Conventional photos using X-ray film?

PHOTOTONE · Jun 3, 2007

There was a recent thread there about doing "artistic" X-rays. Well, what does anyone know about just using X-ray film in a camera for standard photography? X-ray film in ULF is often to be found quite cheap. Anyone tried it? What developer did you use?

glbeas · Jun 3, 2007

Do a search in the forums, theres been a thread or two with examples for you to look at. Then you can pm the poster and find out more info.

poutnik · Jun 4, 2007

X-ray film works like a conventional film, after exposing a latent image on the silver layer it's developed to bring out the image. The difference is usually much higher amount of silver in the emulsion, the emulsion is thicker (FWIK), the base is thicker, the film is wrapped light-tight (X-rays will pass through this wrapping well). The spectral sensitivity to visible light is unknown, the speed can only be tested...

htmlguru4242 · Jun 4, 2007

I answered this in the other thread a moment ago, but I'll repeat generally here for clarity.

I've done a bit of this, and it works. The film is high-contrast and somewhat grainy. It is sold in blue-sensitive and green-sensitive varieties, which seem to be blue only and ortho., respectively.

I've had good results with D-76 1+1, though the contrast is still high. I've not experimented enough to tame the contrast. I develop by inspection.

There is emulsion coated on both sides of the base, which softens the image a bit.

Expose it at ISO 12-ish as a starting point, use a deep red safelight, and watch out, as its easy to scratch the surprisingly soft emulsion.

There's a supplier ... I believe they're called CXS, who'll send you a free sample pack of 8x10 or 11x14 films. (It's 10 sheets).

Vaughn · Jun 4, 2007

I have exposed seveal sheets, but only have developed one myself -- the rest have been developed at the hospital.

I am using some Agfa X-ray film. It is marked "Daylight" and seems to be ortho. Freckles on one of my boys were greatly exaggerated! I cut the film and load it into the 8x10 holders under red safelight.

The image below is the only one I developed myself so far. It is a platinum/palladium print. The film is quite contrasty...perfect for alt processes. Developed in a tray using Ilford Universal PQ Developer (dilution and time/temp forgotten).

It is not very sharp film -- probably due to having emulsion on both sides as mentioned earlier. I roughly rate it at 400 in sunlight/open shade. Much lower in deep forest (it might have a high reciprosity failure rate).

Vaughn

nze · Jun 4, 2007

Hello

I have many of my still life that you can see there Dead Link Removed
pritn such like freesia , peony , iris, 3 pear have been shot on agfa or kodak xray film with tungsten lighting. it is ortho.

wildbill · Jun 4, 2007

Here's a link from an earlier thread i responded to:
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)
I posted one example and i haven't had time to experiment since. I think my iso was 6 or 12. The stuff i've got is kodak digital science film in 14x17 inch.

vinny

RoBBo · Jun 4, 2007

That looks absolutely beautiful Vaughn, I'll have to make sure to give some of this a try.

htmlguru4242 · Jun 4, 2007

Vaughn an nze, very nice shots!

I'm interested in the fact that you say you rate the film at 400. I tried exposing mine at 100, and it was severely underexposed. What developer are you using?

Also, has anyone ever tried out the infrared printer / laser films for digital output of images? I've been thinking of finding some and trying it out for IR photo work. Anyone tried this?

Vaughn · Jun 4, 2007

htmlguru4242 said:
Vaughn an nze, very nice shots!

I'm interested in the fact that you say you rate the film at 400. I tried exposing mine at 100, and it was severely underexposed. What developer are you using?

Developed in a tray using Ilford Universal PQ Developer (dilution and time/temp forgotten).

Sorry I can not be more precise.

The film is Agfa Cronex Medical X-ray Film 10TL Daylight

My first test shots were my boys against a wall, open shade. I metered the scene at 400ASA and 800ASA, with the 800ASA coming back from the hospital X-ray lab too dense, and the 400 about right. The 400 ASA negs made nice cyanotypes -- and it made me realize just how many freckles one om boys has!

The same film shot in the redwoods at 400 ASA was under-exposed. The exposures were long and the color of the light was definitely less blue (overcast). So both factors could have influenced the results. I will use 100ASA as my benchmark next time in that situation.

The photo of Alex, Alex and the tree was washed in sunlight, though printed quite dark (platinum/palladium print with no contrast agents added).

Vaughn

nze · Jun 4, 2007

When I use kodak I rate it @ 50 iso but my for m agfa curix I use a 400 iso

Kobin · Jun 4, 2007

The "Daylight" designation means that the film package is designed to be placed in a daylight cassette loader (the film cassettes can be loaded in the machine in normal light) as opposed to being placed in a light-tight bin in a darkroom to await loading into a cassette by hand under safelight.

K.

DeBone 75 · Jun 5, 2007

I'm using Kodak Medical X-ray for all of my 8X10. Mostly because I got it for free. I rate it at 200 and develope it in Beutler HI Def 1-1-16 ( not the normal 1-1-8) for 7 min. This does a very nice job of controlling the contrast. Since the film is double sided I flop it back and forth in the tray when developing it. Other wise it left the lines from the bottom of the tray. Not really that soft of an image either quite sharp accutally. Althogh lately I've been doing portaits with petzvel lenses.

