Fuji HR-T 8x10 x-ray film and Yankee 4x5 daylight tank- help!

[alfsorenson]

Ok, I'm just starting off first time with darkroom and traditional development, so please be gentle. I've read enough that I know the basics of basics, but I am becoming a bit frustrated with some issues I'm having and hope someone can help here. I am on a very limited budget that is nearly already exceeded, and I haven't even started yet!

I recently acquired some Fuji HR-T 8x10 size x-ray film. I want to cut this film down into 4x5 sections, so it fits the maximum size the Yankee tank will allow. I'm running into several issues:

1) The x-ray film box specifies a "Fuji Safelight Glass No. 8U", yet I can't seem to find this anywhere on the web at reasonable cost. I see safelight lamps for x-ray film running $100 or more, but is there a much cheaper alternative that actually works and won't fog the film?

2) How do I go about opening the x-ray film box in total darkness? Are films like this a box within a box? Is it resealable once I remove some film sheets? Due to the uncertainty of safelight, I don't want to try opening the entire 100 sheets in that light.

3) How do I cut and handle the film? I was just going to use scissors and a 4x5 cardboard template to feel the film into position and cut in the dark. Are cotton gloves ok to use for handling?

4) The instructions for the Yankee say that for 4x5 film, 55 ounces of solution are required. On advice of a friend, I was going to use Kodak D-76 developer (which makes 0.26 gal once mixed), Kodak fixer (1 gal) and Kodak stop bath (16 oz). Unless I'm overlooking something, it appears that I already don't have enough chemicals if 55 oz are needed each time. Am I supposed to use the chemicals full strength or can they be diluted? Also, can I pour any from the tank back into the chemical bottle they came from (in other words, which ones are reuseable and for how long)?

I realize some of this may fall into other categories and I apologize if so. Appreciate any advice/ experience anyone may have.

Thanks,
Alf

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

I've shot Fuji HRT for a few years now and it's mainly green sensitive so any red or orange safelight will work. What I would do is to test a sheet first. That being said, if your test of the red/orange safelights works, I would just process them in a tray. The film has two emulsions and no anti-halation backing so it's not as sharp as regular sheet film. But to me, it's a beautiful film. The emulsion is extremely soft when wet so I'd process them with care.
I cut my 4x5 sheets under a red safelight and develop under inspection. You can rate it between ASA 200 and 400. I also use a Yankee Agitank and they don't work all that great. Most 4x5 sheets of film are not exactly 4x5 inches, but about an 1/8 of an inch smaller on all sides. The stuff is really cheap so just play with it.

 

[DWThomas]

My various readings recommended a dark red safelight -- I'm using a #2 (deep red) filter in the old Kodak bullet-style safelight successfully. It was recommended to me to try a red LED bulb from Superbright, so this year I got one. Alas in my first attempt to test that it looked pretty bad, I need a second try before I give that up, but I think it's too bright and maybe not quite the right spectrum (probably be great with blue sensitive film). It might depend on specific filter cutoff characteristics, but I would be very surprised if an orange worked with HRT. Of course all safelight situations depend on distance between bulb and film and length of open handling time too.

I have cut some 8x10 to 4x5 using a guillotine style paper cutter. As Mainecoonmaniac says, all the films are a bit under the nominal size -- I call it as 0.07 inches, so about a sixteenth under. The 8x10 x-ray film is similarly undersize, so cutting it exactly in quarters may work OK for a 4x5 holder. The "4 inch" dimension (more like 3.93") is more critical than the longer dimension, as that has to slide into the grooves in the 4x5 holder without bellying up in the center. If you cut to exact 3.93 width, you end up having to take a thin sliver from the offcut which can be tedious (especially under a dim safelight).

The Fuji film is in an opaque plastic bag inside the box. Under a safelight you can slide the bag out of the box, lift the folded top of the bag and slide one sheet out without getting much light into the bag.

I normally use the full 8x10 sheets and tray develop in smooth-bottom trays. Some people do it in a zip-lock bag, or put a sheet of glass in the bottom of a ribbed tray. The emulsion is quite tender when wet. For washing I rig up a pair of flat bottom trays, one above the other as though I was going to wash prints, and "cascade wash" the films so there is only one sheet per tray. Since I don't shoot many at a time, I can do that, were I shooting dozens I'm not sure what I would do.

Lately I use HC110 developer at 1+63 dilution -- I suspect that might be roughly equivalent to D76 at 1:2 or 1:3 dilution (but have never tried the latter).

It's all fun, but is more experimental in nature than working with "normal" film.

 

[MattKing]

Welcome to APUG.

I hesitate to suggest this to someone new to development, because it adds an additional complexity, but I think any developing procedure that requires large quantities really works best with developer that is intended to be reused - that means a replenishment regime.

Kodak X-Tol and Kodak T-Max RS are two examples.

