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

[Tin Can]

addendum

I recently read somewhere that double sided has MORE silver than normal film

BUY NOW

the end is near

[Andrew O'Neill]

Because it's double-side

[Brian Bullen]

I’m rating Kodak S/Ra at 125 developed in pyrocat m with sodium carbonate. I have tried several brands in the past (Kodak, Agfa, Konica)of green sensitive x-ray I feel like they are all pretty much the same. Here are a couple recent ones where I tried stand development but definitely created some uneven areas.

[Andrew O'Neill]

I’m rating Kodak S/Ra at 125 developed in pyrocat m with sodium carbonate. I have tried several brands in the past (Kodak, Agfa, Konica)of green sensitive x-ray I feel like they are all pretty much the same. Here are a couple recent ones where I tried stand development but definitely created some uneven areas.

Was the film left to stand in a vertical position?

[Michael R]

What you guys need for this misguided scheme is a proper low contrast developer. Trying to mangle x-ray film into half-barely acceptable tone reproduction using general purpose developers, nonsense Cookbook concoctions, stand development etc. is not the way.

I’m rating Kodak S/Ra at 125 developed in pyrocat m with sodium carbonate. I have tried several brands in the past (Kodak, Agfa, Konica)of green sensitive x-ray I feel like they are all pretty much the same. Here are a couple recent ones where I tried stand development but definitely created some uneven areas.

[Corran]

What you guys need for this misguided scheme is a proper low contrast developer.

Rodinal 1:100...

Works just as well today as it did 6 years ago:

[Michael R]

Fair enough. Apologies for my strident post. I just really, really don’t understand why anyone would use large format x-ray film, especially double-sided x-ray film (unless of course they are using it specifically for its inherent characteristics/properties, in which case I have no argument against it).

Rodinal 1:100...

Works just as well today as it did 6 years ago:

[Corran]

Prices have changed, of course, but back when I bought a ton of 8x10 x-ray film (Fuji HR-T, which I used on the shot above) I paid about 20 cents per sheet. I also last year bought 14x17 x-ray film for $1 per sheet. I think that's a pretty compelling reason. It's also great for learning/practicing.

My best results were obtained by stripping the rear emulsion using bleach. Ultimately, that was a LOT of trouble, and I stopped doing it but it did work well for pictorial use. I will do some more x-ray film in the future, such as that 14x17 film.

I also did like the glowy look of the film sometimes.

[Brian Bullen]

Was the film left to stand in a vertical position?

Hi Andrew,
I have Kodak 8x10 hangers in a 1 gal stainless steel tank. So orientation when developing was horizontal. Just experimenting really, my mix of of pyrocat was 25ml Sol A 125 ml Sol B and 3850ml of water at 68f. Left in the tank for 15 min with agitation was at the beginning middle and that’s it.

[Brian Bullen]

Fair enough. Apologies for my strident post. I just really, really don’t understand why anyone would use large format x-ray film, especially double-sided x-ray film (unless of course they are using it specifically for its inherent characteristics/properties, in which case I have no argument against it).

Some of us are interested in experimenting, some can’t afford the cost of a box of ilford 8x10 or the like and shoot as much as we like. 500 sheets of X-ray is about the same as 1 box of 25 sheets of ilford fp4. Not to mention the high contrast of x-ray works beautifully with alternative processes and also has a different look than modern film. Whatever the reason I don’t think it’s fair to criticize someone for doing something they enjoy and is also harmless to you.