DavidScherf
Hello everyone,
I’m currently doing my Master’s in Microbiology. As part of my studies, we still sometimes detect proteins using analogue X-ray film. As I’ve been experimenting with analogue cameras for the past six months – and more recently with pre-war medium-format cameras – I’m wondering what I might be able to develop in our darkroom.
The darkroom itself is very basic:
We use
‘LucentBlue X-ray
film’
from Advanta (A4 format :spudnikheadstand: ), along with this
developer
and
fixer
from Tetenal. The great thing about the process is that you can develop the film under red light, allowing you to deliberately influence the signal. We don’t make any prints, as the huge negatives are simply scanned and digitised directly.
Now to my questions:
1
. Can all black and white films be developed under red light (hardly, surely?)
2
. Which films can actually be developed using the developer/fixer combination mentioned above? How does one find this out?
3
. Can photographic print paper also be developed using the same process as the film?
That’s it for now. No idea whether these are trivial questions or not. Many thanks for your thoughts and for sharing
David
PS: In case the links don’t work:
Film:
https://advansta.com/products/x-ray-film-western-blot/
Developer:
https://shop.tetenal.de/de/agr/104112/roentogen-liquid-eu-konz-1-l
Fixing:
https://shop.tetenal.de/de/agr/104122/roentogen-superfix-eu-konz-1-l
PPS: The attached image was developed using the process mentioned. Canon A-1 50mm f1.2 and scanned using a Nikon 35mm film scanner.
KlausWehner
Hi David,
Welcome to the forum!
Regarding your questions:
1. ‘Normal’ black-and-white films must be developed in complete darkness. These films are Panchromatic. This means that they are sensitive to all light visible to the human eye – including red.
2. The X-ray developer is a specialised developer. It is precisely tailored to these films. This is important for medical use.
In principle, the chemical process (reduction of silver halide to elemental silver) is the same for every development process using any developer.
So, in principle, you can develop any photographic paper and any film in any developer.
In practice, however, you won’t be able to use these results.
Photographic papers are ‘fully developed’. You develop them until all the exposed silver halide has been completely converted to elemental silver.
Films are only developed until the negatives reach a specified contrast. This process is essentially controlled by the development time.
The development process is therefore stopped at a certain point.
Both methods require developers that work at different speeds. The fixing bath is basically the same for all processes (the concentration may vary slightly).
3. A film developer would be too slow for photographic paper.
In your specific case, you can certainly develop the X-ray film using a paper developer.
You’ll have to try it out to see if and how that works.
Get in touch if anything is unclear.
Best regards,
Klaus
DavidScherf
Dear Klaus,
First of all, thank you very much for your replies. I’m really pleased to be able to learn something about this topic! :)
I actually found an old documentary on panchromatic and orthochromatic films just today, tucked away in the depths of the lab cupboards.
Regarding point 2:
So does that mean I could actually develop and fix any black and white film with these reagents? (Although in the dark, as they’re mostly Panchromatic, and I’d have to estimate the times entirely myself.) And this wouldn’t create any contaminants or even ruin any of the reagents? What exactly do you mean by ‘results that are unusable’? Would one expect the Roentgen developer to leave artefacts on the film, or does this refer to the fact that one cannot estimate the required development times?
So, theoretically, could I then develop and stop the only available (to my knowledge, still in production) orthochromatic small-format film,
Rollei Ortho 25 Plus, under red light without affecting the exposure? I’m toying with the idea of developing something other than the Roentgen film there.
I don’t think I’ll be able to experience exposing and developing a print in our lab. We do have an old Leitz exposure unit, but nobody knows if it still works at all, and if so, how. (It belonged to the old department, now the new department – no knowledge transfer, as they’ve gone digital).
So, questions upon questions. But once again: thank you very much.
Have a lovely weekend
David
KlausWehner
Hi David,
I’m glad you’re interested.
Before I go into the details, I’d really like to know exactly what you’re planning to do.
Are you just looking to experiment a bit, or do you want to produce negatives that you can later process into positive prints?
Why do you want to use a special orthochromatic film? It’s not necessarily the best choice for trouble-free results.
What camera do you have available?
Do you perhaps have a tank for film development?
If you have an enlarger, you probably also have the rest of the equipment needed for an analogue darkroom.
Where do you live?
I’m running a darkroom course here next weekend.
Guests are always welcome to come and observe.
Once I know your goals, I’ll be able to help you more specifically.
Best regards,
Klaus
DavidScherf
My goal(s):
I’ve always wanted to create negatives that I can later convert into positives. A friend of mine has a light table and a Nikon 35mm scanner, which is how we’ve managed to do this so far.
On the other hand,
I’d like to try out old cameras and experiment with developing other orthochromatic films. What appeals to me about orthochromatic films is that I can see the silver crystallising under red light, allowing me to directly and consciously influence the intensity of the development. With panchromatic films, this is only possible indirectly by adhering to development times; you only see the result at the end, and it’s set in stone.
In the darkroom drawers, there are still some Kodalith ortho films (6556, type 3, ASA 25, 35 mm) that I’d like to try out and develop (if possible, using the reagents mentioned).
[font=arial, helvetica, sans-seriCameras currently available to me and my mate:
Canon A-1
(primarily bought for double exposures), Canon AE-1
, Voigtländer Brillant
, Ica Dresden
and various analogue Olympus cameras
(we also want to build a pinhole camera)
My mate owns a developing tank and the necessary equipment, though it’s not particularly appealing to me, as described above. The darkroom is in a very dilapidated state; you could describe it more as a windowless storage room; it’s also very small. As described earlier, no one has the necessary knowledge or inclination to actually produce prints there, or even to test whether the equipment still works. (However, there is a large photo lab on the university’s main campus with absolutely every piece of equipment imaginable: several enlargers, a drying cabinet, huge developing tanks. Unfortunately, I’ve never been there myself, only my friend I mentioned. The lab is no longer in use and could only be viewed at his request to a certain Professor Frankenstein, sadly. Barely twenty years into the digital age, and the knowledge is fading away, even at uni).
I live in Kassel and go to uni there.
Best regards and many thanks
[font=arial, helvetica, sans-seriDavid
KlausWehner
Hi David,
This coming weekend, I’m expecting a group from Kassel to join a darkroom workshop here in Paderborn.
If you’re interested, you’re welcome to come along and watch.
In theory, there might even be a spare place on the workshop. But you’d need to bring some negatives that you could then print yourself.
This is what the workshop covers: the process from negative to classic analogue paper print.
The group is very diverse, ranging from complete beginners to trained photographers.
Your questions would certainly be answered in full.
Please get in touch with me at short notice if you’re interested: klaus.wehner@web.de
It’s an exciting (“magical”) moment when you can watch directly as an image suddenly emerges from nowhere on the film in the developer.
I can well understand why that fascinates you!
However, if you want to end up with usable negatives, you’ll have to do without this experience for the time being.
1. You cannot develop an entire 35mm film in the tray under visual supervision
2. Ortho films (just like X-ray films) are specialised films that have been optimised for very specific tasks. They are only of limited use for ‘normal’ halftone photography.
However, if you have well-exposed and developed negatives, you can experience the magic of watching an image come to life much more directly during the positive process.
So, David, please do get in touch with me briefly.
Then we can sort out the rest.
Best regards
Klaus
DavidScherf
Thank you very much for the kind invitation, but I’m afraid I have to decline. I’m quite busy at the moment with my Master’s thesis, and I’m not particularly keen on having perfect prints. But thank you for all the tips and feedback; they’ve been a great help.?
Perhaps I’ll give the Kodalith film a go soon and see if I can develop it with the reagents and whether it’s still any good at all.?
Many thanks
David
landpfarrer
Hello David,
I’m taking the liberty of joining in the conversation, especially as I don’t live far from Kassel (at the terminus of the RT5).
I don’t want to spoil your fun, but I’m afraid that with your approach, you’re unlikely to achieve a satisfactory result or experience. Orthochromatic films produce strong contrasts, but are very weak in terms of grey-scale reproduction. If that’s your thing...
The experimental setup seems more difficult to me. 35mm film is far too small for visual development. You won’t be able to tell for sure how far the development has progressed. People who develop such films in larger formats by eye often do so in glass bowls, as the classic plastic trays make observation even more difficult. Continuous agitation is recommended for bowl development, which also hinders observation. I’d say: if anything halfway decent comes out of this setup, it’s either a massive feat of skill or an incredible fluke.
