Pushing Rollei Retro80s

[kiss-o-matic]

Anyone have any experience with this? Part of this is out of curiosity, but the main reason is I had one of those d'oh! moments this weekend. Took some photos of mini-me to send to my mom for her bday. Shot a roll in 120... at +2 stops.

I've seen some 120 shots on Flickr that are reported at 400 in Rodinal, and they look quite good.

I have no more 120 left, but have some 35mm that I plan to experiment with. I prefer to do Rodinal Stand. Massive Dev chart has a couple of times, but nothing over 100.

80 ISO:
1+100 for 60 minutes
1+200 for 65 minutes

100 ISO
1+200 for 110 minutes

That seems really off to me to almost double the time for a 3rd of a stop. I bracketed 2 rolls of film (shots at 200, 320, and 400). Would like to have them stand at different times and then go from there. I'm having a hard time coming up w/ a starting point based on the above though.

 

[znapper]

Why Rodinal?
Rodinal reduce speed for most films.

I would try xtol or hc-110 or something else.

80s is contrasty to begin with, so pushing it 2 stops is.....pushing it IMO.

 

[Rob-F]

Well, HC-110 isn't exactly famous for pushing, either (not that it isn't used for this at times). I find XTOL useful for increasing the actual shadow speed, or effective film speed (as opposed to pushing). And I use Microphen or D-DX for that, as well as for pushing. With the latter two, I don't have to mix five liters of developer, though! Half of the five liters might go bad before I get to use it.

 

[kiss-o-matic]

Why Rodinal?
Rodinal reduce speed for most films.

I would try xtol or hc-110 or something else.

80s is contrasty to begin with, so pushing it 2 stops is.....pushing it IMO.

For starters b/c Retro80s in Rodinal is a pretty amazing combo -- i've not done Retro80s in anything else. So, that is indeed the starting point. I know Tri-X is crazy flexible, but with Rodinal, you you can develop it from 100 to 3200. There's even an entry for 12,800 on MDC.

 

[znapper]

Not flogging Rodinal (I use it myself), I just question it's pushing capabilities with this film (I am sure it looks nice shot at box in it).

Some discussion here: http://www.apug.org/forum/index.php?threads/rollei-retro-80s.55950/

 

[sojournerphoto]

Be interesting. I always preferred 80s at 64 and with careful Dev. It is, as said above, pretty contrasty already.

 

[J enea]

i would not want to push rr80s. it is already a very high contrast film in a lot of situations. why not shoot RR400s at 400 then? it is also a very fine film.

the only film i push is tmax 400 and for that i use XTOL (the only time I use it), and a lot of people also use XTOL for pushing, so that could be an option for you

 

[kiss-o-matic]

I'm aware of the contrast... and yes, I know I will add to that pushing. But as per the original post, I have already (accidentally) shot a roll at 320. The shots on said roll are meant to be printed and gifted, and I can't just go back and shoot them as they were my last rolls in 120, and also done halfway across the country.

But yes, part is curiosity. I'm wondering how acceptable (if at all) it is shot at higher speeds. I like RR400s, but just not as much as 80s. I used to use it all the time (developed in DD-X) but found it a bit "crunchy" for lack of a better word.

 

[Santtu Määttänen]

I have pushed RR80 to ISO 160 before. Never gone to 320. Would like to try, just for fun.

If you decide to with Rodinal, I would do a semi-stand development to compensate for the high contrast. Or use diafine or something else with tendency to increase the film speed (like XTOL)..

 

[kiss-o-matic]

Will try that for round 2. I did a 1+100 stand for 120 minutes last night. Negs are definitely usable but the word is out on the contrast. These are direct sunlight w/ some shadows, so given the nature of the film they will be about as contrasty as they can get. It's a stress test, but the roll I miss-shot was similar conditions, so trying to replicate.

XTOL is out of my wheelhouse, due to the size. 🙁 I do have quite a bit of DD-X though, but I'd have to experiment again I'm afraid... or find something outside of MDC.

 

[Murray Kelly]

The best results with that film I've had have been with 1ml each of Rodinal and HC-110 in 250 and let stand for as long as you can stand 🙂. That was with 35mm so you would have to scale it up for a 120 tank.
I appreciate your quandary in this unfortunate situation. Good luck.

 

[kiss-o-matic]

The best results with that film I've had have been with 1ml each of Rodinal and HC-110 in 250 and let stand for as long as you can stand 🙂. That was with 35mm so you would have to scale it up for a 120 tank.
I appreciate your quandary in this unfortunate situation. Good luck.

Was that at box speed? I quite like the results with just plain Rodinal... usually standing.

 

[Murray Kelly]

That was at the nominal box speed. The results were such that the contrast was tamed but I believe you will have to expect some loss at 320. IMO it will be better than Rodinal alone.

 

[kiss-o-matic]

Cheers -- might try this out.

 

[kiss-o-matic]

Okay, so the take home point here is to learn 2nd grade math. I shot them at +2 stops, not -2 stops. Should have developed for 25 or so. For shame, they'd have come out nicely.

i'm not super bummed as looking at them, there's only a couple on the roll that can compete w/ the other roll, so I won't be banging my head on the walls. Not for that, anyway.