Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,682   Posts: 1,482,220   Online: 1041
      
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 37
  1. #21
    Tom1956's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    US
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    1,684
    Quote Originally Posted by Nikola Dulgiarov View Post
    Ortho X-ray film can be exposed through a medium yellow filter with good results, neat cloud separation and tonal range of the skin tones. I've been working solely with mammography x-ray film for my 8x10 images, and I shoot it at 100ASA, filter included, and develop in Pyrocat HD, Xtol. The Perfection XR foruma on unblinkingeye allows for a push up to 200 ASA. If you absolutely have to use paper negatives, color RA4 paper developed in a high contrast B&W developer is easily 100 ASA and is panchromatic. I haven't tried it in Pyrocat @ 1+5+100, but it may be worthwhile.
    There's the answer I've been looking for. I do have a slight wonder of any halation, due to the probability this kind of film has no anti-hation backing. As far as Pyrocat, I've never used it--know all about it, and would agree as to the advisability of it's use in this application. Although I have several packages of good D-76 laying around, sounds like the Pyrocat may be the best multi-purpose thing to use.
    Sounds like a 15G filter would be as far red as you dare go, and even that would probably cause a loss of speed. Sounds like No. 8 or 11 would be as far red as ordinary circumstances woule allow with X-ray film. I can live with that. This foolishness of these 8x10 film prices is just ridiculous. I believe I'll give this a try. Thanks.

  2. #22
    Nikola Dulgiarov's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Sevilevo, Bulgaria
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    129
    D76 should also work, you can give it a try. Ortho films are great for developing in trays, because you can work by inspection. My 100ASA Xray film is neatly insensitive to the red filter I use for photopapers. Unfortunately, with RA4 paper, you must either work in complete darkness, or under a very dim green filter, which isn't actually safe for the paper, but is below its initial exposure threshold for the handling time; such a safelight is only good enough to give you outlines and pale shadows in the DR; hence you must develop by time. Starting time would be approx 2 minutes at 20C.
    As far as X-ray films and filters, I dare not say much, as I make my own gelatin coated filters, so my medium yellow is just X% tartrazine soln. in 10% gelatin, spun to a 0.06mm coating on optical glass. But the absorption graph matches a medium yellow filter, with a slight extension into the green.

  3. #23
    Mainecoonmaniac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,721
    Images
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom1956 View Post
    I do have a slight wonder of any halation, due to the probability this kind of film has no anti-hation backing.
    The film is not super sharp because it lacks an anti-halation layer, but that's fine with me. The emulsion is also soft when it's developed so handle it carefully. I like the look of the film with some subjects. Souping the film under a safelight is also a plus.
    "Photography, like surfing, is an infinite process, a constantly evolving exploration of life."
    Aaron Chang

  4. #24
    Tom1956's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    US
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    1,684
    I wonder if the halation situation is anywhere near as bad as the 35mm High Speed Infrared (HEI135-20) I used to shoot many years ago. I recall Kodak put that on this god-awful "Estar-AH" base, whatever that was, and it would bloom like the devil. Always wondered why they did that. On X-Ray film, not having the backing is self-explanatory., as it's not an optical process and isn't sharp in the first place. But I do wonder if the blooming is bad enough to give that "dreamy, other-worldly" effect that I do not want.

  5. #25
    AgX
    AgX is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    7,435
    There a more X-ray film types than classic films. Some have antihalation-feature, some not.

  6. #26

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Daventry, Northamptonshire, England
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    6,629
    If PE gets ISO 25 with Ilford MG then as Kentmere is a stop faster and it is, then ISO 50 should be possible. At ISO 50 or even anywhere near it, models should be able to keep still long enough even under natural light.

    pentaxuser

  7. #27
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    15,942
    Images
    148
    Quote Originally Posted by jnanian View Post
    papers vary depending on the paper and the light.
    graded papers i have used are very slow
    gaslight papers, very slow
    bottled emulsions, some are slow, some were fst ( luminos was about asa 100 )

    i wish i had peroxide and a box, i'd fume my paper and see what happens, since it
    has been known to work with film, it seems like a good bet to work with paper.
    Luminos was the UK importer/distributor of Adox materials in the 1950's, at some stage the owner appears to have moved to the US where the trade name continued and was used for rebadged Kentmere materials possible others as well.

    Ian

  8. #28
    Nikola Dulgiarov's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Sevilevo, Bulgaria
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    129
    @ Tom1956
    This is an example of what I've done with X-ray film. This is Primax Mammography Film, shot w/o a filter @ 50ASA, developed in Pyrocat HD. Scanned on an Epson V700, and an approx. 100% crop of the image (try not to ay attention to dust and artifacts, nor to the aesthetics of the image, my brother is an easy/and willing/ target when testing things out )

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	img201.jpg 
Views:	24 
Size:	306.9 KB 
ID:	68587
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	img206.jpg 
Views:	13 
Size:	764.9 KB 
ID:	68586

  9. #29
    Tom1956's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    US
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    1,684
    I think I'm leaning more toward x-ray film not, based on the supposed flatness of response in the ortho region, and the supposed anti-halation backing, although I know not what brand would be the best on these counts. I could give up full-pan film on these traits, and still be mostly happy. Print paper still leaves me cool. Now if somebody could spoonfeed me a film, developer, time and temperature to load up my 8x10, shoot a piece, and end up with a perfect 10-step gray scale, that would be nifty.
    I learn so much on these photo chat sites, and become confused with twice that amount. This one has the sharpest people I've found, but it still seems like I could search archives till the cows come home and still not find a hard-set procedure. Here's what I DO know--8x10 pan film prices are totally outrageous, and it shuts down any 8x10 ambition on that count alone.

  10. #30
    Mainecoonmaniac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,721
    Images
    6
    Beautiful work! It's sure sharp even though its X-ray film. BTW, I think you're neg is flopped. I have a V700 and I love it. Wish the film holders were sturdier.
    "Photography, like surfing, is an infinite process, a constantly evolving exploration of life."
    Aaron Chang

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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