As well as my own small darkroom, which really only has room for one person, I also have access to a darkroom at one of the local schools. I could offer to give you an insight into darkroom work, even from can development right through to the finished print, if you like. It’s not quite as far as Paderborn ;-)
Regarding the Kodalith Ortho: Properly stored black-and-white films last longer than you might think; you have to make a few compromises, but I’ve exposed and developed films that were over 50 years old. As far as I know, the Kodalith was only supplied in rolls (30m). You’d then have to load it into cartridges – for a trial run, I’d load it for 12 exposures. This is best done with a film winder (I’ve got one here).
Given the current lighting conditions in this area, 25 ASA is already quite a challenge – incidentally, that rating only applies to natural light with this film. Under artificial lighting, it’s more like 12.
Kind regards, Jörg
KlausWehner
Hi Jörg,
€
I couldn’t agree more with what you’ve said.
€
I also believe that the best way to sort out all of David’s questions is through a face-to-face conversation.
Your generous offer will certainly be of great help to him.
€
Thank you and all the best!
€
Warm regards from Paderborn
Klaus
DavidScherf
Hi Jörg,
€
I’ve already developed a fairly large quantity of the orthochromatic film we use in the lab, and I think the results are quite decent. As I said, I’m not looking for the perfect result; if I were, I’d hardly be pursuing this any further. I much prefer misusing an extremely high-contrast X-ray film for other purposes. And ASA25 is absolutely achievable, especially with a flash. Developing ‘by eye’ also works perfectly. The signal usually comes through after about six seconds in the developer. After this time, I hold the dripping film between the red-light lamp and my eye; that works perfectly. If the exposure was a bit poor, I simply pop it back into the bath for a moment. The finished negative has always been streak-free and uniform so far. Once I’ve digitised some of the negatives soon, I can share them here if you’re interested.
Your assumption about the Kodalith is correct. The roll is 30.5 m long (that works out as 871 photos?!) and expired in January 2000. What’s more, the roll is still in its original sealed packaging and untouched. Before it ends up in the bin at the end of the new professorship, I’ll definitely give it a go. We also have a film winder and empty spools in the lab; I tried them out just this Sunday. I might come back to your offer in the future, as, as I mentioned before, I’m not particularly interested in prints. Perhaps just in the process itself, but not necessarily in ending up with a positive. But thank you very much! :)
As for both X-ray films, I’ll update the results here if anything comes of it.
Until then, happy working
David??
DavidScherf
- A quick update -
€
The link below contains the digitised images of the 35mm photos taken with X-ray film, in case anyone would like to try something similar or is interested in the image quality of X-ray film. I’ll post another update here as soon as the medium-format images have been digitised.
€
https://imgur.com/a/CWL361y
ZalmanYanowsky
Thank you very much, David, for publishing the photos! I would have done exactly the same as you: conducted exposure of the available material and developed it using the reagents I had to hand. It’s obvious that this is of interest.
Far be it from me to discredit your work, but may I ask: do you also see that your experiments are likely to be of more academic interest rather than paving the way for conventional analogue photography? I am certainly open-minded about unconventional materials and still occasionally (!) shoot on orthochromatic or other special films such as Technical Pan; back when it became fashionable, I cross-processed colour slide films (i.e. in C 41 instead of E 6, meaning developed into negatives), but after 30 years of running my own darkroom for both black-and-white and colour, I am convinced that the development (in the sense of evolution) of black-and-white emulations towards today’s modern products was logical and necessary.
I wish you continued enjoyment and success with your work, including on the Master! I’m looking forward to seeing the medium-format results.
Warm regards,
Zal
P.S.: The calculation that 30.5 m of film yields 871 KB negatives doesn’t add up, because you lose a significant amount due to the leader and tail. A roll of film with 36 KB exposures is, if I remember correctly, 1.65 metres long. That means you can cut 18.5 rolls of 36 exposures each from the 30.5 metres, which gives you 665 exposures.
If, as has been pragmatically suggested here, you make the rolls shorter, the number of possible exposures shrinks even further.
Wolfgg
ZalmanYanowsky
Thanks, that interests me.
?
Best regards, Zal
