Graflex.org

Murray@uptowngallery.org · Joined: 03 Apr 2002 Posts: 164 Location: Holland MI

I have found some interesting posts here on 'outdoor', 'pictorial' and 'in-camera' alternative use of films like Kodak 4125, so I know some are workable.

I didn't find any info here on using xray film. I have seen a few images on the web that >look< ok on a monitor, a far cry from in-person, I realize.

In trying to sort out why I find on the web, I see there is a lot of confusion over single vs. double emulsion xray films. The consensus is that the double-sided film is probably the reason why it has a reputation for poor resolution.

I found a box of 'high definition' single emulsion orthographic xray imaging film (still unexpired). I realize I will have to determine my own path with it, but I wonder if any of you creative users of ortho and litho films have had success with xray film.

I haven't yet found any xray techs who use film who have any idea what constitutes 'high definition' for their purposes - they just use the right stuff for the job at hand. Based on the double-emulsion reputation for poor resolution, I'm guessing that a single emulsion eliminates that & is thereby 'higher' definition.

Thanks

Murray

scottkathe · Joined: 07 Apr 2006 Posts: 15 Location: Vermont, USA

I use the double emulsion x-ray film at work. We use it to detect radioactive decay. The radioactive particle has enought energy to go through the emulsion then through the film and out through the emulsion on the other side effectively giving a 2x signal compared to a single emulsion. If we put a special screen on the other side and do the exposure at -80 F the radioactive particle will bounce off the screen and head back through the film. If we put another screen on the other side (make a sandwich) the particle will bounce back and forth between the screens till it runs out of energy and get a much stronger signal (darker exposure).

With a double emulsion film if light gets through the film base to the emulsion on the other side it would cause the image to be 'soft'. Let us know how this turns out I have always been curious since I use this stuff and work and we have an automatic film developer. The chemistry for developing x-ray film is different so it would be interesting to see what happens with 'normal' film developers.

Scott

Ed Workman · Joined: 10 Sep 2002 Posts: 11 Location: Central Coastof CA

Go to APUG forums. There is a current thread on ortho films, including examples made with xray stock

primus96 · Posted: Tue Jun 13, 2006 3:55 pm Post subject:

I have used the Kodak 4125 ortho film for quite a long time.
I cannot remember if the 'official' speed of the stuff is 50 ASA.
Using it to make proper pictures meant downrating it by two stops to get shadow details at 12 ASA when developed in R09.
It is good for anything that doesnt move. The smoke & steam escaping from a railway locomotive looks very different.
It would be interesting to shoot moving water, like a a set of falls or stormy sea.
You cannot help but get a impression of movement in your images.

I have sampled MACO positive film which is 6 ASA for pictorial use.
There were some very interesting films for the graphic arts & printing industries and I wanted a purely blue sensitive film.

I have not tried X-ray film which would need guillotining down anyway. I was of the impression that it was of very high contrast.