Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images

[Pfiltz]

Thanks Wayne.

[ScottPhotoCo]

Last in this test series. With the results from the last 2 rounds I changed things up a bit on this processing scheme. I bolded below what I changed this time.

8x10 Kodak Ektascan B/RA Mammography Film
Deardorff 8x10 + Kodak 12" Commercial Ektar
Late afternoon direct sun
Scanned on Epson V750 Pro using the Epson software with no additional adjustments


Ektascan_BRA_100.5s1-6.3006 by ScottPhoto.co, on Flickr
100 asa - 1/2 at f6.3
Tray processed in Adinol at 1:100 for 20 minutes. Agitation for the first minute then 15 seconds every 3 minutes


Ektascan_BRA_80.25s1-6.3001 by ScottPhoto.co, on Flickr
80 asa - 1/4 at f6.3
Tray processed in Adinol at 1:100 for 20 minutes. Agitation for the first minute then 15 seconds every minute

Process changes:
After the fairly drastic difference between 80 and 100 asa on the previous tests and the uneven processing I was getting I tried two different things this time.
1. On the 100 asa image I changed the agitation scheme to 1 minute followed by 15 seconds every 3 minutes to see if the uneven agitation would be solved while keeping the contrast that was nice on the previous rounds. It appears it has.
2. On the 80 asa image I processed for a shorter time (10 minutes) and agitated the first minute and then for 15 seconds every minute.

Observations:
I was really surprised how similar these images came out. There are subtle changes in the highlight areas but the overall tonality seems nearly identical. The sharpness and detail is quite good.

Next steps:
I am finally comfortable to shoot this film and have an idea of what I am going to get. You can't beat the price point (for single sided film anyway) and processing isn't difficult. I love film.

Tim
www.ScottPhoto.co

[Wayne]

I read the whole thing, and I'm on dialup. It took me days. And I just developed my first x-ray negatives last night. I developed the first one with a red ping-pong ball bulb about 15 feet away. It was almost black. Guess that was a mistake. The second one developed in dark turned out OKish, will try to print it tonight. Hard to judge this stuff for the first time without printing it.

So, will it be posted?

I think there is a need so we can direct people to it, as it seems many are unwilling to read the complete existing threads.

btw, I have read all I can find here and elsewhere.

And I am still working with it. Very affordable.

[Andrew O'Neill]

I can't do anything until QT Luong gets a hold of me. But he has to read my email first. It's probably not really necessary posting an article. The two main threads here (I wish they could at least be merged into one!!) in regards to X-ray film, are very meaty.

[Tin Can]

I think just a few bits would be good.

X-Ray film types and the 3 sizes that fit ANSI holders, (8x10, 11x14 and 14x17) sometimes the 7x17 fits and sometimes it does not, holders are not standard and 7x17 X-Ray film is actual size not 1/16" smaller like ANSI film.

An ISO guide and a suggestion that normal chems work.

Warning to be gentle with the doubled sided stuff, and so on.

Explanation of types and uses, including mammo, took me quite a while to figure mammo out, and I have yet to use it. But soon.

Now this will be lost in the forum, search does not work so good for me. imho ymmv

I can't do anything until QT Luong gets a hold of me. But he has to read my email first. It's probably not really necessary posting an article. The two main threads here (I wish they could at least be merged into one!!) in regards to X-ray film, are very meaty.

[Andrew O'Neill]

My article isn't comprehensive guide to x-ray film. It's based only on my personal experiences, although I do answer some of your points... except about some films do not fit standard holders. I have no experience with odd ball sizes. I only work with 8x10 and 14x17, in green latitude double-sided. I also talk about use of filters, EI's, methods of development, chemicals, conventional and alt printing abilities, and a bit on stripping... the film, not me.

[Tin Can]

Sounds like you know way more than I.

I will quietly await your article.

Thanks!

My article isn't comprehensive guide to x-ray film. It's based only on my personal experiences, although I do answer some of your points... except about some films do not fit standard holders. I have no experience with odd ball sizes. I only work with 8x10 and 14x17, in green latitude double-sided. I also talk about use of filters, EI's, methods of development, chemicals, conventional and alt printing abilities, and a bit on stripping... the film, not me.

[Wayne]

The two main threads here (I wish they could at least be merged into one!!) ...

NOOOOO. It would take me over a week to reread it then.

[SergeiR]

i believe that if someone actually capable of shooting with camera - they are capable of reading and thus can find information. If information has to be chewed and spoon fed - may be that person shall not be there in first place. People conditioned to think that there is something super important about PROCESS. Thanks to lovely people of f64. Joy of discovering things, joy of trying new things, rediscovering something, hunting for bits and pieces - its all getting lost. Everything has to be "exposed for shadows" everything has to be under bloody developed and god forbid if you do something in dark room for 10 minutes and not 5:45.. You wont ever get good picture.... Riiiiiight.

---

8x10 kodak csg , 1:160 Rodinal, 7m rotary. Wollensak 12 inch SF series . Print.


Scan-130809-0001www by Sergei Rodionov, on Flickr

[SergeiR]

NOOOOO. It would take me over a week to reread it then.

aye. that would be completely and utterly wrong. One is for sharing another is for questions.. I know that sharing one quite often straying into discussions, but still