I remember someone mentioning that Kodak's 5222 Double XX Film is similar in look to the old Tri-X. Or if you want that older look of the old film, try 5222. Is this a fair assumption or is this just hogwash? I used 5222 many years ago, but didn't get a feel for its look for the 2 rolls I shot. Any comments? I know 5222 has to be one of Kodak's last untouched film, which has basically been unmodified or updated since its inception.
If yours is a scanning based workflow, then reversal processing of Double X is something worth considering.The film yields nice slides at EI 400 and 800. Grain is crisp but not too big even when pushed two stops. With preflashing, loss of shadow details at EI 800 can be minimised. The scanned slides are naturally sharp without needing sharpness adjustment in the post.
Someone from Kodak, might have been @laser , once remarked that the movie film people were down the hall from consumer film and they didn’t talk to each other. And they never touched the formula for 5222.
In sample close-up images of Double-X, a word came to my mind that the grain was “beautiful” which is not the same adjective I would use for “practically everything else”. That impression (and the discussions about using it in “Lighthouse”) led me to experiment a bit with it. I still think it’s “beautiful”, and I see that look in my prints.
I haven’t “mastered” it though, I agree it’s a bit harder to control than TMAX100 which I find easy but others say is tricky.
I suspect it is susceptible to halation and has a shouldering curve, which means the correct exposure is “more critical”.
Any resources how to reversal process as slide? I have some ORWO UN-54 that can also be reversal processed. Seems like something to try
I suspect it (XX) is susceptible to halation and has a shouldering curve, which means the correct exposure is “more critical”.
reversal processing of Double X is something worth considering.
Any resources how to reversal process as slide? I have some ORWO UN-54 that can also be reversal processed. Seems like something to try
There's been a thread on Photrio within the past year about using copper sulfate bleach with a chloride donor (plain table salt) to rehalogenate the silver to chloride, then dissolve it away with ammonium hydroxide solution (clear household ammonia is this in 3% solution). No permanganates (to soften the emulsion) or dichromates (toxic, carcinogenic, very bad for the environment).
nauseating smell of Ammonia
...5222 has to be one of Kodak's last untouched film, which has basically been unmodified or updated since its inception.
For generalities and an overview of B&W reversal I usually refer people to this Analog Resurgence video. It covers one approach to process and shows examples with several films.
I've not tried UN54, but if it's anything like Kentmere 100, it is an ideal candidate for reversal. I get full speed out of Kentmere 100 and 400 (with a slight increase in the 1st development time) using stock Kodak D-19 as 1st and 2nd developer. If the finished slides are too dense you can increase first development time, rate the film slower, or do a 'reverse chemical pre-flash' with a dip into a weak ferricyanide solution and a re-fix. I prefer those techniques over adding thiosulfate or thiocyanate to the first developer to control density.
Fomapan stocks are a great place to start practicing with reversal because you can use stock dilutions of common B&W developers as a first developer and get good results.
Can confirm: it is easier to block your highlights with XX. Rate at 320 and develop for 200, especially when using it in high contrast daylight. I haven't noticed much in the way of halation, but I'm more used to effects you see in x-ray film so I may be overlooking it.
Orwo UN54 is indeed a nice film for reversal processing. This tutorial by @mrred is a good starting point for UN54 reversal:
[Unfortunately, the examples Peter posted in the above page are no longer available. But the method works fine.]
If dichromate is to be avoided for some reasons, a low strength permanganate bleach can be used in its place.
If desired, Iron Out based second development can be replaced by light exposure and redevelopment in a suitable second developer.
Neg/ pos materials are inherently sharper than reversal - all that people are seeing is the (poor) sharpness quality of their scans, not of the film. The high contrast of reversal materials is what makes them seem, under specific viewing circumstances, acceptably sharp.The scanned slides are naturally sharp without needing sharpness adjustment in the post.
I haven’t “mastered” it though, I agree it’s a bit harder to control than TMAX100 which I find easy but others say is tricky.
I suspect it is susceptible to halation and has a shouldering curve, which means the correct exposure is “more critical”.
Neg/ pos materials are inherently sharper than reversal - all that people are seeing is the (poor) sharpness quality of their scans, not of the film. The high contrast of reversal materials is what makes them seem, under specific viewing circumstances, acceptably sharp.
I've found 5222 sits somewhere in between the 400TX/ 400TMY-II regions, if you don't overexpose it. Both are better in different ways than 5222 - and 5222 seems to shoulder earlier (not an issue when it's being used as intended - how many of you have a truck/ trucks full of lighting kit to control scene contrast with?). Reportedly, within cinema usage conditions (which differ from still usage conditions), t-grain B&W emulsions were trialed, but not found to offer sufficient visual/ perceptual advantages over then current products to take into production.
...5222 has to be one of Kodak's last untouched film, which has basically been unmodified or updated since its inception.
Whether or not the emulsion recipe was fundamentally changed, surely this, like all other Kodak films, underwent modification(s) when everything moved to the coating line in Building 38.
You can bet the cine users of this film would have screamed bloody murder if the Building 38 move had significantly changed the characteristics of their favorite black and white film. I believe we're reasonably safe in believing Double-X hasn't changed characteristics in a meaningful way over the period from Raging Bull up to Kill Bill -- which I believe spans the period when production was scaled back and moved to Building 38.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?