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

[koraks]

Bryan, that looks gorgeous. And your processing and results seem to match with my experience. Rodinal 1+100 to 1+200 works great for xray.

[Luke79]

i am currently testing xray , i will try a test image on fuji rx and kodak tmat 13x18 today in the jobo 3010, lets see what i get ,
i was using mamography film till now, only single layer , so i am excited ... hope it works ....

[Corran]

Thank you Peter and koraks. For years I was stubborn and refused to do tray processing but I admit it is pretty easy. I use the tray that came with my 4x5 BTZS tubes since it's not ribbed and just the right size to use for 8x10, but I'm still too chicken to do more than one sheet at a time, especially with this delicate film.

I shot the same image on an extra sheet of Delta 100 to compare, scanning that now, might post comparison crops on my blog. Kind of blew the highlights on the Delta though.

[Tin Can]

Peter and I shot back to back Ektascan and Delta 100 with exact same setup & Rodinol Gas Burst developing. Maybe I will post them. Need to consult with Peter first.

Thank you Peter and koraks. For years I was stubborn and refused to do tray processing but I admit it is pretty easy. I use the tray that came with my 4x5 BTZS tubes since it's not ribbed and just the right size to use for 8x10, but I'm still too chicken to do more than one sheet at a time, especially with this delicate film.

I shot the same image on an extra sheet of Delta 100 to compare, scanning that now, might post comparison crops on my blog. Kind of blew the highlights on the Delta though.

[Corran]

I'd definitely like to see that. I just posted my shots and comparison on my blog. The differences amount mostly to my ISO and development on the Delta 100, so, definitely not a definitive test but might be interesting anyway. Also I posted 100% crops (scan was 2000 DPI).

[Tin Can]

I'd definitely like to see that. I just posted my shots and comparison on my blog. The differences amount mostly to my ISO and development on the Delta 100, so, definitely not a definitive test but might be interesting anyway. Also I posted 100% crops (scan was 2000 DPI).

I cannot post yet,and we also missed the ISO on the X-Ray as we shot all at 100. My poor decision.

I think these X-Ray to 'normal' film posts are a great idea.

[Tin Can]

Straight out of scanner. No Photoshop, Picasa resize to LFPF 750 pixel standards.

Really bad scans, but they show the exposure mistake I made by rating Ektsacan at 100 ISO instead of 50 ISO, but I wanted same same. My decision, not Peter's. It was my ball.

Both 8X10 Ektascan and Delta 100 were shot at 100 ISO, same lens 480mm Ronar Deardorff 11x14 with 8x10 back, shutter speed 1/100 fstop 32, one studio flash and reflector. Same development. Rodinol 1/100 10 minutes gas burst, water stop, TF5 fix gas burst. Another set coming after lunch. I cannot explain the big differences between sitters.

[Corran]

Randy, mind mentioning which is which film on each of these?

[Tin Can]

Randy, mind mentioning which is which film on each of these?

I thought I would make you guess!

I know #3 is Ektascan as you can see the notch. That makes # 4 Delta.

I can't see the notches on 1&2, but on my light table the Ektascan has higher contrast, so it's # 2 and obviously #1 is Delta.

4 more coming same system but a SF lens on different camera.

[jon.oman]

In number 4, there is a light leak?