Rodinal 1:100

[Ronald M]

Dear all,

I have been following thisthread for a long time and finally I've gotten downto using rodinal to develop my film.

However i've been getting some sort of uneven developing, as can be seen in the below picture.

Apparently the right side is overdeveloped. Any ideas? I've followed the instructions exactly and i'm not sure what's going on. The whole roll is like this, and the previous one was also the same.

You risk all kinds of uneven development when doing stand. That is why NO film manufacturer will ever tell you to do it.

The rules are

on immersion, the wet dry edge needs to proceed across the film as quickly as possible with no retreat/ advance . I drop film into a preloaded film tank. You will get a line if you break this rule. The first 30 seconds are critical.

agitation needs to be vigorous and random so as not to leave any areas with unreplenished developer.

trying to be gentle here gives so called "surge marks". Internet BS.
Kodak instructions are 5/7 times in 5 seconds. I can do 5 before my arm fails, but it works.

Another method that works is a two reel tank, two reels, film on the bottom only. ONly enough developer to cover the bottom reel. Invert 2 times. This is vigorous and random and exactly how sheet film is done in a large tank without gaseous burst agitation. Same set up, but roll the tank 1.33 rotations and back. repeat one more time. The second PJ people wrote the rolling method up in Modern Photography around 1963 when I was in college. He is currently a RF member. This still works and gives excellent results.

Insufficient agitation gives bromide drag/streaking most easily seen from the sprocket holes, but if happens in high density areas also. If you don`t see it, you are not looking hard enough.

To cut contrast , skip every other agitation cycle during the last half of the development time.

Or expose at 50% box speed and cut development 20%. This gives beautiful negs with rich shadow detail and no blown highlights.

Grain clumping is proportional to time in developer and total wet time, mostly time in developer. Cut that time down and there is far less grain. Use Ilford wash procedure to cut that down and save water.

Skip prewash, short stop or rinse between developer & fix. All you do is dilute the developer with ss and defeat what you did with short development time. Develop, fix, wash is all I do. Sine I never reuse fix, there is no cost.

Flame away, but I will not get into an argument. After thousands of rolls and 50 years, I know what works and what does not. I present these ideas to open minded people not jaded by all the miss information presented on the internet.

 

[Soeren]

The rules?
Stephen Anchell is somewhat more positive to stand development caling it the safest alternative technique you can use with modern film.
Best regards

 

[johannielscom]

yeah right.

Flaming and arguments? Won't bother.

 

[kiss-o-matic]

Nice tones and lively subjects!
Regarding dilution ratio, you can do it 1+50 or just make a 500ml solution. They last forever anyway.
For me, I do it 1+50 standard development after some failure with stand.

I was recommended stand w/ Retro 80s (and Retro 400s/Superpan 200) to bring out shadow detail. Not sure if it helps actually, as it's so contrasty. It's the look I prefer though, most of the time.

I got some Atomal 49 which I'll try next, which can hopefully subdue some of the grain on the Retro 400s.

 

[jwicaksana]

You risk all kinds of uneven development when doing stand. That is why NO film manufacturer will ever tell you to do it.

- snip -

Flame away, but I will not get into an argument. After thousands of rolls and 50 years, I know what works and what does not. I present these ideas to open minded people not jaded by all the miss information presented on the internet.

Thank you Ronald, some very helpful insights there, I'd like to incorporate them to my developing regime.

I was recommended stand w/ Retro 80s (and Retro 400s/Superpan 200) to bring out shadow detail. Not sure if it helps actually, as it's so contrasty. It's the look I prefer though, most of the time.

I got some Atomal 49 which I'll try next, which can hopefully subdue some of the grain on the Retro 400s.

Thanks, I like the look too. BTW I found out I am leaning towards Rodinal 1:50, as I don't do stand and 1:100 would be too long for me. Can I still post here?

 

[Photo_Smith]

Stand development is hardly new, in the early part of the twentieth century most roll films were developed to completion using that method.
Development takes place by ionic exchange between the developer and silver halide.
My first mentor worked processing films in a big tank where they were clipped in a frame and left for several hours, films of the time allowed visual inspection under the correct lighting.
An alternative to developing to completion was a factorial method where the factor was multiplied by the highlight emergence time the factor was known as the 'Watkins Factor' as it was first laid down by Albert Watkins.
Both these methods were popular until the first Panchromatic emulsions were introduced just before WW I

I personally don't use stand development, often using a reduced agitation instead a little can go a long way:

The difference in highlight density between zero and continuous being a factor of about two.

 

[jwicaksana]

Hello, writing back after more time and experiment with this developer/technique. I exposed Tri-X at 1600 and did some semi stand in Rodinal 1:100. The result was very nice, the negative is a lot clearer and more contrasty than if I went full stand. Will post some results soon, flickr is down at the moment.

 

[jwicaksana]

​

TX400 EI 1600
3 minutes pre soak
90 minutes semi stand, Rodinal 1:100
Agitation for the 1st minute
2 inversions at 30 minute mark

P.S. Sorry about right hand side, my scanner went funky on this one.
​