P C Headland
Well-known
Trius said:
I'll join your pimping - I use Rodinal in 1+50 and more usually 1+100 dilutions for a variety of films from Efke25 to Neopan 1600 and get excellent results.
It keeps forever, and at higher dilutions the time is not so critical.
Paul
Hektor
Leicapile
OK - I just checked the Ilford website tech info sheets - DDX and other liquid developers should be stored between 4 and 20 degrees centigrade. My fridge is at 4. I estimate this gives 2 or 3 times the useful life of concentrate compared to 'room temperature' storage.
Indeed in a significant number of places the ambient is above 20 centigrade for long periods of time, - making storage in refridgerated conditions mandatory.
hopes this helps those of you with home heating installed.
4 deg cent = 44 deg farenheit,....20 deg cent = 68 deg farenheit, accorging to Ilford, so if your room temp is more than 68 deg F, put your dev in the fridge.
Indeed in a significant number of places the ambient is above 20 centigrade for long periods of time, - making storage in refridgerated conditions mandatory.
hopes this helps those of you with home heating installed.
4 deg cent = 44 deg farenheit,....20 deg cent = 68 deg farenheit, accorging to Ilford, so if your room temp is more than 68 deg F, put your dev in the fridge.
GeneW
Veteran
Sorry about that, Bill. To tell the truth, I've never used (or previously heard of) the Arista or Minolta films. I pretty well stick with Tri-X or Neopan 400.
Gene
Gene
K
Kin Lau
Guest
P C Headland said:
I use HC110 & Rodinal for slow films (100 iso), HC-110 or Microphen (because I still have some, and I reuse it) for 400iso stuff and Diafine mostly for Tri-X.
I mostly use Rodinal for slow films, but at 1:50, it's 19min's, so when I'm less patient (like today), I just souped APX100 and FP4+ in HC110(B), 6 & 9 min's respectively.
bmattock
Veteran
GeneW said:
Gene,
Arista is the house brand of Freestyle Photographic - they sell film, chemistry, and the like at good prices - been around a long time, good reputation. Arista.EDU is Forte, Arista.EDU Pro is Foma. They also used to repackage Ilford Delta 100 and sell it as a no-name cheapie, but I think that deal is gone now. Too bad, great prices.
The Minolta film is:
http://konicaminolta.jp/products/consumer/film/lineup/monochrome/pan100.html
I like to try funky film, what can I say? Sadly, I can't find a dev chart for it...dang.
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
W
wlewisiii
Guest
Bill,
The Massive Dev Chart (http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.html) gives this:
Fomapan T200 HC-110 B 200 3.5 20C
It's my understanding that the Arista.EDU Ultra are the Foma products and the old .Pro (no longer available) were Forte. The Ultra 200 is supposed to be this T-Grain emulsion from Foma.
I do know I like the Ultra 100 but haven't tried the 200.
Hope this helps,
William
The Massive Dev Chart (http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.html) gives this:
Fomapan T200 HC-110 B 200 3.5 20C
It's my understanding that the Arista.EDU Ultra are the Foma products and the old .Pro (no longer available) were Forte. The Ultra 200 is supposed to be this T-Grain emulsion from Foma.
I do know I like the Ultra 100 but haven't tried the 200.
Hope this helps,
William
kaiyen
local man of mystery
Hm. Well, this is a bit confusing.
First of all, there isn't to my knowledge, an Arista.edu Pro. There is/was:
Arista Pro: Ilford (discontinued)
Arista.edu: Forte (discontinued)
Arista.edu Ultra: Foma
Arista (Pro?) II: Agfa (I think - I am not sure if they ever confirmed this).
Regardless, you probably are dealing with the Foma stuff, as others have surmised. I have no idea what the KM stuff is - do they even make B&W film?
Rodinal is my own personal "recommend it to everyone" developer because it's so easy with which to work. However, it's relatively grainy, and I've heard and seen less than stellar results with HP5 (results vary, though). It's also not great if you've shot at box speed, as it tends to be a speed-decreasing developer. So it's not perfect.
I also agree that a liquid concentrate is your best bet for ease of use, though I am able to consistently get 6 months or more out of powder developers if stored properly.
So...this is a pretty tough call, in other words. I'd say start with Rodinal or DDX, and decide how you feel about the results. One is higher acutance but less speed, the other is better speed but more solvency. Perhaps you'll prefer something in between. Who knows.
allan
First of all, there isn't to my knowledge, an Arista.edu Pro. There is/was:
Arista Pro: Ilford (discontinued)
Arista.edu: Forte (discontinued)
Arista.edu Ultra: Foma
Arista (Pro?) II: Agfa (I think - I am not sure if they ever confirmed this).
Regardless, you probably are dealing with the Foma stuff, as others have surmised. I have no idea what the KM stuff is - do they even make B&W film?
Rodinal is my own personal "recommend it to everyone" developer because it's so easy with which to work. However, it's relatively grainy, and I've heard and seen less than stellar results with HP5 (results vary, though). It's also not great if you've shot at box speed, as it tends to be a speed-decreasing developer. So it's not perfect.
I also agree that a liquid concentrate is your best bet for ease of use, though I am able to consistently get 6 months or more out of powder developers if stored properly.
So...this is a pretty tough call, in other words. I'd say start with Rodinal or DDX, and decide how you feel about the results. One is higher acutance but less speed, the other is better speed but more solvency. Perhaps you'll prefer something in between. Who knows.
allan
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
What I like about Rodinal is the tonal scale, the gradation of midtones and highlights. Some don't like the grain on high speed film. I've never found it objectionable. Compared to many other developers which achieve finer grain with through solvent action which reduces edge acutance (or at least that's the theory), Rodinal negs show an edge sharpness without too excessive interior contrast. So the combination of beautiful gradation and sharpness makes for really gorgeous renditions, IMO.
If you check APUG, you'll find lots of discussions on Rodinal, both very pro, and the doubters. You'll find lots of useful information on various developing techniques, from stanard 1:25 and 1:50 dilutions, all the way to 1:200 "stand development", i.e, very little agitation, a technique for compensating developing for high contrast range scenes.
Rodinal is the oldest commercially available developer, but fell out of favour with the introduction of 35mm film, due to the format's small size and the quality of the earliest emulsions. But with finer grain and better emulsions, it regained popularity.
I plan on buying several of the large bottles soon, just in case Agfa ceases manufacture of it.
Trius
If you check APUG, you'll find lots of discussions on Rodinal, both very pro, and the doubters. You'll find lots of useful information on various developing techniques, from stanard 1:25 and 1:50 dilutions, all the way to 1:200 "stand development", i.e, very little agitation, a technique for compensating developing for high contrast range scenes.
Rodinal is the oldest commercially available developer, but fell out of favour with the introduction of 35mm film, due to the format's small size and the quality of the earliest emulsions. But with finer grain and better emulsions, it regained popularity.
I plan on buying several of the large bottles soon, just in case Agfa ceases manufacture of it.
Trius
bmattock
Veteran
wlewisiii said:
Thanks, William - I had seen the Massive Dev Chart listing, but did not know that the Foma 200 was t-grain. Their own (Foma's) dev chart says they don't play well with it, but perhaps that is out of date?
bmattock
Veteran
kaiyen said:
Yes, I believe that the roll of Arista.EDU pro is Foma 200. I did not know it was t-grain, as William advised, though.
Yes, KM makes film. They just don't sell it in the USA (or even Europe, I guess):
http://konicaminolta.jp/products/consumer/film/lineup/monochrome/pan100.html
They make standard B&W and C-41 color print film, but I think they don't make any E-6. Anyway, I was hoping to find a dev chart for it somewhere, but there isn't even one on KM's website that I can find. That's what I get for experimenting!
As to the Rodinal - remember, my film is already exposed and ready to process. So I guess I'd value 'probably won't get screwed up' over 'this is some cool stuff' if there was a choice between the two. I can't afford to go back to Gettysburg and shoot these again, if you know what I mean. I'd take safety over coolativity.
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
GeneW
Veteran
Bill, since these are obviously not rolls to experiment with, you might want to play it safe and stick with the one you already know: D-76bmattock said:
Gene
bmattock
Veteran
GeneW said:
Yeah, you may be right. SIgh. I was hoping the answer would be easier, you know? I know that any D76 I mix up is going to end up down the drain (I checked, it is ok where I live do that, grin), because it will get old in the jug. But it might be the safest from the point of view of not having a disaster of epic proportions on my hands.
What was I thinking, experimenting with different brands of B&W film on this trip? I should have just shot Tri-X with a yellow filter and developed it in D76, same as always.
I'm such a maroon sometimes...
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
kaiyen
local man of mystery
Bill,
My fault - I gave you a recommendation to experiment when you're asking about what to do with rolls you've already shot. Mea culpa.
I would stick with D76, too. As A&T said, there isn't any film out there that is specifically unfriendly to D76. You can't go wrong with it, and you certainly wont' be any more wrong and/or experimenting than with any other developer.
As for tossing whatever you don't use - do you not develop enough to use it up even in 6 months? I have no problem keeping D76 for 6 months at least.
allan
My fault - I gave you a recommendation to experiment when you're asking about what to do with rolls you've already shot. Mea culpa.