In essence, each time you develop some film, you don't discard the used developer, you keep and re-use all but a small portion. The small portion is discarded and replaced with the same volume of fresh developer.

 

[MattKrull]

Let's preface this: I too have picked up some x-ray film (in my case, Ektascan single sided to try and make my processing a bit easier), but I have not yet processed any of it.

Have you considered usign Rodinal for your developer?

With Rodinal you need 10ml (less than a tbsp) of stock developer per (approximately) 50 square inches of film (aka one roll of 35mm film). To do a 4x5, you'd need roughly half that (dev times being dependant on the ratio to water). 10ml of rodinal is probably going to be a lot cheaper than a tank full of D76, even at 1:1 - probably less hassle too.

As I said, I haven't processed any x-ray film yet. But that is my plan, we'll see how well it works.

 

[WetMogwai]

That tank is going to scratch up your film. I've never gotten good results with it using regular photographic film. Using a soft double-sided film will be much worse. The edges are likely to get scratched beyond the rebate and the inner sheets are likely to get scratched in the middle if you do a full load of 12 sheets. I suggest using flat bottomed trays or a ziplock bag. This will allow you to use a smaller amount of chemicals and develop a better scratch prevention technique. I've heard of people getting good results with a hanger system too, but I've been getting good results in trays and bags using it at the full 8x10 size. The bag method can be a little messy, but it works well in a small space. I typically use a gallon bag with 500ml of developer and do two sheets in a session, but I'm getting more comfortable using a single tray with no bag.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

Xray film

As I said, I haven't processed any x-ray film yet. But that is my plan, we'll see how well it works.

You have to keep an open mind about Xray film. Again, there's no anti-halation back so your highlight can bloom and it's not panachromatic.

Here's a shot done with Fuji RX film which is blue sensitive printed on palladium.

 

[Colin Corneau]

That tank is going to scratch up your film. I've never gotten good results with it using regular photographic film. Using a soft double-sided film will be much worse. The edges are likely to get scratched beyond the rebate and the inner sheets are likely to get scratched in the middle if you do a full load of 12 sheets. I suggest using flat bottomed trays or a ziplock bag. This will allow you to use a smaller amount of chemicals and develop a better scratch prevention technique. I've heard of people getting good results with a hanger system too, but I've been getting good results in trays and bags using it at the full 8x10 size. The bag method can be a little messy, but it works well in a small space. I typically use a gallon bag with 500ml of developer and do two sheets in a session, but I'm getting more comfortable using a single tray with no bag.

+1.

I had some 4x5 film I shot on a trip to China years ago, and the Yankee tank RUINED them. Uneven development from a system that didn't distribute refreshed/agitated developer, with the result that my negs just weren't printable in a darkroom.

Stay away from that system, is my advice. You'll do much better with tray development, hangars, roller tanks etc.

 

[alfsorenson]

Ok, guys, thanks for replying so far and sorry for the delay as I had an unexpected situation that took me away from the net for a few days. Anyway, I actually tried out this film, but used individual trays instead of the tank. The goal has been to take actual x-rays on film. Have been doing digital x-rays for years, but digital techniques do not produce the same resolution as film, unfortunately, so have been having the itch to try out film.

Anyway, the idea was to use that film in an x-ray cassette that has an intensifying screen. I have two such cassettes already, one slightly smaller than the other.

To jump ahead, I tried some exposures recently, but hardly anything turned out correctly. I did cut the film down (to less than 4x5) as I knew I'd just be doing test exposures first and was careful and did not seem to get too many scratches.

My first subject was a flower that had been "doped" with a substance to increase film contrast. I knew this would work as the flower is easily revealed digitally. Anyway, none of the exposures with the x-ray film turned out well. I tried varying exposures to the x-ray source. At first, I kept the intensifying screens inside the x-ray cassette. A 3 min exposure did get the rose to show up, but it seemed seriously overexposed to me, poor focus, and contrast had to be greatly adjusted in Photoshop once the film was scanned. I then tried 10 sec, also with the screen in place, and nothing. Then I removed the intensifying screen from the cassette, did a 3 min exposure, and then nothing again.

I'm wondering if my developer (D-76) might be at fault. I mixed it according to the directions Dead Link Removed. (See under "Preparing Chemicals" and then "developer"). However, since I was trying less than 4x5" size and only needed small quantity, I proportioned what he says there (7.5 oz developer powder in 64 oz water) down to 1 oz developer in 8 oz water. I then diluted this by 50% by adding and additional 8 oz of water. I then let it sit and cool overnight before using it. For the 1st 3 min exposure in cassette with screen, I must have developed by inspection for at least 15 min; and at least 25 min or more with the ones with no screen. I was also working under a red safelight, the one here. I'm just wondering if I didn't mix the proper amount of water with the D-76 or something.

