Ortho-Litho Film

[Fotoguy20d]

Having recently made the jump from 4x5 to 8x10, I went to buy some film and discovered that with 4 times the surface area, film was now 4 times the cost. So, I thought I'd try ortho-litho film - Arista II from Freestyle is reasonably priced. Being able to process under safelight using paper developer seems like a nice fringe benefit too. I thought I'd pick up some 4x5 too to refine the process with the cheaper film before starting in on the 8x10. That's when the problem started - I realized the ortho-litho film is sized like paper and not like film (it was seeing the 3.9x4.9 size that did it). So, now I need to trim the 8x10 film by .1" to get it to fit into the holders. Having read my long winded intro, the simple question is this. Once I'm trimming anyway, is there an advantage to using ortho-litho film over making paper negatives using Ilford MGIV (wither FB or RC, I have both)?

Thanks,
Dan

 

[removed account4]

hi dan

i have a fridge with a bunch of ortho litho 8x10 film
but i see no benefits over paper negatives so i use paper instead.
i suppose the big thing is if you are creating negatives for
alternative processes, and would rather have film, so your exposure
isn't "a through the paper exposure ... "

the other advantage to litho rather than film is litho isn't as "contrasty"
as a paper negative tends to be ... i tend to shoot paper when it is open shade
or overcast and process it in partially spent paper developer a water bath
... and then a second fresher bath of developer ... ...

have fun !
john

 

[Rick A]

Its good for internegatives, and copy work. You can experiment with developers to get continuous tone prints, its good for contrasty negs for alternate printing types like platinum and such

 

[John Kasaian]

I like ortho for capturing fine detail in subjects that don't move like my seahorse specimien, architectural details etc.... I don't especially like how the sky appears on ortho film so I generally avoid using it for landscapes where the atmosphere plays a role.

For an excellent reasonably priced panchro 8x10 film check out Arista.eduUltra

 

[Fotoguy20d]

John,

I'm aiming to use the 8x10 for portraits using some old brass lenses (I have a 1 3/4" Packard and just won a 2 3/4") - it's an Eastman 2D so doesn't have much movement for other applications. Figured an ortho film would be ideal for that application.

I figured the ortho film is similarly contrasty to paper - since it isn't (when processed in paper developer only presumably, that seems an advantage to using it. I use Ilford Multigrade developer for my paper - any thoughts on using that over Dektol?

Dan

 

[Rick A]

You need a green filter to darken the sky, otherwise it gets blown out white. ortho films do not respond to filtration the same as panchrochromatics. Look on "www.crime-scene-investigator.net/filters1.html" for a listing of effects desired and which filter to make it happen.

 

[John Kasaian]

John,

I'm aiming to use the 8x10 for portraits using some old brass lenses (I have a 1 3/4" Packard and just won a 2 3/4") - it's an Eastman 2D so doesn't have much movement for other applications. Figured an ortho film would be ideal for that application.

I figured the ortho film is similarly contrasty to paper - since it isn't (when processed in paper developer only presumably, that seems an advantage to using it. I use Ilford Multigrade developer for my paper - any thoughts on using that over Dektol?

Dan

I used spent or very diluted paper developer to tame contrast and develop under red light by inspection. I don't think the brand would matter much, but ymmv of course!

 

[Fotoguy20d]

I used spent or very diluted paper developer to tame contrast and develop under red light by inspection. I don't think the brand would matter much, but ymmv of course!

Freestyle recommends Dektol at 1:9 (off the top of my head) - I'll either try that or just take a guess with the Ilford concentrate and mix it very weak.

Dan

 

[desertrat]

Clayton makes a developer called Extend Plus that can be diluted to give low contrast. Freestyle and B&H sell it. I used it years ago on some Arista Ortho Litho film (not their current stock) from Freestyle, and was actually able to get some low contrast negs with it.