Captain_joe6 · Jun 21, 2007

I'm noticing in most of my searches that x-ray film comes in a variety of flavors. Blue-sensitive, green-sensitive (which may be orthochromatic or green-only), high speed, medium speed, half-speed, screen. Does anybody have suggestions about exactly which to purchase? Generally, which films produce fine grain, moderate speed (anything above single digits), and good sharpness?

I'm also wondering if anybody has noticed any differences in quality due to the dual coating on the film. Any loss of sharpness, problems due to lack of anti-halation layer, etc?

How is the grain? Some of the examples posted seem to have very, very fine grain, but some posters in other threads complain to no end about the grain being huge. Any truth in either direction? If it depends on the film, which films are which?

I think that pictoral use of x-ray film could become a big thing, especially considering the cost. We need to get some solid information going here!

Harrigan · Jun 21, 2007

I have used a film no longer made by Kodak called Industrex SR-45 scientific film. The stuff is wicked slow, I meter it at iso 3 and then multiply that by an exposure factor of 5. I process the film in trays or in beseler color print tubes with d-76 1:2. The dilute developer helps hold down the contast which is really high and also works with my long exposures to give me good shadow detail. The film is ortho and only coated on one side. It can be worked in red 1A safelight and I think its blue sensitive, although I can not find the spectral curves for the film.

I also have worked with some Fuji X-ray film in 14x17 that is considerably faster and blue sensitive film. This film is emulsion coated on both sides and scratches incredibly easy. I've not worked out the speed yet but I also process this in d76 1:2 in trays only due to the double emulsion coating. I suspect it could be shot at about 200-400 with a normal 1:1 dilution. I will try pyro with this film next to try and get help the scratching which I've not been able to overcome.

I tried to upload an example but I guess since my subscription expired I can not show you the samples here.

htmlguru4242 · Jun 21, 2007

Captain Joe, as may have been mentioned before, the double emulsion does cause a visible decrease in sharpness, but it isn't too bad and depends entirely on the specific film in question.

The grain is not fine by any stretch, but it is certainly not large. Seeing as how the sheets are so big, though, the grain is not much of an issue.

The high speed blue and medium speed green films work well for me.

Look for free samples of the film to evaluate it before you buy. Many companies will send you 10 sheets of 8x10 for free .

AgX · Jun 21, 2007

Harrigan said:
I meter it at iso 3 and then multiply that by an exposure factor of 5.

What do you mean by that?

Multiplying the ISO value by 5? Or multiplying the exposure by 5? In case of the latter, what are you compensating for?

Harrigan · Jun 21, 2007

AgX said:
What do you mean by that?

Multiplying the ISO value by 5? Or multiplying the exposure by 5? In case of the latter, what are you compensating for?

Sorry I meter the scene at ISO 3, which is the slowest setting on my minolta iv f and then multiply that by 5. For example a 2 second exposure becomes 10 secs. This is really slow film!

Harrigan · Jun 21, 2007

If anyone wants to try any of the films I mentioned I have large amounts. I would be happy to send a few sheets out to anyone interested in trying it out.

PHOTOTONE · Jun 22, 2007

How can you tell which side to place face up in the film holder? Is X-ray film notched?

htmlguru4242 · Jun 22, 2007

Phototone, I was wondering the same. I've never seen notched X-Ray film, even on the single-emulsion stuff, and it's not always easy to tell visually.

Everything that I've seen has been clear-base though, so maybe it doesn't matter?

Harrigan, that SR-45 sounds interesting. It seems to be intended more for direct exposure to gamma rays and the like; it gives approximate speeds at various energies in KeV, and the exposure curve is in log roentgens. How's the grain on it?

AgX · Jun 22, 2007

I haven't done anything with X-ray films, but just grabbed an X-ray photo at hand:
DU PONT "CRONAR" SAFETY 4 NI

This one has a pale blue base density and looks as anything this kind I have seen so far. It seems to be doubleside-coated.

htmlguru4242 · Jun 22, 2007

I realize I made a wording mistake in my previous post.

I shall calrify:

I was referring to the single-emulsion X-Ray film that I saw somewhere probably 6 or 8 years back. It was only coated on one side, and when I say "clear base", I meant that there was no anti-halo layer or other coating that would prevent it from being exposed through the base.

As with all X-Ray films that I have seen, the base was bluish in color.

I've always wondered as to the exact purpose of the film's base being blue ...

AgX · Jun 22, 2007

Even if the film was single side coated, had no AH layer and one would not bother to which side to expose, the blueish base could still have its effect in case of an ortho-sensitation.

As the X-ray technicians would have the same problem there must be a scheme for packaging the sheets.

pedropolis · Jun 23, 2007

xray samples?

can anyone give details on any company willing so send samples of x-ray film to the uk?
I have had a bit of a google but can't find anything!

cheers

Conventional photos using X-ray film?

Attachments

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency