Exposing Eastman (Double-X) 5222 in the Leica

I am not linked up to anybody. For Svema materials I have my own Ukrainian supplier from Odessa. As you probably know the original Svema factory is already closed for many many years. And yes I have family in Ukraine too. Concerning Svema: http://www.svema.info An Ukrainian .UA you can not registrate if your main address is abroad.
About Kodak 5222 Double-X: Prices of Kodak have been rised pretty high the last months and because this cine film is an USA product the Euro price is of course coupled to the US$-Euro rate. Before 1 1/2 years ago 1,5:1 now 1,06:1. So it is how it is now. Apart from the fact we have in Holland a 21% VAT. But looking at the actual bulk film prices for Kodak Tri-X 400 maybe XX is still a bargain. Tri-X 400 30,5m/100ft should costs Eur. 140,- now. I am very concerned about the price policy of Kodak Alaris. This is of course not good for the Kodak film market at all !
 
As long as this thread is popping back to the top of the stack, let me say that I finally took a deep breath and loaded up a bunch of cassettes from the 100' of XX I bought from the Film Photography Project over the summer. (I'd never used a bulk loader before and was afraid of making a mistake.) I filled a bunch of snap caps but honestly found old spent cassettes to be sturdier and easier. So, I am back in the XX game. Woohoo!
 
Nice to see many fans of Eastman 5222 'XX', I fortunately still have some in my freezer. Here's a shot taken with my Leica M7, Zeiss Planar 50/2, XX developed in D-76.

7347159782_f5dedff17c_z.jpg
 
Loading a 35mm cassette with re-loadable cassettes of even once used commercial cassettes is a piece of cake. However by using old cassettes you have always more risk for scratches. In precise loading for 1,63m for a 135-36 metal re-loadable cassettes I am using the AP loader machinery which means you have a precise length and a Tesa tape to the first 3 sprocket holes only and you will loose only 2 1/2cm of the end of the film which is then still in the cassette lenght so that the last picture of the 135-36 film is still good. This is only possible with the professional AP-loader system. Further I do not think my Dutch clients would like to buy second hand cassettes with sometimes different lenght of their 135-36 film. But of course for your own hobby it maybe doesn't matter. I am not selling low cost LOMO crap but professional quality films. Even in my LOMO shop and the Svema Foto 200 is a high quality East European film. They are loaded in the same metal quality AP cassettes as the Double-X film. Not outdated or cheap T.S.F. material. In private I am working 100% on film, except my iPhone. And I personally hate crappy film or developers which won't work correctly. Especially in chemicals I never take any risk. Chemicals are so cheap comparing with your time , efforts and (sometimes) expensive film material and photo papers. I am only working with serious manufacturers, Kodak cine, Foma, Rollei/Harman, Rollei/Agfa Gevaert, Fuji, Bergger, for the near future Ferrania who love film!
 
Hi All

So, I was brave enough to order some of this stuff today. I also ordered some HC-110 and some Windisch W665. Now I have an arsenal of developers (Rodinal, ACUROL-N, DD-X, HC-110 and Windisch W665). This is actually what I always wanted to avoid!

125PX was beautiful to me in DD-X. So I think I will start with this. Can anybody give me any guidance assuming that I will shoot at "box speed," which I assume is ISO 250. The fallback will be the new to me HC-110 I guess. Not sure yet what to do with the Windisch W665...

Thanks in advance for any commentary regarding DD-X and XX!

Regards to all,

John
 
Replenishing D-96

Replenishing D-96

If anybody here is using D-96 for 5222 and replenishing I have a question about that. At what rate is it replenished?

I've been using 15mL per roll. I have a 1000mL bottle and use about 500mL for developing. After developing I pour 15mL (per roll) of replenisher into the half-full 1000mL bottle and then pour back in the just-used 500mL of developer until I have 1000mL again. I had been wondering if one is better off pouring that 15mL into the full 1000mL first and then pouring off to bring it back down to 1000mL.

It's a small amount but multiplied over the liter of replenisher I have and errors would add up. I don't know how the movie processor's machines did this.

Grateful for pointers,
s-a
 
It depends a bit on the developing tank which you're using and how many ml you also loss for one or two films. I am using a Jobo 1520 tank which gives a loss of exactly 10ml each cycle. So when making a 1000ml stock (the minimum amount for this Jobo tank in inverse development with a Heiland TAS robot is 485ml). So after the first cycle I will add 10ml replenisher. The overall volume stays the same: approx. 1000 ml and in practice I am using 500ml-550ml to fill this tank. In rotary I could do the same: 2523 tank, minimum volume 270ml in rotary. In the practical way I could use 300ml each cycle. I am using for XX the Adox Borax M.Q. with replenisher but the principle is exactly the same comparing to D-96. So far together with HC-110 (B) but here I am using HC-110 as one shot, the best overall results as regular all round developer.
 
Wishing to go "back to basics" with XX, I mixed up some fresh ADOX Borax MQ developer and replenisher. Just now washing are eight Minolta SRT/SRM/XK rolls, a quick "eyeball" of the top two rolls shows full+ emulsion speed, as I expected. I went to 15 minutes at 15C (my basement work area is very cold at the moment). Plenty of shadow detail, "beefy-looking" negatives that I prefer. A success I believe. Will be starting to hang them in a few minutes, so I'll have a better idea then. Then will post some of the best of them.
 
jkjod said:
I have been using D-76 and I'm quite pleased with the results - I've rated everywhere between EI 250-1600, but probably won't shoot more than 800. I have wet printed from the roll I shot at 800 and I really liked the results.


EI 800, 20 mins, 20C
Scan-141203-0001-6.jpg by jkjod, on Flickr
Click to expand...

Jkjod, is this D76 1+1 solution? If so, very nice!

I've been trying to find out D76 (1+1) developing times for XX shot at 800asa but haven't gotten lucky yet. Does anybody have some hints? Should I go with Jkjod's 20 minutes?
 
I would go twenty minutes. Sure why not try it? Back in the seventies, with the old Tri-X, one-stop push was 50% increase. Two stop push was 100% increase. Developed thousands of press rolls this way. Wouldn't think it would be much different with XX (1959 emulsion formula). Also the longer the development times, the less a few minutes make here or there will have much effect. I'd say go for it.
 
juBadub said:
Jkjod, is this D76 1+1 solution? If so, very nice!

I've been trying to find out D76 (1+1) developing times for XX shot at 800asa but haven't gotten lucky yet. Does anybody have some hints? Should I go with Jkjod's 20 minutes?
Click to expand...

Sorry for the late reply, it is 1+1. It works pretty well at EI 800. Very contrasty though. I'm not sure it made any difference but I use Patterson tanks and only used the agitator thing every other minute instead of every minute like I typically do. Over all I think I like the Microphen better, but the D-76 does a really good as well.
 
My next step: KODAK 5222 Double-X in Atomal ATM-W (from Wehner). He made a synthetic alternative for the HEAP used in this developer which ingredient was also used in May & Baker Promicrol. Fine grain combined with higher speed.
Click to expand...

The test bear is back:

24185410812_6b59b9e7c0_z.jpg


Kodak 5222 Double-X E.I. 250 in Klaus Wehner ATM-W developer. 10:00 minutes at 20C.

In the original Agfa Atomal also HEAP ( N-(beta-hydroxyethyl)-o-aminophenol sulphate ) was used.
 
gdi said:
Where can I still find a 400ft roll in the US? ( I want inexpensive - not Tri-x like prices)

Thanks!
Click to expand...
From the Kodak website (http://motion.kodak.com/motion/Products/Product_Information/index.htm) the current price for a 400 foot roll is $257.88. Compare that to $100+ for 100' of Tri-X.

The first time I bought Double-X I got it from one of the shops which sells short ends but I have not had much luck finding anyone who had any. Now I just order directly from Kodak. Their 800 number is on their website and they accept credit cards.
 
pschauss said:
From the Kodak website (http://motion.kodak.com/motion/Products/Product_Information/index.htm) the current price for a 400 foot roll is $257.88. Compare that to $100+ for 100' of Tri-X.

The first time I bought Double-X I got it from one of the shops which sells short ends but I have not had much luck finding anyone who had any. Now I just order directly from Kodak. Their 800 number is on their website and they accept credit cards.
Click to expand...

Many thanks, Peter. I mistakenly believed one of the reseller websites that said Kodak would not sell to the public. I'll go with them directly then.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom