A newbie developing for twenty years...

Juan Valdenebro

Juan Valdenebro

Truth is beauty
Local time
1:43 AM
Joined
May 23, 2009
Messages
4,352
Location
Barcelona and Colombia
View My Gallery
I shot a roll of 120 PanF50+ and developed it as my notes said for a pull on direct sun: 6 minutes in Rodinal 1+50 at ISO6 incident for yellow filter: it came out weak, with highlights printing in zone 6 and almost everything in middle gray...(?!)


I thought... Underdevelopment? Underexposure? Maybe PanF requires more light or development now, as I haven't shot it in 120 for years... So I took out a second roll from my fridge and made a quick test, exposing it for more light, and also checking my Hassy's speeds (125, 250, 500) and developing it for longer: 9 minutes with more agitation... Speeds were fine, but density was almost the same, just a little bit higher, with white cars under the sun printing gray on zone 6 ½... And I mean that dull even for exposures +1 and +2!


I checked film: best before May 2011, and it was bought in the best store here, refrigerated there and here at home...


I'm mixing 12ml of Rodinal with 600 of water. Rodinal is from an almost new bottle I'm using these days with other films, and results are OK.


That was yesterday. Today I used my last roll of PanF decided to get real whites... Gave it a nicer punch: 14 minutes.


The same. Horrible.


Got no clue... Any idea?

Cheers


Juan
 
That's a puzzle. If the film is ok, and the camera is fine then how about the edge markings ? A good solid black ? If not then there could be contamination in something you are using to mix the Rodinal, or on the reel/tank.

As a check, get a roll of 35mm Pan F and shoot the whole lot off, then develop sections of six shots or so (control strips in other words). Try using distilled water and different measuring/mixing hardware and tank, so far as is possible, to see if you can find a cause by elimination. Not very dramatically helpful, sorry, but good luck and do keep us informed.

EDIT: Ummm, that is a three stop pull ? Or is that including compensation for the yellow filter ? For straight processing Ilford suggest 11 minutes at 1:50.
 
Last edited:
I know you made sure of these (Plz don't feel insulted), but just to eliminate potential causes:

You gave an hour or so before you shot the roll after taking it out of fridge?
Diluted Rodinal with water in room temperature?
I believe diluted Rodinal has got very short lifespan and sensitive to light. Was it used quickly, without exposed to strong light for more than 10 minutes or longer?
 
MartinP said:
That's a puzzle. If the film is ok, and the camera is fine then how about the edge markings ? A good solid black ? If not then there could be contamination in something you are using to mix the Rodinal, or on the reel/tank.

As a check, get a roll of 35mm Pan F and shoot the whole lot off, then develop sections of six shots or so (control strips in other words). Try using distilled water and different measuring/mixing hardware and tank, so far as is possible, to see if you can find a cause by elimination. Not very dramatically helpful, sorry, but good luck and do keep us informed.

EDIT: Ummm, that is a three stop pull ? Or is that including compensation for the yellow filter ? For straight processing Ilford suggest 11 minutes at 1:50.
Click to expand...


Just a one stop pull... For all my B&W I meter incident with a lower ISO than box speed... For strong sun I expose even higher to underdevelop and control contrast, and another stop for the yellow filter. For example I expose Tri-X under direct sun at 50 incident for a pull with yellow filter. At 100 without filter, at 200 without filter and without pulling, and at 400 for overcast or in camera meter...

Cheers,

Juan
 
Last edited:
coelacanth said:
I know you made sure of these (Plz don't feel insulted), but just to eliminate potential causes:

You gave an hour or so before you shot the roll after taking it out of fridge?
Diluted Rodinal with water in room temperature?
I believe diluted Rodinal has got very short lifespan and sensitive to light. Was it used quickly, without exposed to strong light for more than 10 minutes or longer?
Click to expand...

Yes, film was out of the fridge long enough, placed on camera before going out, and I walked on a sunny day...

Yes, Rodinal was diluted with water being already at developing temperature: 18ºC as all my Rodinal use for any film...

Yes, I mix Rodinal just a moment before I pour it into the tank... No light...

Cheers,

Juan
 
As Sug already asked:
developer temperature?
distilled water?
processing immediately after diluting the developer?
one-shot use?

If answers are 20°/yes/yes/yes , then I'm puzzled, must be something wrong with the film.
 
I used tap water, but have done it many times and I have never seen density change compared to distilled water...

There's something happening, and something big. It's like a fast film when it lost speed, but... PanF50?

Nothing like this happened before, in my life... Only with these three rolls I bought some days ago... No matter the light I gave them, or the development, they were flat...

Can't be the camera because I've been using it this week with TMax400 and every shot and speed were fine...

Can't be the developer because TMax and TriX developments with the same Rodinal in the same tank and reels this week were fine...

Can't be the meter because it metered on sun at right speeds: 1/250 f/2.8 1/2 at ISO 6, and that's 1/250 at f/8 1/2 at ISO 50: the speed I use for Tri-X under direct sun with yellow filter...

And I have never ever had any contamination of any kind... I even mix fixer just before taking the developer out...

From the first of the three rolls the film didn't react to exposure... Then it didn't react to more exposure, and the same happened with more development...

Must be the film!

Any experience with such a variation between distilled and tap water or PanF?

Cheers,

Juan
 
Austerby said:
Ilford instructions suggest 11 minutes in Rodinal 1+50 at ISO50, so I'd suggest underexposure and underdevelopment is the cause of your woes if I'm not mistaken.
Click to expand...


?

I developed for 14 minutes, and exposed at +1 and +2 after metering at ISO6, getting even to 1/60 at f/2.8: that's lots of light and development.

Impossible.

Cheers,

Juan
 
The pull sounds do-able. The edge markings being not as expected it "has" to be development or film. If the meter was crazy far out, after a bang or something or the diaphragm was stuck on F32, then the edge markings would look normal. After the mechanical stuff is out of the way, then . . . contaminated or otherwise non-working developer, or the film had a very bad experience between Ilford and the shop.

If you still have the packet with the emulsion number, then you could try to go back to the shop and see if they have another packet from the same batch. Send that (unshot) plus one of the developed rolls back to Ilford ? Over on APUG they sound like they investigate every report thoroughly, even while the products are high quality and the few problems are usually outside the manufacturing.

The effect of old fixer looks different to what Juan described.
 
Yes, I use all chemicals only once...

As it happened three times, and the changes between different exposure/development were present but in a very small way, I think there was no fogging or contamination, and simply for some reason, the film was not responding to light in a normal way.

Maybe it's God's voice telling me "time to try acros... You never tried it in any format..." 🙂

Cheers,

Juan
 
MartinP said:
The pull sounds do-able. The edge markings being not as expected it "has" to be development or film. If the meter was crazy far out, after a bang or something or the diaphragm was stuck on F32, then the edge markings would look normal. After the mechanical stuff is out of the way, then . . . contaminated or otherwise non-working developer, or the film had a very bad experience between Ilford and the shop.

If you still have the packet with the emulsion number, then you could try to go back to the shop and see if they have another packet from the same batch. Send that (unshot) plus one of the developed rolls back to Ilford ? Over on APUG they sound like they investigate every report thoroughly, even while the products are high quality and the few problems are usually outside the manufacturing.

The effect of old fixer looks different to what Juan described.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the idea of investigating the emulsion number, Martin...

I'll go to the store soon.

Cheers,

Juan
 
One would hope that with Ilford checking then you would get the film and postage etc. replaced either by them, or by the shop - depending on what was found. Or maybe I'm being wildly optimistic ?! It will be interesting to know what happened.
 
Yes, honestly it's for me as mysterious now as when I took the first film out of the reel yesterday... Not that understanding could help those three rolls, but I would know what I shouldn't doubt about all parts of my procedures...

I think I'll try a roll of 120 Acros. If I use the same lens, filter, camera, meter, developer and tank, and get normal results, the problem was just the film...

Cheers,

Juan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
Yashica MONO 400 - Developing
Replies
5
Views
2K
dourbalistar
dourbalistar
ChrisPlatt
ISO 400 BW negative film recommendation?
2 3
Replies
47
Views
3K
Erik van Straten
Erik van Straten
Rikard
Forgot my Tri-X in Rodinal method
2
Replies
27
Views
3K
Rikard
Rikard
O
processing and chemicals
Replies
15
Views
1K
Andrew Sowerby
Andrew Sowerby
S
My Leica doesn't like my Paterson reels
Replies
17
Views
481
coogee
C
Back
Top Bottom