HP5+ Rodinal and grain.

[Keith]

Maybe a little too much grain ... or maybe I've been a little corrupted by foveon digital? 😱

I've been developing the Ilford in Rodinal for a while now and really like the bite the developer gives it ... never liked it much in Xtol or D76, or HC110 for that matter because it seemed rather flat. How do others here develop their HP5+ in Rodinal?

I'm currently using it at 50+1 for eleven minutes at 20 degrees C and was thinking of trying 100+1 and one hour stand to reduce the grain slightly ... am I on the right track with this idea?

Any examples you can show me? Thanks. 🙂

 

[Keith]

I meant to add ... this is with 135 film.

 

[Jani_from_Finland]

Rodinal is noce, but liked it best on different films with 1:25 and the times beeing around 20' depending on film.
I am just about to soak some rolls in Rodinal+HC110 mix.

 

[Photo_Smith]

Well defined grain or bite are just something you get from HP5 and Rodinal, you could add 4 g/l sodium ascorbate which will give slightly less grain and is better than adding sulphite in keeping the overall tonal character of the Rodinal.
Other than that keep the developer at 18-20°C and no more, less agitation helps as does bizarrely more dilution which is different from other developers...

 

[rodt16s]

^ Same. lower temp 17/18 °C, minimal agitation and 1+100...

 

[Highway 61]

Maybe a little too much grain ...

Nah this is just impossible... 😛 😀

 

[Keith]

Nah this is just impossible... 😛 😀

Grain hound huh? 😀

It seems to be more apparent with HP5+ ... I don't remember getting a lot of grain with Tri-X and the same developer and routine.

 

[oftheherd]

There were, so I suppose still are differences in Tri-X and HP5. At least some 35 years ago when I was experimenting with them. Any Ilford film would dry water spotless no matter how you tried to spot them. With D-76 (all I had available then and there) Tri-X would push better than HP5. Never knew why.

I have since used Rodinal 1:100 and stand and I don't think the grain was that bad. But I used in with 120. I didn't check the subsequent 35mm I tried that with for grain, although I remember thinking on visual inspection without a loop, it was a little unusual looking.

 

[Bob Michaels]

Keith: are you trying to shoot HP5 at an iso of 400 when you develop it in Rodinal? I believe that HP5, TriX and Neopan 400 all have an actual iso of around 250 when developed in Rodinal. It has always seemed to me that an iso of 400 and a developing time to suit resulted in negs that looked like they were pushed a bit. Shooting at 250 with a suitable developing time gives me negs that I like a lot better.

My standard, although yours may differ, is an iso of 250, dil. of 1:50, and a time of 9-10 minutes for HP5, TriX, or Neopan 400.

 

[Keith]

Keith: are you trying to shoot HP5 at an iso of 400 when you develop it in Rodinal? I believe that HP5, TriX and Neopan 400 all have an actual iso of around 250 when developed in Rodinal. It has always seemed to me that an iso of 400 and a developing time to suit resulted in negs that looked like they were pushed a bit. Shooting at 250 with a suitable developing time gives me negs that I like a lot better.

My standard, although yours may differ, is an iso of 250, dil. of 1:50, and a time of 9-10 minutes for HP5, TriX, or Neopan 400.

Thanks Bob. Interesting you should say that because my last roll does look a little over cooked and does have a slightly 'pushed' look.

I'll try your suggestion with the next roll I shoot. 🙂

 

[gsgary]

HP5 @ iso 800, Rodinal 1+25 8.5 mins

 

[gsgary]

HP5 @ iso800 1+50 12 mins

 

[Highway 61]

Keith: are you trying to shoot HP5 at an iso of 400 when you develop it in Rodinal? I believe that HP5, TriX and Neopan 400 all have an actual iso of around 250 when developed in Rodinal. It has always seemed to me that an iso of 400 and a developing time to suit resulted in negs that looked like they were pushed a bit. Shooting at 250 with a suitable developing time gives me negs that I like a lot better.

