Rodinal 1:100

dng88 said:
This is the second time I heard that a film not supposed to be using B&W chemical but successful get something out of it. Someone has tried Velvia and this time XP2. What a surprise!?
Click to expand...


I have developed several C41 and E6 films in Rodinal. I've been using 1+200 and 2h stand development. Water temperature measured by hand (about 20 degrees centigrade).

Here's couple of examples.

Expired Extrafilm 200 (with Kiev 4)
1360698250_07a7cad505.jpg


Expired Elitechrome 100:
1360699072_085fa496e5.jpg
 
Very nice.

I do a search and whilst just cover only E6, I think the concept that there are silver and also the first step of E6 is to develop the film as Black and White is mentioned here:

http://www.lightcatchers.org/gcarlson/e6processing/insidee6.htm

Now in E6 film, we have 3 different layer being exposed. The result should be a bit different (but all B&W film seems a bit different). In other words, we have more B&W film type. Cheers!
 
I finally got the plumbing installed in my new darkroom so I can start doing some tests. Does anyone have suggestions for a testing protocol that would yield meaningful or at least useful data assuming that the parameters are:

1. "New" Rodinal diluted 1:100
2. Any temperature (between 18 & 24 degrees to make it a little easier)
3. Any film (I have Tri-X, Plus-X and Acros 100, but any other suggestions are welcome)

Thanks,

Ash
 
OK, here's what I did last weekend:

Film: Ilford HP5+ 4x5 sheet film loaded in a Jobo 25xx tank with stopper lid.

Totally new Rodinal with the A&O label fresh from Freestyle. Mix 1:100.

Temperature: 68°F at the start. Possibly rising to 69°F by the end.

5 360° inversions/minute for the first 5 minutes. Sit for 25 minutes. 2 360° inversions. Sit for 30 minutes. Drain. Stop. Fix. Wash. Dry.

Results: The negative was WAY underexposed. My fault. I did get an image of the highlight areas. The shadows were gone. This is to be expected with underexposure. I also got nice gritty grain. That's to be expected with HP5+.

Good luck!
 
UPDATE: 120 Pan F & Rodinal

UPDATE: 120 Pan F & Rodinal

I developed a roll of Pan F this week. 800ml water + 8ml Rodinal. 5 minute pre-wash, 3-4 triple inversions during the first 5 minutes, stand until 30 minutes total elapsed, 3 inversions, stand for the balance of the hour, dump, water stop, fix, wash, dry.

4 frames at E.I. 50 were overexposed (operator error). Dense negatives, but still ok. I think they will print better than they scan. 6 frames were exposed at E.I. 25 with much more careful metering. Very flat light. In fact I was in deep shade in the woods. These negatives look very nice. In fact, I think I got some contrast that I wasn't expecting given the very flat lighting. When I get those scanned I'll share.

I like this combination. When I do the next roll, I'm going to cut back on the initial agitation. Something like: Fill, 3 inversions, 10 taps to dislodge bubbles, repeat at 3 minutes, repeat at 30 miuntes, dump at 1 hour.
 
Wayne: I used to tap to dislodge bubbles, but don't do it now, and I've still had no bubbles. 😀 I guess it doesn't hurt to do it, and once you're in the habit it's hard to stop. Just a thought.

Oh, and ... samples?
 
I stumbled onto Rodinal 1:100 stand development about a month ago, and after 40? rolls of film I have had only one film that was less then optimal.

The list of films I have developed -

Plus-X
Tri-X
Tri-X EI 6400
Rollei Retro 100
Rollei Retro 400
Pan F
Efke KB25
Efke R25
Efke KB100
Efke KB100 EI 200
Efke KB400
Efke KB 400 EI 3200
Ektapress 1600
Kodak Gold 100
Konica Centuria 100
Agfapan 25

The best emulsions for Rodinal 1:100 stand development are the Efke film with the Efke 25 simply mind-blowing...

Welder | Lakes Entrance | Victoria, Austrlia 2008
2008_09_001_026_700e.jpg

Bessa R2 | Voigtländer APO-Lanthar 90mm f3.5 | Efke KB25 | Rodinal 1:100 Stand | View Larger

Plus-X and Tri-X work very well and Tri-X in Rodinal 1:100 produces the finest grained high-speed film I have ever seen, far better than Delta 3200 or TMax 3200...

Snug | Sydney, Australia 2008
2008_10_010_013_800.jpg

Bessa R2 | Voigtländer Nokton 50mm f1.5 | Tri-X EI 6400 | Rodinal 1:100 Stand

Plus-X is no slouch... albeit a with bit more grain.

