collective wisdom and willingness to share have provided a sort of "kick start" into working with x-ray film.
Now for my hair-brained idea. X-ray film has the image exposed on two layers of emulsion -- the side facing the lens being the primary image and the so-called back side being the secondary image. It occurred to me that the secondary image would be a bit fuzzy due to the image passing through the primary emulsion and the base material. This is really an unsharp secondary image (hopefully the lights are going on and you know where I'm going with this).
It may be possible to relatively easily create a built in unsharp mask for the primary image.
The trick (I think) will be to reduce (possibly proportionally) the secondary image.
The result (again, I think) will be improved contrast in the shadows and better acutance overall.
There have been several suggestions for removing the secondary emulsion by mounting the negative on a glass plate -- great idea. I'm now working on a reducing process that is controllable using that setup. For calibration, I'm shooting a white wall with a 4x5 Stouffer Step Tablet sandwiched on a sheet of Fuji Green X-ray film using an older wood film holder. The older film holder's internal guides has more slop so I can insert the two sheets of film together.
Using a controlled exposure, I can measure the developed and reduced film density on my old densitometer.
I think I have the process down -- I'm working on the reducing chemistry now. I need something that I can control the emulsion reduction -- Clorox Bleach is not a good idea -- It wasn't consistent enough except in strong working solutions and then it seemed to only consitently strip everything off.. I also splattered some on my shirt and pants -- now the wife is involved ;-(
I'm ordering Farmer's Reducer to see if that will give me better control over reducing the unsharp mask denesity -- something like maybe one half stop per minute.
Bill
Bill,
I too have thought of ways to exploit the double sided image -- I've even tried to develop them separately. For me, the second image works best as a retouching mask. I've played with pencils, dyes, abrasives, knives, and even thickened ferricyanide bleach. There's a lot of potential there, but it takes practice.
Bill, thanks for the post.
I also bought the Fuji Green XRay film and was surprised at the blue base. So I admit to quickly trying to ballpark the exposure development and exposed at 100 and developed in HC-110 Dil B for 6 minutes then another shot for 3 minutes. Both are overly dense to my eyes but I haven't tried to bleach the one emulsion off, yet. The 3 minute neg is closer but I will try Dil H next time. I do have some scratches but I hope only on the bottom side.
Any suggestions as to dev times for Multigrade IV type contact printing appreciated.
I'm doing exclusively MG IV contact prints and I'm getting great results with Rodinal and stripping one side.
Cool...how long do you process in Rodinal and what do you expose at? And you are talking the Fuji Super HR-U? Thanks...
The unsharp masks that I make with "regular" film are pretty much the same as what should result from the X-ray film. I pin register a sheet of film - emulsion side to the back side of my original negative. That separates the two emulsions by only the thickness of the negative base. Putting more distance between does work for some pictures but you run the risk of causing an halo effect between high and low density areas in the photo and the image looks a bit artificial or outright strange. The mask doesn't look fuzzy to the eye ... Just much less dense. That's why I think the X-ray film will provide a subtitle crispness and a bit more shadow definition if I can control the density of the secondary image effectively... Time and experimentation will tell...
Thanks to all for your comments.
Bill
My standard right now is shooting at ISO 50, developing in Rodinal 1:50 for 7 minutes, and stripping the rear emulsion. This is Fuji Super HR-T. I think that's a good starting point...I usually print my negs for 11 seconds with a #3 filter and they come out very nice. Check out my blog for some shots and more info.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark MacKenzie
Enjoyed the blog, Bryan. Watch out for the alligators.
The Fuji HR-T is listed as "High Contrast" Green sensitive. The HR-U as just Green sensitive. Has anybody played with both? The HR-U I just shot seems plenty high contrast but I overdeveloped it and haven't stripped the one side yet.
:)Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark MacKenzie
I didn't realize there was an HR-U. They don't sell it on cxsonline apparently. But I guess the Rodinal keeps the contrast controlled because I never have problems with contrast. It's too little contrast sometimes if anything.
http://www.zzmedical.com/zencart/xray-film-c-28.html That is where I found mine. Shipped fast and no problems.
I think if I get a chance I will cut up an 8x10 sheet into 4x5's and do a better job of testing. I stick to HC-110.
Corran, I noticed the shot with your wollensak wide angle looked really nice with lots of detail and that large neg look...
Thanks, but I've cropped about 15% of the edges to get rid of the corners which were atrocious...I might've had a dud because my 159mm just never sharpened up in the corners even at f/45.
Well, there's nothing like putting a theory to practice that shows what a bonehead you can be.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill_4606
Does anyone see where I went wrong in my last statement above? When you contact print the original to make the unsharp mask, the resultant mask it a positive!
My X-ray film "unsharp mask" is a negative just like the original. Actually it is just a copy... Nothing else.
As suggested by others the secondary image might be good as a selective mask to dodge or burn in an area. Or as a spotting mask. But it's of no use as a contrast mask.
Thanks for tolerating my well intentioned but miss-guided idea.
Bill (back to the drawing board)
There must be some advantage to messing around with one side emulsion. Wouldn't it change neg density so you can have selective contrast by bleaching away certain areas for higher tones? Just an idea...