Rodinal Revisited...

filmtwit said:
Sorry typo. Last batch was 1+30.
Click to expand...

I have no idea what film you are using, but I do know that 1:30 for 30 minutes is too long. Your blown highlights prove that. Look at the AGFA chart. Find a similar film and use that time. I do know that Agfa 100 in Rodinal 1:100 for twenty minutes works.
Reduce agitation as well. 3 minute intervals seems to work well.

Wayne
 
It's a motion picture stock. I've been doing only light agitation (2x flips) every two minutes. This was the 2nd roll I've developed from it and was hoping for better results then I had with D76

venchka said:
I have no idea what film you are using, but I do know that 1:30 for 30 minutes is too long. Your blown highlights prove that. Look at the AGFA chart. Find a similar film and use that time. I do know that Agfa 100 in Rodinal 1:100 for twenty minutes works.
Reduce agitation as well. 3 minute intervals seems to work well.

Wayne
Click to expand...
 
venchka said:
I have no idea what film you are using, but I do know that 1:30 for 30 minutes is too long. Your blown highlights prove that. Look at the AGFA chart. Find a similar film and use that time. I do know that Agfa 100 in Rodinal 1:100 for twenty minutes works.
Reduce agitation as well. 3 minute intervals seems to work well.

Wayne
Click to expand...

Calm damn man, jesus... These odd "1:30" dilutions is with the "R09" Rodinal version or something something. I really should have all the facts in front of me. 1:50 is with THE original Rodinal soup. Fotohuis should be here sooner or later to give out all the facts, Rodinal guru 🙂
 
I'm old & curmudgeonly. But I will calm down a bit.
Black & white film developing 101. First lecture.
Expose for the shadows.
Develop for the highlights.
Blown highlights = Too much development.
A quick scan of the AGFA PDF linked above shows ISO 50 film @ 1:50 for 11 minutes at 20C. How would that compare to 1:30 for 30 minutes? A wee bit overdevloped maybe? Blown highlights perhaps?

As for using Rodinal to get "better results than D-76". They are different. Used correctly, both are good. Neither is "better" than the other. We also don't know how you were using D-76.

When I work with a new film+developer combination I like to sneak up on the correct time. Start with less time. Add time until the highlights go off on me. I suggest that you try the next roll of movie film at 1:50, 10 minutes, 20C. See if you like it better. Or try stand development for an hour.

Or you can wait for a Rodinal guru.

Wayne
 
Change course here if you don't mind. Using Rodinal 1+100 for 60 minutes, slight aggitation at the 30 minute mark, stand development.

I have been told the Film speed (say Tri-X) doesn't matter, therefore I can set the meter as I need it per shot. example 200 iso, 400, 800 etc I have not tried this but it makes sense since most films work in Rodinal 1+100 @ 1 hour.

Is this correct? I'm assuming sharpness suffers?

Thanks for any help you can give.

Jim
 
jcrutcher said:
Change course here if you don't mind. Using Rodinal 1+100 for 60 minutes, slight aggitation at the 30 minute mark, stand development.

I have been told the Film speed (say Tri-X) doesn't matter, therefore I can set the meter as I need it per shot. example 200 iso, 400, 800 etc I have not tried this but it makes sense since most films work in Rodinal 1+100 @ 1 hour.

Is this correct? I'm assuming sharpness suffers?

Thanks for any help you can give.

Jim
Click to expand...

Hmm, I have tinkered quite a bit with that recipie, but gave up because of occasional uneven development. As for exposure, in my experience it does matter. The recipie above should work more or less for films exposed at box speed. For Tri-X@200 I used around 30 minutes and for 800 around 90 minutes. Good luck! I am back to 1+50 for 13 minutes, mostly.
 
jcrutcher said:
Change course here if you don't mind. Using Rodinal 1+100 for 60 minutes, slight aggitation at the 30 minute mark, stand development.

I have been told the Film speed (say Tri-X) doesn't matter, therefore I can set the meter as I need it per shot. example 200 iso, 400, 800 etc I have not tried this but it makes sense since most films work in Rodinal 1+100 @ 1 hour.

Is this correct? I'm assuming sharpness suffers?

Thanks for any help you can give.

Jim
Click to expand...
I've never done stand-dev. since I had even with semi-stand problems with uneven development.
But sharpness shouldn't suffer, at least visible sharpness or acutance would increase as result of the edge-effect.
The longer and longer unmoved - the more acutance in high thinned Rodinal.
 
I've never done stand-dev. since I had even with semi-stand problems with uneven development.
But sharpness shouldn't suffer, at least visible sharpness or acutance would increase as result of the edge-effect.
The longer and longer unmoved - the more acutance in high thinned Rodinal.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately this is NOT true:

http://www.fotografie-in-schwarz-we...0-filme-entwickeln-die-richtige-bewegung.html

Stand development at the end gives less sharp negatives then a smooth agitation with Rodinal/R09 one shot.

I can only acknowledge the above test article and proof with my own negatives.

Greetz,

Robert
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom