These are with no filter. I tried a Tiffen #12 yellow before on landscapes and wasn't too thrilled. This was way back when I was trying to figure out my film speed on 8x10 though. I liked yellow filter on my portraits however, and green even more (but caused a two stop difference, instead of one with the yellow - so I vouched for the yellow).
I was shooting two exposures on these images. One was no filter and the other exposure was with a circle warming polarizer. I added two stops to my exposure bit they came out thinner than the ones without a filter. I thought a polarizer my help with a sky on xray film like it can with color... no cigar. I'd like to try yellow and green filters again, but I question how much they would actually benefit the image.
It's really fun to go out with a big camera and take a lot of care to compose each image. A whole lot of work goes into it. It really sucks to process the images and there be problems like scratches or uneven development that would most likely not exist if I was shooting conventional film. I've been wondering if I should just be using regular film (I've got two boxes of HP5 now, and one box of FP4 coming in the fall), but when it's gone - it's gone. I'm using xray film because I got amazing results with studio portraits and I've seen stunning landscapes by Bryan, Holden, and others. Perhaps I should load my holders with HP5+ on one side and xray film on the other. That way I get two variations of the same scene and can determine wether this xray film is worth spending all the extra effort to deal with.
Lee Smathers
www.photoevangelist.com
The first 7x17 film I was using was expired HR-U that I received for free. I switched to a new freshly dated box of HR-A, which is the same emulsion that I was using for my portraits - familiar territory. However development problems were the same. Rodinal just isn't working for me in 7x17.
Lee Smathers
www.photoevangelist.com
Without a filter I get no sky detail with single-sided Kodak B/RA.
FWIW, I always go out with both X-ray and conventional film. Personally, I think knowing you've got some 'real' film with results (processing-wise at least) you can be reasonably sure about has always helped with the sometime frustration of dealing with the quirks X-ray film. IOW, I'd want to shoot a little bit, at least, of that Ilford, too.
Totally understand your concerns about the limited supply of Ilford 7x17, but maybe you could ask around and locate a bit more if you begin to run out prematurely. Plus, by that time you'll probably have long-since solved the x-ray film problems and can better figure out what works best for which type of subject matter.
Just my very humble .02.
8x10 Kodak CSG, Yellow-green filter, Symmar 300/500 @ 300mm
rotary dev, rodinal 1:100, 15:00
Scan-130720-0003www by Sergei Rodionov, on Flickr
Scan-130720-0004www by Sergei Rodionov, on Flickr
and if you REALLY careful...
8x10, Kodak CSG, 1s, Yellow/Green filter, Symmar, 8m in 1:100 R09
Scan-130721-0004www by Sergei Rodionov, on Flickr
Beppe platinato di Filippo Natali, su Flickr
Platinum/Palladium toned Kallitype, made from 14x17" Kodak Tmat Xray negative developed with Pyrocat-MC, Apo Ronar 600 F/9 (...or maybe Xenar 420mm F/4.5, I don't remember exactly)
Thank you all for the tons of helpful tips in this thread!
Filippo
Bookmarks