I would stick with D76, too. As A&T said, there isn't any film out there that is specifically unfriendly to D76. You can't go wrong with it, and you certainly wont' be any more wrong and/or experimenting than with any other developer.
As for tossing whatever you don't use - do you not develop enough to use it up even in 6 months? I have no problem keeping D76 for 6 months at least.
allan
bmattock
Veteran
kaiyen said:
Allan,
I used to shoot that much B&W, but I got this nifty keen DSLR, see...and...oh geez. I'll work on it!
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
derevaun
focus free
On the chance that it got lost in the shuffle (not likely around here, but...), what about just souping it in Diafine? It won't blow out the highlights, and some recommend it with box speed for overcast lighting.
bmattock
Veteran
derevaun said:
I have the Diafine, haven't mixed it up yet, have never used it before. I can use it at standard speeds? I had this idea it was for pushing film...but I know little about it.
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
OK, just to be clear ... I'm looking at Tri-X negs (EI 400) that I developed in Rodinal, according to the Agfa table, but with a little bit of adjustment for higher temp and a sligtly different agitation protocol. This after 18 years of not processing my own film. Hell, I hadn't even shot film in nearly as long.
THEY ARE PERFECTLY DEVELOPED. The only density variations are due to exposure, as I was bracketing since the camera was new to me, and I couldn't be sure the meter was spot on.
What you know (D-76) is, indeed, a safe bet. But don't be afraid of the Rodinal. Some people make it mystical, but hey, it's just developer and converts a latent image to a silver negative, just like other soups. Only it does it mystically ...
Trius
THEY ARE PERFECTLY DEVELOPED. The only density variations are due to exposure, as I was bracketing since the camera was new to me, and I couldn't be sure the meter was spot on.
What you know (D-76) is, indeed, a safe bet. But don't be afraid of the Rodinal. Some people make it mystical, but hey, it's just developer and converts a latent image to a silver negative, just like other soups. Only it does it mystically ...
Trius
R
richiedcruz
Guest
Trius said:OK, just to be clear ... I'm looking at Tri-X negs (EI 400) that I developed in Rodinal, according to the Agfa table, but with a little bit of adjustment for higher temp and a sligtly different agitation protocol. This after 18 years of not processing my own film. Hell, I hadn't even shot film in nearly as long.
THEY ARE PERFECTLY DEVELOPED. The only density variations are due to exposure, as I was bracketing since the camera was new to me, and I couldn't be sure the meter was spot on.
What you know (D-76) is, indeed, a safe bet. But don't be afraid of the Rodinal. Some people make it mystical, but hey, it's just developer and converts a latent image to a silver negative, just like other soups. Only it does it mystically ...
Trius
What Rodinal dilution do you use, and how do you agitate? I have just started experimenting with Rodinal myself and the first roll that I developed at EI 200 just seemed to have an indefinable quality that impressed me in a way that D-76 never has. I am looking forward to many happy months of experimenting
Richie
W
wlewisiii
Guest
The nice thing about Diafine is that _if you do push the film_ it will compensate it beautifully. But if you shoot at rated ISO it will still develope it OK. I'll say that if I shoot at rated speed, I'll just simply soup it in D-76 because that stuff is so close to fool proof that even I can use it successfully...
Given the film you're talking about, I'd say use what you _know_. Then go out and burn a roll that has a rated speed of, say 400, at an EI of 100 to 1600 and soup it in the Diafine. See what the negs look like to you and then scan them. That's where the real strength of Diafine in the modern world is - the negs scan better than anything else I've used.
William
Given the film you're talking about, I'd say use what you _know_. Then go out and burn a roll that has a rated speed of, say 400, at an EI of 100 to 1600 and soup it in the Diafine. See what the negs look like to you and then scan them. That's where the real strength of Diafine in the modern world is - the negs scan better than anything else I've used.
William
titrisol
Bottom Feeder
Bill, given the films you used any developer will work for you.
Now:
Are you willing to test on these rolls?
Or do you want to use what you already know [D76]?
Are you going to scan or print?
If you want to experiment I'd say either Ilford DDX/Clayton F76 or Xtol are the way to go.
I favor DDX since it is a liquid.
Those give you a little bit better sharpness than D76 without sacrificng grain, and work great for scanning.
Now:
Are you willing to test on these rolls?
Or do you want to use what you already know [D76]?
Are you going to scan or print?
If you want to experiment I'd say either Ilford DDX/Clayton F76 or Xtol are the way to go.
I favor DDX since it is a liquid.
Those give you a little bit better sharpness than D76 without sacrificng grain, and work great for scanning.
bmattock said:
Last edited: