Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,519   Posts: 1,543,775   Online: 865
      
Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1
    ronlamarsh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Seattle Wash
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    462
    Images
    16

    Help x-ray film woes

    I am using Fuji single emulsion mammo x-ray film for enlarged negatives. I have done this successfully with making an interpositive first etc and using paper developer. I just tried to use an actual print as an interpositive as I have heard of others doing this. Everthing comes out as a perfect positive! I am developing in D-55 4:1 and exposing in a contact print frame under a 300w bulb at about 30in. its totally weird! I have tried exyending exposure and decreasing to ridiculously low and its always a positive! Could it be my developer? I don't know.
    No escaping it!
    I must step on fallen leaves
    to take this path

  2. #2
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,217
    You are contact printing a positive paper print onto what?

  3. #3
    keithwms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Charlottesville, Virginia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,079
    Blog Entries
    20
    Images
    129
    Curious. Show!

    I wonder if it is some odd optical effect due to two negs being close together.... isn't the extra film coated on both sides? If so then I guess one emulsion will be sharp and the other not... and then... I don't know. Try printing it!

    Interesting.
    "Only dead fish follow the stream"

    [APUG Portfolio] [APUG Blog] [Website]

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    832
    Images
    131
    Is it possible that you are getting the effect of solarizing? 300w is pretty bright.

  5. #5
    holmburgers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Rochester NY (native KS)
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,420
    Images
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Rich Ullsmith View Post
    Is it possible that you are getting the effect of solarizing? 300w is pretty bright.
    That's also the only thing I could think of. One method of producing positives from positives is to overexpose to the point where the silver halide grains "do a 180°". That's oversimplified for such a complex reaction, but I believe that's kinda how it works. There is a discussion on this topic somewhere...

    If you've found a way to get a direct positive from mammography film, that might be a very interesting technique to exploit!

  6. #6
    ronlamarsh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Seattle Wash
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    462
    Images
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by holmburgers View Post
    That's also the only thing I could think of. One method of producing positives from positives is to overexpose to the point where the silver halide grains "do a 180°". That's oversimplified for such a complex reaction, but I believe that's kinda how it works. There is a discussion on this topic somewhere...

    If you've found a way to get a direct positive from mammography film, that might be a very interesting technique to exploit!
    Thanks to all for the comments. It seems I should patent my process as I have found a way to create a direct positive from a positive print! Yes it is due to HORRIBLE overexposure, I had stupidly assume that since I was trying to penetrate fiber base paper that I would need mega-light....wrong! I ended using my D@ with cold lite stopped down to F32! at about 80cm for 4 sec, when using the 300w bulb I was giving 40sec! What was i thinking? anyway all is well that ends well. BTW mammo x-ray film is single emulsion very fast(blue/green sensitive) and has great sharpness abiet a blue base that doesn't seem to affect anything. I develope it in Ilford PQ paper developer for about 2 min. It does require at least a 1 minute presoak as the heavy anti-halation coating interferes with developement. I get this stuff for free from some of my customers as everyone is switching to digital imaging.
    No escaping it!
    I must step on fallen leaves
    to take this path

  7. #7
    holmburgers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Rochester NY (native KS)
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,420
    Images
    2
    I've gotta try it! I'm using Agfa mammography film and I agree that it's a good film. I also had trouble with some mottled development and maybe the anti-halation dye was my trouble...

    I haven't fooled around with it much more than the 2 instances, though I got a nice enlarged negative by enlarging a b&w positive onto the film and developing it in HC-110, dil B.

    cheers!



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin