Practicality of cutting down 8x10 x-ray film

[mabman]

I've been browsing some of your galleries and I have to say, some of you LF guys do great work I've been using 35mm and various 120 formats to date, but I have to admit I'm intrigued by LF...

I've read the recent thread on which LF camera to buy as a beginner, and the consensus seems to be either 4x5 or 5x7 in some format, such as a Speed/Crown Graphic.

Now, my main concern after the camera/lenses themselves is the cost of film. Some reading has lead me to the conclusion that x-ray film can be used for this purpose with interesting results (I'm mostly interested in B&W anyway), and is by far the cheapest option. However, the smallest size it comes in (at least that I can find) is 8x10".

Cutting this down would work optimally for 4x5 at least, but I'm wondering how practical an option this is - I've read that x-ray emulsion is particularly soft and prone to scratching. And, it would obviously have to be stored in something light-tight once cut down. (I don't have a darkroom myself for doing the cutting down, but I can rent time in a community darkroom for a reasonable price.)

I've still got a couple of MF cameras I haven't test-driven yet, so this idea is a little premature for me, but, hey, a guy's got to dream

 

[DarkroomExperimente]

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=30464


this could be interesting for pinhole work too...I'd expect a blue-sensitive film to be able to use a smaller pinhole

 

[PHOTOTONE]

Yes, cutting down X-ray film is practical, but it is very "tender" as it has an emulsion on both sides. You just have to be careful.

 

[JBrunner]

My advice to somebody just beginning in LF would be to avoid the exotic- you are going to have your hands full without trying to work with thin finicky emulsions with no anti halation layer just to save a few bucks. Even then the cost savings will be somewhat of an illusion, because I guarantee you'll have a lower ratio of good negatives, especially at first, while you figure out how to expose/develop them. Then you will have to figure out how to print them. A box of "normal" film will likely last you quite a while, as you will be making far fewer, (but much better thought out) exposures. It would be a shame to put the time and effort into one of your first really great LF exposures, just to get boned by a stock that wasn't designed for the task, and that makes you have to feel your way around like a blind man in a china shop.

It is great fun to play with different stocks, X-Ray, Ortho-Litho, etc., but wait until you have a known process and procedure with standard materials to go by. JMO YMMV

 

[Brian Bullen]

Even though Jason is a seasoned pro I have to respectfully disagree with his comment. I use x-ray film almost exclusively and it's pretty easy to work with. Super cheap and because you get so much film in a box you can experiment to your hearts content. As Phototone said the major problem with x-ray is that it scratches easily. I use old lenses and a packard shutter and have excellent results, at least for my tastes. I've developed x-ray in D-76 but it looked a little to standard for my tastes, then switched to Caffenol + C and love the results. Just because you're new don't be afraid to try something different. I love using x-ray film and you might too. With that said don't exclude regular film either, use both, experiment and have fun. Trial and error should be a learning experience and learning new things is exciting.

 

[JBrunner]

Even though Jason is a seasoned pro I have to respectfully disagree with his comment. I use x-ray film almost exclusively and it's pretty easy to work with. Super cheap and because you get so much film in a box you can experiment to your hearts content. As Phototone said the major problem with x-ray is that it scratches easily. I use old lenses and a packard shutter and have excellent results, at least for my tastes. I've developed x-ray in D-76 but it looked a little to standard for my tastes, then switched to Caffenol + C and love the results. Just because you're new don't be afraid to try something different. I love using x-ray film and you might too. With that said don't exclude regular film either, use both, experiment and have fun. Trial and error should be a learning experience and learning new things is exciting.

And there is the considered different opinion. Welcome to photography.

Brian, I love the layout and interface of your website. Cool images too. Well done, looking forward to more.

 

[Brian Bullen]

Mabman, one thing I forgot to mention, I have seen 5x12 x-ray film that might be easier to cut down to 4x5.

 

[Brian Bullen]

Jason, thanks for the kind words. With so little free time the website is in a continual state of disrepair. Most of the protraits are x-ray film and an 8x10 camera.

 

[mabman]

Thanks for the interesting views so far

So, for sake of argument, if I wanted the best of both worlds (assuming Polaroid 4x5 film is "easiest" to deal with than regular sheet film for a beginner) and get a *Graphic camera that supports a Polaroid back and sheet film holders, which option(s) should I be looking for? I've searched around, and I'm getting quite confused with the spring/Graphlock backs and Speed/Crown/Pacemaker/Anniversary et al... As well, I'd probably want a rangefinder, at least initially.

Thanks again!

 

[DarkroomExperimente]

One more vote for Brian's website...cool images

my dentist is a photographer...I've always wanted to ask him to take some artsy X-rays for me, but it never occured to me to use my "camera" with X-ray film in it...he has a cool panoramic X-ray machine too

 

[Brian Bullen]

Thanks D.E.

 

[rkmiec]

mabman by far the easiest solution for getting into lf as far as film is fuji quickloads.however there are downsides,only available in acros 100 which is what i use.and expense,the backs are like 100 bucks and you only get 20 sheets per box compared to 50 for the same price of non quickload film.the extreme advantage however is that you have less to worry about,i feel now as i progress in lf i need to use other films and get some regular film holders.also while getting used to lf from 35mm i think the convenience is a wonderful thing and some weight savings also.since your darkroom time is limited to rental sessions which may or may not be expensive quickloads have an advantage there also.good luck......rick
so as to not be wrong i must say that acros is the only b&w film in quickloads.there are several slide options and a few color print film options.also you mention polaroid and they have the positive/negative film i have been meaning to try.

 

[Murray@uptowngallery]

Not all x-ray film is double sided. It is difficult to pick and choose when you find a seller and even identify which is single emulsion.

X-ray duplicating film is single emulsion, but I'm getting confused thinking abuot whether it's positive or negative.

There is an imaging film that is single emulsion.

Not all xray film is blue-only. The green sensitive film responds to both blue and green...still considered ortho, but I wonder if it's a little more flexible.

Look up Christian Nze's work here and on his own site for some amazing results. He has found some of the newer Agfa Curix (HT-G?) film to be very fast. I think he uses it at ISO 200 indoor with incandescent light because he doesn't care for ortho response outdoors. I also think he said it's about ISO 800 in sunlight.

I'm pretty sure the sizes are more 'true' than with conventional films which tend to be 'nominal'. (for example, 8x10 film is a little smaller, but I think xray 8x10 is actually 8x10. I haven't tried fitting it into filmholders yet.

I'm going to go visit Brian's site now.

Oh, for MF, I think xray film is typically thicker (only time I researched it I cames up with 0.010", which compares to 8x10 & larger 'normal' film. I think 'normal' sheet film in smaller formats is about 0.007". Rollfilm varies but 0.004" is a good rule of thumb.

I had the idea of cutting short rolls of 120 or 122 (Folding Pocket Kodak postcard size) from xray film (I have some 14x17"), but the 0.010" will not roll well at all. I have enough 2x3 cutfilm cameras now I'll never need to make rolls from xray film (aside from the thickness).

 

[Murray@uptowngallery]

About the darkroomlessness.

I have a standing offer to use an arts center dark room, but I don't know how I would find the time to go there and haul the stuff I want to use. They're not set up for anything bigger than maybe 6x6 too.

I got a changing bag and someone else gave me the idea to make a portable darkroom 'kiosk' as a vertical wood frame with fabric-store blackout drapery cloth, and an IR-sensitive web camera on top hooked up to a PC to see what your hands are doing when cutting film and watch developing happen. Can't do this with IR film, however. I was thinking about a polymer laundry sink with wheels added and a board on top with cutouts and hose connections a la clothes washer hookup.

The fabric for the 'walls' of the portable room may be a dust issue according to many darkroom books' advice.