Broken | Sydney, Australia 2008
The%20Artist.jpg

Bessa R2 | Voigtländer Nokton 50mm f1.5 | Plus-X | Rodinal 1:100 Stand

Even 20 year-old Ektapress 1600 can come out to play...

Hoodie | Sydney, Australia
2008_10_011_034_800.jpg

Bessa R2 | Voigtländer Nokton 50mm f1.5 | Kodak Ektapress 1600 | Rodinal 1:100 Stand

Check my Flickr Photostream or Photo Gallery, for more examples. Check 'tags' or 'Technical Details' for development info.

Here is what you want to know, how I do it...

Films that are shot at speed - 35mm -

Several minute water bath
Rodinal 1:100 - disregard temperature unless extreme heat or cold
1 minute of slow inversions, maybe 20 in 60 secs
3 really hard thumps to dislodge air bubbles, very important
DO NOT TOUCH for 59 minutes, a couple minutes extra will not harm anything(the DO NOT TOUCH is very, very important)
3 water baths then fix and rinse

For medium format, I change the dilution to 1:125 and be sure to use 500mm of solution per roll. Everything else the same.

Pushed film, such Tri-X EI 6400 or Efke KB400 EI 3200...

Several minute water bath
Rodinal 1:100 - disregard temperature unless extreme heat or cold
1 minute of slow inversions, maybe 20 in 60 secs
Every 30 minutes swirl the tank, like you would a glass of wine, for 15 seconds. Do not invert!
Total time - 120 minutes
3 water baths then fix and rinse

That is it.

Some notes...

Expose for the highlights, you will have no trouble with shadow details. Very important to not over-expose as you can quickly lose highlights, if in doubt under-expose a bit.

Negatives will come out of the tank quite 'flat', even when shooting a very high contrast scene. Add contrast when printing or scanning.

I will often put 5 rolls of different brands and speeds into a Jobo 3500 tank and all come out fine. I normally use the 2 roll Jobo 1500 tank with 2 reels.

How easy is that...
 
Last edited:
P. Lynn,

The welder shot is indeed quite striking. A question that comes to mind is Efke 25 is quite a slow film. Pardon my asking, but was this shot "lit" at all?? or done with a tri-pod? The resolution amazes me if this was accomplished by hand holding. I would think due to lighting conditions and Efke 25 that the shutter speed would be a bit on the "long side" ?

Thanks,

Scott
 
Scott,

Thanks.

No, the welder shot was not lit. It was hand-held, and this is the best of about 6 frames. If you look close you can see that the welder is in full sunlight, so exposure would have been 'Sunny f16' then opened up 2 stops for an orange filter, so exposure would have been 1/125 at f4 or f5.6. I am suspecting I may under-exposed by about 1 stop to ensure that I held the high-lights around the arc. That final image is pretty much full-frame, so I was quite close, so the depth of field is slim.

Here is another shot from the same roll of film...

'Cuppa' | Lakes Entrance | Victoria, Australia 2008
2008_09_001_035_700e.jpg

Bessa R2 | Voigtländer APO-Lanthar 90mm f3.5 | Efke KB25 | Rodinal 1:100 Stand | View Larger

Here is Efke KB50...

Sparks | Sydney, Australia 2008
2008_08_016_016_700e.jpg

Bessa R2 | Voigtländer Ultron 28mm f2.0 | Efke KB50 | Rodinal 1:100 | View Larger

While Efke KB25 is slow, it is my preferred film for all my shooting except when I really need speed than I push Tri-X or Efke KB400. The Efke emulsions with their high-silver content are just luscious.
 
Last edited:
this is turning into an amazing thread. I should clarify one point. There was mention of my "stand development" it's actually about a third generation modification passed on to me by a friend. What I'm suspecting in this stand process is there is far more latitude than one expects.

Wayne's comment that he will modify the process further makes sense. I'm certain that it will work. I still prefer using this with film ISO's of less than 200. Greater than 200 and grain is a factor. If you are looking for that then you know what to expect...
 
Acouple fo years ago after I purchased my 40/1.4 Nokton SC I had asked Tom Abrahamson about achieving the "vintage look" of B&W films from the 40's and 50's. Now I realize that the "vintage look" is subjective but he reccomended I give Buetler a try with Efke film and man was this combination great as well.... I develped it using the more standard approach of inversions every 60-75 seconds but maybe someone has tried this formula with the stand development process??

Just a thought
 
What happened to emulsion swelling? This is all very interesting indeed! (Trius; that picture is just lovely!). To my mind, however comes a question, related to what was the going dogma in the late 70s (or thereabout): If you want fine grain and sharpness, don´t keep the film in fluids longer than strictly necessary. This to keep emulsion from swelling; giving grain-like clots to deal with. In this school of film-development some people argued much in the direction of "shaken not stirred". This is quite the opposite - and seems to work well.