Anyway, other than the developer, not sure what else could be giving me either too much or not enough exposure.

Appreciate any ideas you'd have. I definitely should be seeing some development occurring as I am agitating in the D-76, but no. Thanks in advance.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Was the safelight on the entire time you were developing? THAT could cause serious fogging of the film during development.

To re-hash an earlier point, run, screaming, in the opposite direction from the Yankee tank. While I haven't had scratching issues with a Yankee, they're a waste of chemistry, and they also produce 'surge' around the edges of the film caused by the ribs of the film rack. Surge is visible in over-development of the edges of your frame. What causes it is the ribs of the film rack, being nearly in contact with the film, will amplify the wave motions of the developer when you agitate, therefore over-developing the edges. It's a royal pain in the ass. The reason people tolerated it in the past was that a lot of folks using them were press photographers who composed loosely and cropped when printing, so it didn't matter if you lost an 1/8th of an inch on each edge to developer surge.

 

[Rick A]

Ok, guys, thanks for replying so far and sorry for the delay as I had an unexpected situation that took me away from the net for a few days. Anyway, I actually tried out this film, but used individual trays instead of the tank. The goal has been to take actual x-rays on film. Have been doing digital x-rays for years, but digital techniques do not produce the same resolution as film, unfortunately, so have been having the itch to try out film.



I'm wondering if my developer (D-76) might be at fault. I mixed it according to the directions Dead Link Removed. (See under "Preparing Chemicals" and then "developer"). However, since I was trying less than 4x5" size and only needed small quantity, I proportioned what he says there (7.5 oz developer powder in 64 oz water) down to 1 oz developer in 8 oz water. I then diluted this by 50% by adding and additional 8 oz of water. I then let it sit and cool overnight before using it. For the 1st 3 min exposure in cassette with screen, I must have developed by inspection for at least 15 min; and at least 25 min or more with the ones with no screen. I was also working under a red safelight, the one here. I'm just wondering if I didn't mix the proper amount of water with the D-76 or something.

Anyway, other than the developer, not sure what else could be giving me either too much or not enough exposure.

Appreciate any ideas you'd have. I definitely should be seeing some development occurring as I am agitating in the D-76, but no. Thanks in advance.

I believe your developer may be too dilute, and possibly dead from what you describe.. First off, you should mix the entire batch of powder to make stock strength developer. If you don't have a vessel to hold one gallon, then buy the one liter size. There in no way of guarantying a proper mix by dividing the powder, unless you mix from "scratch" with bulk chemicals. After mixing the developer to stock strength, let that cool over night, never dilute further until you are ready to use it immediately. Always follow the instructions on the package, never folk lore from the net.

Long thread but worth reading:
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?48099-X-ray-Film-example-and-comparison

 

[MattKing]

Most X-ray film isn't very sensitive to X-rays. It is sensitive to the intensifying screen's emissions.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Most X-ray film isn't very sensitive to X-rays. It is sensitive to the intensifying screen's emissions.

And don't you need an X-ray intensive illumination source in the first place?

 

[alfsorenson]

I believe your developer may be too dilute, and possibly dead from what you describe.. First off, you should mix the entire batch of powder to make stock strength developer. If you don't have a vessel to hold one gallon, then buy the one liter size. There in no way of guarantying a proper mix by dividing the powder, unless you mix from "scratch" with bulk chemicals. After mixing the developer to stock strength, let that cool over night, never dilute further until you are ready to use it immediately. Always follow the instructions on the package, never folk lore from the net.

Long thread but worth reading:
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?48099-X-ray-Film-example-and-comparison

Thanks, Rick, and I may have to agree with your assessment. I think I'll get some more of the D-76 and remix as on the package. I'm going to try one last experiment first though.

 

[alfsorenson]

Most X-ray film isn't very sensitive to X-rays. It is sensitive to the intensifying screen's emissions.

Interesting point and I've been wondering about that, whether or not the film will be x-ray sensitive without the screen. It's called green x-ray film and I'll bet no sensitivity without the intensification screen in front of it. I'm going to try one last experiment soon just to be certain, once I have remixed my developer, but if it's the case that only sensitivity is with the screen, I definitely won't get the resolution I wanted, and I'll probably have to go with b&w variable contrast paper .

 

[alfsorenson]

Tonight's test seemed to show what you said, MattKing, that the film is sensitive to both visible light and the intensifier screens inside the cassette, but not x-rays alone. I approached tonight's exposure from that viewpoint and it now looks like I have an x-ray (it's drying now). I had to generate almost full power to cause fluorescence inside the cassette so the film would respond, however. Won't know for a while how the resolution is, but I have a question about development. As I mentioned prior, I'm using D-76 and watching under safelight for development. Tonight I noticed that there was a brightening of the image that peaked around the 6 min mark, then the brightness started to fade. Should I have stopped when it reached the peak? It was sort of difficult to see well under the safelight, but by the time I stopped, some of the brightness in the image had abated. Thanks.

 

[ic-racer]

You have an X-ray tube??

 

[Wayne]

My various readings recommended a dark red safelight -- I'm using a #2 (deep red) filter in the old Kodak bullet-style safelight successfully. It was recommended to me to try a red LED bulb from Superbright, so this year I got one. Alas in my first attempt to test that it looked pretty bad,

Well that's bad news cause I just ordered 3 of them. Haven't other people used these quite successfully?

 

[DWThomas]

Well that's bad news cause I just ordered 3 of them. Haven't other people used these quite successfully?

I'm not sure what specific films the recommenders were using. Some X-ray films are only blue sensitive, I suspect the red LEDs would be fine for that. There is/was a Kodak Safelight Filter data sheet that lists three red filters -- #1, #1A and #2.

The #1 "Red" is listed for "Blue sensitive materials and most phototypesetting materials."
The #1A "Light Red" is listed for "Slow orthochromatic materials."
The #2 "Dark Red" is listed for "Fast orthochromatic materials, green sensitive x-ray films." This suggests to me you need a cut-off well down into the red end.

The transmission curve for the #2 shows a cut-off around 650 nm AND the transmission beyond that is reduced on the order of 12 or 15 percent, thus it is definitely dark.

The #1 cut-off looks to be more like 610 or so and transmission is reduced 10% in the pass area, yet that's not recommended for green sensitive x-ray.

I was going to try and look up the Superbright bulb (E27-R8-G) I bought to see if they say anything about its spectrum, but their website is acting very strangely and looks nothing like I remember ... oh well, I'll try again later.

Anyway I was trying to do the full-blown test with preflashing the film and then doing timed patterns and it was late and I may have screwed something up which is why I want to try it again before totally writing it off. I just haven't had time to mess around with it. I put the bulb in a Kodak bullet style safelight housing and left the filter off. It was indeed red, but way, way brighter than the #2 filter with a 15 watt incandescent bulb. As no doubt time, intensity and distance from film are important parameters, maybe I just need some neutral density, but it was the hope of improving visibility that led me to this attempt in the first place.

So try it, and good luck. Report back -- I shall do the same if I ever get done rescuing the yard from encroaching wilderness!

 

[Wayne]

Which one did you use, how close to the film and for how long? They make different ones.

 

[DWThomas]

Which one did you use, how close to the film and for how long? They make different ones.

It was the E27-R8-G which is a little ping-pong ball sized globe ("comparable wattage 5-10 watts"). (Someone recommended that to me when I complained about my aging eyes having trouble seeing anything under the #2 filtered light.) In my setup, the bulb was about four feet+ from the film (Kodak bullet safelight hung from the ceiling over a counter). I don't seem to have the numbers handy at the moment, but I was ultimately looking for the ability to go several minutes as I would if tray developing. The general layout works with the #2 Dark Red filter covering a 15w incandescent in the same hanging fixture. I have too many other things clamoring for attention at the moment, but somewhere between now and WPPD 2016, I'll try some more tests. It's tedious trying to do the setups in the dark and my patience was running thin at the time.

For starters I might test with skipping the matrix of preflashed background and just lay a string of washers on a sheet of film. I could then set up to expose in 1 stop increments starting from a couple of seconds to try and establish some hint of a base time range with way less work. Don't know if any of my light meters could get an intensity reading or not (and it might introduce more spectral mismatch!) Under the #2 filter I find it almost difficult to find a developing tray on the counter, whereas with the LED unit I could probably read a newspaper. If there is any spectral component of shorter wave than the claimed 635 nm, that could be a problem. I could probably come up with some sort of laser printed ND filter to put over a clear acrylic disk to replace the safelight filter too (or maybe pick up one of the lighter red safelight filters to use with the LED bulb, depending on what the actual problem is. (Enh, one of these days ...)

Mostly, given what I have seen so far I wouldn't want to promise anybody "get this bulb and all your problems will be solved."

 

[Wayne]

Maybe you just had the bulbs a bit too close. I ordered the wrong ones and am now re-ordering a few of the E27-R8-G. I know other folks are using those successfully wth x-ray

 

[DWThomas]

..... I know other folks are using those successfully wth x-ray

But which x-ray? There are blue sensitive and green sensitive (and probably others). Blue is at the far end of the visible spectrum from red and I would expect that to work, though I've not tried it (don't own any blue sensitive film). Green is mid-spectrum, so odd as it sounds, closer to red.

I will retry the R8 one of these days, I had just hoped it would be like those single line spectrum sodium vapor lights -- only red!

 

[Wayne]

They have been reported to work with green. Keep trying! Maybe try 2 bulbs at 6 feet, if you can see well enough. I find the red ones I ordered to be extremely bright. They are the wrong bulb but similar output.