 

[SMBooth]

Jim Galli's recommendation of Rodinal at 1:150 with a restrainer looks like it works pretty good to me.
Dead Link Removed

that's a nice link to the filter use, thanks

 

[premo]

I shoot arista ortho 95% of the time. I shoot it at weston 20 (asa 25). Developed 24-1 in mixed dectol film, plate and paper developer. In other words, I mix the stuff per the directions on the dectol package, than use it 24-1 plus 1 drop of glycerine per each 6 oz---one shot. Fab stuff. you can use various intensity yellow filters to get more sky effect.

 

[Vaughn]

There is always x-ray film, also. Much higher ISO, still usable under a red safelight. Requires more careful handling (most have emulsion on both sides -- subject to scratching.) Much cheaper than regular film.

 

[Jim Noel]

It makes no sense to use paper developers when attempting to lower the contrast of lith films. Paper developers are inherently more active, more contrasty, than film developers. If you want to prove this, try developing an enlargement, or any other print, in film developer.

Use diluted film developer. HC 110 diluted about 1+15-20 from stock works well. Also D-76 diluted 1+ 4 or 5 works. Even better, try Jim Galli's alteration of Rodinal. It works beautifully. You can find it on the Tonopah pictures web site.

Any of these will give you very nice full scale negatives.

 

[premo]

I'm going to have to try Rodinal 1-150, since several posts speak so well of it.

 

[desertrat]

There is always x-ray film, also. Much higher ISO, still usable under a red safelight. Requires more careful handling (most have emulsion on both sides -- subject to scratching.) Much cheaper than regular film.

I was working with ortho litho film, trying to get it usable for general use. I was able to get more or less normal contrast, but the tonality is kind of strange. Then I discovered medical green sensitive (ortho) x-ray film. It's cheaper than any ortho litho film I've been able to find and has the heaver .007" thick base. Film speed seems to be in the ISO 25 - 100 range, and the tonality seems more like photographic film. Processing is a bit tricky to prevent scratches, though. I'm saving my ortho litho film for special projects now, if I need the high resolution and extra fine grain, and using x-ray film for everything else.

 

[premo]

Interesting idea, x-ray film. I'll see if I can find a dealer in the stuff.

 

[desertrat]

Interesting idea, x-ray film. I'll see if I can find a dealer in the stuff.

There are several threads at the LF forum dealing with buying, exposing, and processing x-ray film. Here is one of the main ones:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=48099

I bought a 100 sheet box of Kodak Hyper Speed Green x-ray film from zzmedical.com for $28 not including shipping. They take paypal, which is what I used, sent a couple of confirmation emails, one with a tracking number, shipped the next day, and I got the package about 6 days later.

Dead Link Removed

There are a couple of other internet based companies selling x-ray film to the general public. Some of the generic films can be had for around $24 in 8X10.

Hope I'm not getting in trouble for posting these links.

 

[fschifano]

Freestyle recommends Dektol at 1:9 (off the top of my head) - I'll either try that or just take a guess with the Ilford concentrate and mix it very weak.

Dan

That does work. I can vouch for that on personal experience. But be advised that the stuff is slow, very slow. In daylight, you can usually rate it at EI 3 or 6; but because there's no sensitivity to red light at all, it gets even slower under tungsten lamps. Freestyle has it in 3.9x4.9 inches to fit sheet film holders exactly. The full 4x5 inch size is just a little too big to fit the holders and must be trimmed.

All in all though, it's not very good for general photography. Being orthochromatic, it's not so great for landscapes. Being as slow as it is, makes it problematic for portraiture. It's very thin, only .004 in. thick compared to regular sheet film's.007 in. thickness, and not very rigid so it's hard to handle and is susceptible to buckling in the film holders.

I use it like graded enlarging paper. It's great for making enlarged transparent positives. Contact print those onto another sheet and you can make an enlarged negative that, with a little tuning, can be suitable for making alternative process prints like cyanotypes.

 

[premo]

Although I rate it at weston 20, I use a packard shutter, often on instantaneous. I have read that packard shutters speeds vary according to the size of the bulb and the diameter and length of the hose, and varies from 1/10 to 1/50, depending on those factors. I also develope by inspection, which may make a difference.

 

[premo]

Hey, thanks for the link (zzmedical) just ordered half speed blue!