Was that just foolery, then - about emulsion swelling? Or am I missing something?

le
 
Last edited:
jan normandale said:
I still prefer using this with film ISO's of less than 200. Greater than 200 and grain is a factor. If you are looking for that then you know what to expect...
Click to expand...

Larger grain...

I found that it varies from brand to brand of film. Efke KB100 even when pushed to EI 200 has less grain than Plus-X at speed. Rollei Retro emulsions seem to be more clumpy, but Tri-X can be incredibly smooth. The Efke emulsions are the best that I have found for stand development using Rodinal.

Also the increase in grain is directly related to agitation. With Rodinal and stand development less agitation is definitely more. When I first started stand development, I used 2 minutes of inversions at beginning with a set of inversions at 30 minutes. The grain was very apparent.

About the same time I started experimenting with stand development, a discussion on stand development with Rodinal started over at APUG(Analog Photography Users Group) , and some of the members of APUG have incredible technical knowledge of film, developing and chemistry. After mining through many pages of discussing bromide drag, silver migration and chemistry 101, I came to the conclusion that the increase in grain was a result of over-agitation and the secret was to find just the right amount.

The method that I posted in my previous post was the result of experimenting with time, dilution and agitation.

I wish I had a good scanner as Tri-X pushed to 6400 is amazingly fine grained, in fact under the loupe there is little more grain than when shot at speed and developed in D76 Stock.

I use stand development, primarily because I am lazy. While the time in the tank is long, an hour to 2 hours, that actual time spent developing film is less. You have a few minutes, mixing and filling the tank and a minute of inversions, then you leave and go do something else for an hour, like have a coffee, scan some negatives, take more photos, whatever. I find long development time with regular inversion very tedious and boring, plus you have to keep an eye on the temperature, etc, etc.

With stand development, I get consistent results with the least amount of effort. I told you I was lazy!
 
Last edited:
I gather that one of the principles of stand development is that the very dilute developer has only sufficient active developing agent to develop the film and will become exhausted before over-development occurs. Is it possible to determine precisely how much Rodinal syrup is needed for a single 36-exposure roll of 35mm film?

What I'm thinking is that 300ml of 1+100 has less of the active agents than 500ml of 1+100. Surely the volume of the dilute developer must be considered alongside the concentration. So how much Rodinal syrup do I need for a 36-exposure roll; for a 24-exp roll; for a 120 roll?
 
Chris,

Remember the, 'I am lazy bit'? I tend to avoid complications if at all possible.

For 1 or 2 rolls of 35mm film(24 or 36 exposures makes no difference in my experience), I use 500ml of solution in the Jobo 1520, always 500ml never less. With only 5ml of Rodinal required, there is not sense of economy in using less. I have no discernible differences in 1 or 2 rolls in the tank as long as you DO NOT TOUCH the tank after the initial 1 minute of inversions. When I say 'DO NOT TOUCH', I mean DO NOT TOUCH! After 1 minutes of slow inversions and 3 hearty thumps to dislodge the air bubbles, the tank is not moved, vibrated, pushed, it is not touched, especially if you only have one roll in the tank!

Why... because apparently Rodinal in high dilutions will develop to exhaustion and not over-develop as long as there is no new developer introduced to the emulsion. So whether you have 1 or 2 roll in the tank, if the tank is not touched or moved in way for the 60 minutes, the developer can be exhausted on the film even though there may be fresh developer elsewhere in the tank. So it is vitally important to keep the solution still, and I could always see a slight difference in the negatives if the tank was bumped or somehow moved so the developer flowed slightly in the tank.

I also use 500ml of 1:125 Rodinal with 1 roll of 120 or 220 in the Jobo 1520 tank. If I have lots of rolls of film to develop, I will use my Jobo tank that holds 5 rolls of 35mm or 3 rolls of 120/220 in 2 litres of solution.

One other thing I have found that while temperature is relatively unimportant, within reason, it is important to have the solution at ambient temperature including the water baths. I found that by starting out with lower temperature than ambient, as the solution rises in temperature while standing, this causes the solution to circulate around the tank which is natural result of convection.

I do not know the technical reason that stand development does or does not work, nor do I really care. I am only reporting on my experience after more than 50 rolls of film over the past 2 months.

I will let the photographs do the talking...
 
Last edited:
this is wrong, XP2 Super works fine with Digital ICE when developed in C41 chems.

>>XP2 Super doesn't have the orange base that ICE is looking for. The good news is that it prints better in an enlarger than Kodak BW400CN. Good news & Bad news I guess.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom