--> Skip to main content

A New Method for Processing X-Ray Film

Anybody shooting large format film today knows that film is extraordinarily expensive. A sheet of 8x10" black & white film will run anywhere from $3 to $10. Those interested in ultra large format photography have come up with various ways of shooting on a budget: paper negatives, lith film, and X-ray film. X-ray film costs anywhere from $.50 to $2/8x10" sheet.

When you first think of X-ray film, you might imagine a film capable of seeing through surfaces. But get your mind out of the gutter! For the conventional photographer, X-ray film has some quirks. But if anything those quirks limit what the film sees, not expands.

X-ray films typically are orthochromatic. Much like films in the really olden days, they are not sensitive to the red spectrum. For your photography, that means a really red rose will look blackish. For portraiture, that means that freckles and zits will look darker than they do, so keep that in mind.

A big plus to orthochromatic films is that they can be handled and developed under red lights. So you can develop by inspection - actually watching the latent image materialize much like when you print conventionally.

Another quirk to X-ray film that presents the biggest challenge to conventional photography is that most films are coated on both sides! What does that mean to you, the budget large format photographer? Several things....

First off do you know what turns your prewash to blue, green, or black? When you pour clear tap water in to your film drum and it comes out colored, that is a dye adhered to the back of conventional films called an anti-halation layer. That prevents light that hits the film from bouncing around off the back of the film layer causing blooming highlights. If conventional film has an anti-halation layer, then you could call x-ray film's secondary layer a "pro-halation" layer. Instead of discouraging those hightlight blooms, x-ray film encourages that effect. Never fear, it can add unique feature if employed correctly.

Another related effect is that photos are going to appear less sharp. There are two identical images with a several micron thick piece of plastic separating them. So in addition to those blooming highlights, there will be a slight overall glow to any image.

But most importantly, the double sided emulsion makes processing difficult. Processing in a conventional drum blocks the chemistry from completely penetrating the back emulsion, which with normal film would just be the plastic backing. That effectively ruins your image, since the back emulsion is very unevenly processed. Some photographers deal with this problem by scratching off the back emulsion.

Other photographers have dealt with this by careful tray processing or other techniques. I've heard of people using ziplock bags as an example. But I've come up with what I think is an easier solution. I just lined the conventional 8x10" tray with plastic cling wrap. It seems to have minimized scratching problems and is very easy and cheap to apply.

Give it a try!

(sample photos to follow)


Popular posts from this blog

Linhof Serial Year List - Salomon Says

Recently I've acquired a few Linhof cameras. I got a 5x7 view camera from Oakland Museum's White Elephant Sale. Later I stumbled upon a Color Kardan 90 Jahre Jubalaeum edition on Craigslist. And more recently, I found a "baby Technika" 2x3 (6x9) at Oakland's East Bay Depot for Creative Re-use. Not knowing much about Linhof large format cameras, I tried getting more info online, and came across a strange thread on the Large Format Photography Forum . Basically on this thread various Linhof owners ask a guy named Bob Salomon what year their Linhof was made. And the thread is over 100 pages long! Sifting through that thread is mindnumbing. Why Bob doesn't just publish the list of serial numbers is beyond me. Maybe it's just nice to feel needed. So I started compiling a spreadsheet of the serial numbers and the answer Bob gives. If you don't feel like spending a couple days reading this thread to get a hint as to the age of your Lin

How to stop annoying Corel pop-up ads

Corel has done something extra sleazy. For those not familiar, Corel has been making image editing software for as long as I can remember. The Canadian based company is known for budget graphics software including Corel Draw! (Similar to Adobe Illustrator) and Paint Shop Pro (Similar to Lightroom) as well as some other products. The price of their software makes it hard to resist. I bought a few of their products years ago. Recently ads started popping up in Windows (not on a web browser, but just in the right corner of my monitor. Those ads were for Corel products and would float over all other panes in my Windows. How sleazy is that?! So I found a way to get rid of the ads for good. Or at least until you install another Corel product. If this happens to you, and you find it as annoying as I do, follow this instruction. First, hit control (+) alt (+) delete and select task manager at the bottom. If you look at your task manager, you'll see something called "background

Who Makes Ultrafine Film?

One of these 120 paper backings stands out as being different. Not a big surprise, since one is Kodak, and another is Ilford. But our mystery film Ultrafine has the *exact* same backing paper as seen in this scan. What does this mean? There are a few possibilities that come to mind. It's always possible that the backing paper is made by a third party I suppose. Not likely, as there isn't much of a market for 120 film anymore, and I've never seen another non-Ilford film with the same backing paper. So is this mystery film, Ultrafine actually Ilford then? Another, more likely theory is that it is made by Kentmere. Kentmere and Ilford are both part of the Harman group . In researching this I just read that Harman was the name of the founder of Ilford company in the late 19th century. So how is are the Ultrafine (E)Xtreme films? I bought a bulk roll of the 400 speed. Frankly it's pretty grainy and soft. I don't hate it, and I'm trying to work with the grain.