Bit of a dilemma with dev'ing my film...

[schmoozit]

I had been using Diafine to soup my stuff for a while, but the heat and time it's been sitting caused it to finally crash; hard and fast. It went from doing the last film about a mont ago just fine, to giving me zip! I was pretty bummed.

So, the good news is that I had some Rodinal laying around and this finally gave me the kick in the pants to use it. I like it! It's not hard to work with! I don't mind the more precise temp/time/agitation, etc... In short, I'm not planning to order any more Diafine. Here's where the problem is...

I have collected several rolls of exposed film that as yet need to be souped. BUT, I shot it intending to dunk it in Diafine, and it's very forgiving nature in regards to lattitude Errm... so... uhh... I have shots between EI 25 and around 3200 on the same roll!!!

Here's what I'm thinking... and being a Rodinal newbie tell me if I'm wrong...: If I go for a rather hyper dilution, say 1:200 or perhaps even more (or less???), it'll be more forgiving and much less contrasty, and give me the most salvageable negs. Additionally, from what I've heard, minimal agitation may also be my friend in this circumstance. I could perhaps just do a stand dev.

So, what do you think???

Thanks,
I knew I should'a used the Gossen

 

[Ash]

Why not get some Diafine for those last rolls, and call it a day after that? It may cost you a little more, but it'll save losing some photo's. I nearly cross processed a film because I didnt want to have to pay the extra for hour processing (needed it for a deadline) - it was worth the extra cost, I had some of my best urban photo's from the roll.

Get some diafine, you know you wanna

 

[schmoozit]

Why not get some Diafine for those last rolls, and call it a day after that? It may cost you a little more, but it'll save losing some photo's. I nearly cross processed a film because I didnt want to have to pay the extra for hour processing (needed it for a deadline) - it was worth the extra cost, I had some of my best urban photo's from the roll.

Get some diafine, you know you wanna

I would, and considered it, but I'm so broke it ain't funny. It costs extra to have it shipped to me in Japan, and on top of it I really would rather not have it around. I think it has made me lazy in some ways; i.e., never using the Rodinal and such.

Otherwise, that is the best advice, I'd say.

 

[Ash]

well if you have friends who also soup film, sell it onto them afterwards. You might recoup at least the postage costs

 

[schmoozit]

well if you have friends who also soup film, sell it onto them afterwards. You might recoup at least the postage costs

You don't understand. I am SERIOUSLY broke! I could order the Diafine, but my CC bill still keeps coming, and still has to be paid, although a might bit slower than it should be.

Here's what I'm after. Is the attempt worth it in Rodinal, or should I wait until finances are better and order the Diafine? I could do a test roll (and may), but I thought I'd like some opinions before bothering with another test roll and wasting more of my film (albeit a short bulk load... but I just did that yesterday... waste, waste, waste... arghhh!).

 

[P C Headland]

I use either Rodinal or Diafine, and in your situation I'd wait till I had enough money to get the Diafine in.

If you really really must develop them in Rodinal, I'd go for 1+100 and stand develop for an hour, but the frames shot at the higher and lower ends may be toast.

What film did you use - TriX? If so, you'll likely get something salvageable from 100 to 1600, with reasonable results from 200 to 800.

Or, something a bit more "left field", have a search around for the homebrew Diafine-type recipe.

 

[Todd.Hanz]

Agree with PC, wait and get some Diafine if thats what the initial plans were, if those exposures were important to you.

Todd

 

[schmoozit]

I use either Rodinal or Diafine, and in your situation I'd wait till I had enough money to get the Diafine in.

If you really really must develop them in Rodinal, I'd go for 1+100 and stand develop for an hour, but the frames shot at the higher and lower ends may be toast.

What film did you use - TriX? If so, you'll likely get something salvageable from 100 to 1600, with reasonable results from 200 to 800.

Or, something a bit more "left field", have a search around for the homebrew Diafine-type recipe.

Cool. Yeah, it's Tri-x. If 1:100 will give me the results you suggest, wouldn't 1:200 or more be reasonably expected to cover the rest?

Perhaps 1:200 and 2.5 hrs? I'd think the developer is gonna get fairly, or fully, depleted near the latter end, so the increase in time isn't really that much. Hmm... I'm feelin' like this will work, and at this point planning to throw something in tonight, damn the consequences.

Unfortunately, I'm out of beer, too. Guess I'll have to accomplish something meaningful while I wait. Not that beer isn't meaningful, mind you!

 

[schmoozit]

Agree with PC, wait and get some Diafine if thats what the initial plans were, if those exposures were important to you.

