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

[SergeiR]

Logan - you referring to flat bright surfaces with lot of grain? (just trying to figure out then). If so - then it means negative was too dense or too thin. Scanner doesn't handle either condition too well, when pushed to extreme.

[logan.egbert]

Logan - you referring to flat bright surfaces with lot of grain? (just trying to figure out then). If so - then it means negative was too dense or too thin. Scanner doesn't handle either condition too well, when pushed to extreme.

You're dead on, Sergei! Thank you!

[logan.egbert]

Another shot, this time at ISO 100 developed in Rodinal 1:100 for 7:30 rotary.

[logan.egbert]

And the other. This one rated at ISO160.

Wish I would have thought about blocking the light from hitting the damn backdrop, but them's the breaks.

[SergeiR]

You're dead on, Sergei! Thank you!

no problem not sure if it helped much though But generally, at least with Kodak CSG (double sides) - i am yet to see "overdevelopment" . I can screw up exposure every now and then, but i left properly exposed film in R09 (which is pretty active formula) developer for periods up to 1 hour without any ill effect, while experimenting with various dilution ratios.

[ImSoNegative]

shot a few with the pinhole camera and xray film, 8x10 a fellow that was there asked me if it was medium format

family plot by goldenimageworks65, on Flickr

giant bible by goldenimageworks65, on Flickr

first commandment by goldenimageworks65, on Flickr

[Will S]

That last one is very Walkerish. Very nice.

[SergeiR]

810 CSG, 8m rotary in 280ml of 1:150 Adonal

Playing with Dallmeyer 3D here, trying to figure out uses.

Flower study #32 by Sergei Rodionov, on Flickr

[UlbabraB]

wow I love the smoothness of this one!

[SergeiR]

Yeah, every new sheet i make with that lens seems to draw me more and more in awe of how well those handmade lenses were.

(same processing as above)

Flower study #33 by Sergei Rodionov, on Flickr