My standard, although yours may differ, is an iso of 250, dil. of 1:50, and a time of 9-10 minutes for HP5, TriX, or Neopan 400.

Same with APX100. Exposed at iso 64 it's very nice in Rodinal 1+50 for 9-10 minutes, and way nicer than exposed at iso 125 and developed in Rodinal 1+50 for 13-14 minutes.

This is why I don't like Rodinal : if you expose your films at their box speeds, you get either huge grain, or blown highlights, or buried shadows, but can't have none of the three problems, which doesn't happen with D76 1+1.

 

[gsgary]

Same with APX100. Exposed at iso 50 it's very nice in Rodinal 1+50 for 10 minutes, and way nicer than exposed at iso 100 and developed in Rodinal 1+50 for 14 minutes.

This is why I don't like Rodinal : if you expose your films at their box speed, you get either huge grain, or blown highlights, or buried shadows, but can't have none of the three problems, which doesn't happen with D76 1+1.

This is APX @100 1+50 13 mins in Rodinal

 

[Photo_Smith]

This is why I don't like Rodinal : if you expose your films at their box speeds, you get either huge grain, or blown highlights, or buried shadows, but can't have none of the three problems, which doesn't happen with D76 1+1.

False. Blown highlights and buried shadows are to do with incorrect exposure.
Have a look at Delta 3200 pushed to EI6400

As for APX in Rodinal HUGE grain

We all get it you don't like Rodinal but come on huge grain blown highlights and blocked shadows-Don't blame your tools when your method is the problem!!

 

[f16sunshine]

HP5 and Rodinal 1:100 = Love!

HP5 and Rodinal 1:100 = Love!

I like grain and so develop HP5 in Rodinal 1:100 stand. I try and keep the temp around 20c which is not too tough in mild Seattle.

My scans are not super sharp but you get the idea. I love the results. Wet prints look super.

Most recent roll. Here with very generous exposure. Using low dilution and stand development gave great results.

 

[Highway 61]

We all get it you don't like Rodinal but come on huge grain blown highlights and blocked shadows-Don't blame your tools when your method is the problem!!

OK you win, Rodinal is the best developer ever and any film, were it pulled, pushed, exposed at its speed box, classic emulsion, delta one, everything in Rodinal !

I can show you dozens of scans of negatives developed in T-Max Dev. or D76 or Ilfotec which will look the very same as yours on a screen.

I can also show you excellent results I got with Rodinal.

This doesn't prove anything. And I don't have any "method problem".

If you like high acutance and very visible grain, if you expose for what you will develop (highlights or shadows), if you shoot landscapes or still life objects (ala Ralph Gibson), if you use a MF camera or larger, Rodinal is perfect.

If you mainly shoot iso 400 films at box speed in 35mm cameras, this is another story.

f16sunshine : your first photo is gorgeous, congrats.

 

[PRJ]

Keith, the only way to reduce the grain without modifying the developer is to limit development, but that also reduces the "bite" that you like. Ignore all the methods people use to make themselves feel special.

You could also modify the developer if you want. There are several ways to do this to get finer grain. All act as either a restrainer or as a solvent. You could add Salt (NaCl), Sodium Sulfite or Ascorbic Acid. Those are the three ways that I know about, but there are surely more. Each one can create other problems though like dichroic fog. I have been using Rodinal since I started photography, as well as a host of other developers. Rodinal is one of the best and it is very easy to use. I use my own version of it these days.

D76 in my opinion isn't very good at anything. It is just a general purpose developer. Kind of like generic food. It does the job, but meh....

 

[ferider]

For scanning, Keith ?

If yes, do you need the speed or can you give more exposure ?

Roland.

 

[Keith]

For scanning, Keith ?

If yes, do you need the speed or can you give more exposure ?

Roland.

Yes I do only scan Roland. My last roll was shot in very poor light ... f1.2 and 1/30 so there wasn't any wiggle room there without pushing.

I feel it's important to master Ilford's HP5+ as a go to 400 black and white film because I believe it will still be around when Tri-X is a memory ... in spite of Kodak's good intentions! 🙄 😀