Todd

Yeah, I'm taking into consideration just what I have on the film. There is one that I'd really like to make sure comes out, though if it didn't I wouldn't be suicidal or anything; perhaps just need a bottle of cheap whisky.






Truthfully though, I hardly drink.

 

[ZorkiKat]

I had been using Diafine to soup my stuff for a while, but the heat and time it's been sitting caused it to finally crash; hard and fast. It went from doing the last film about a mont ago just fine, to giving me zip! I was pretty bummed.

Does bath #1 still look OK? One quick remedy which could save the day is to make a new activator (#2) bath. I believe that bath #1 could be quite robust and as long as it's not contaminated or oxidised, it should keep on working.

If you've some exposed but undeveloped film leaders lying around (or cut it from one of the rolls you still need to develop), use this to test your bath #1.
Soak the film leader for as long as it needs to be in the first bath. Then dunk it in a new activator bath and see if it develops (darkens) to the degree that you'd normally expect. Rinse and fix the "developed" leader and when dry, compare it to similar fogged portions of negatives developed in "proper" Diafine.
If the densities are the same, your ersatz bath #2 would be working right.

A new activator bath can be a plain 10% sodium carbonate solution. I'm not sure if this would work with Diafine, but other two-bath developers use plain
alkaline baths for activation. For instance in the 2-bath Leica Beutler developer, the second bath is just a 5% sodium carbonate solution. If you think that your Diafine is shot or partly shot, this is one way to check.

Jay

 

[schmoozit]

Too late! The first batch of negs are on slooow cook as I type. It'll all be over in a couple more hours.

Thanks for your input, everyone. I already dumped my Diafine, thinking there was no hope for it (it looked real bad).

Here's what I decided on, though this isn't digital truth type dev time material, so...

Dilution: 1:225 (Was thinking 1:250, but just realized I put in a little more Rodinal than I intended)
Temp: 22c (Not so important with stand dev)
Time: 2.5 hrs
Agitation: 30 seconds continuous first 30 secs. (Leave and drink beer thereafter)

 

[schmoozit]

And the verdict is....

USEABLE NEGS!!! I won't be able to scan them for a while, but they are scannable, so...

I really am not sure of the metering throughout that roll, but it was definitely all over the ballpark. Most of them are quite dark as I was shooting outdoors in fairly bright light, though I still don't know for sure what the IE actually was. I'll do another roll like this and throw some tests on it to see the range.

The bath I made became a bit warmer than I'd expected over the dev time, so that made some difference, I suppose. It was 27c before the 2.5 hrs was up, and add to that a very slightly stronger than intended dilution, and I'm feelin' pretty good with what I got. The few indoor available light shots (probably 1600) look pretty middle of the road.

Wish I could scan them tonight, but I gotta get to bed.

'Night...

 

[rich815]

In my experimenting I've been surprised in how much wide variations in development time and temp will still yield "useable" negs, as in something there and with scanning or printing I'll see something. That's a far cry from getting the most out of a film in terms of the best tones, texture and look you might want. You say you exposed this roll between EI 25 and around 3200, and with Tri-X! Curious, just what were you after?

 

[jdef]

Schmoozit,

Rodinal uses sodium hydroxide as its activator, which is poorly buffered in dilute solutions. Your developer is most likely exhausted long before the 2.5 hrs is up. If you check development after 1 hr against your 2.5 hr negs, you'll probably find them very similar. Remember, time in solution is time for grain clumping. Good luck!

Jay

 

[schmoozit]

Sorry for the very long delay in getting back to this. I got kinda busy, and then had some problems while scanning (I messed up one setting) that caused me to rescan almost everything.

Here's what I got, but unfortunately I cannot recall what I shot these at. I'm pretty sure the outdoor stuff is at about 100, and the indoor available light stuff was @ 1600. Two of the shots show some problems, but part of that is the Summar which causes me real headaches sometimes if the light isn't just right.

The first two shots are with the 85/1.9 Canon on M3, while the rest are with the 50/2 Summar.

 

[schmoozit]

The rest...

 

[bsdunek]

Unfortunately, I'm out of beer, too. Guess I'll have to accomplish something meaningful while I wait. Not that beer isn't meaningful, mind you!

Well, at least you didn't mix the beer with the Rodinal, although, maybe that would help?
Glad your negatives were usable.

 

[wyk_penguin]

what actually happens to the negs when they are shot over such a wide EI/ISO (or whatever you call it)? Do some turn out to be very thin or do they all look normal?

I usually shoot the whole roll at one ISO. The most adventurous time was over and under-exposure for 2 stops but 25 - 3200 is way to exciting for me. So I was just wondering what happens to the negs.