Kabouik
Member
Thanks for the answers! I will try another bottle. Which one would you buy here, Adonal, Adox Rodinal, or APH09? I've read there that maybe APH09 is better for stand development from someone who tried all three, but that was just an impression, and not very firm.
As for the dilutions, I've found people using as less as 3 mL per roll, and got fine results with 4 at the beginning. I just didn't noticed that my last poor results caused by underdevelopment rather than bad scanning, wasted a few rolls (and most importantly, a lot of pics). :/
I guess the dilution is not very important as long as there are at least 3 mL per roll and the soup concentration is not too high either, to allow exhaustion of the developper near the film in stand development. I only do 30 sec of inversions at the beginning and a swirl at 30 min, so the developper must exhaust near the film, and perhaps if my R09 is expired and less effective, that would explain why 7+700 on a 120 film gave better results. Perhaps I will try 5+500. Would you have any examples?
As for the dilutions, I've found people using as less as 3 mL per roll, and got fine results with 4 at the beginning. I just didn't noticed that my last poor results caused by underdevelopment rather than bad scanning, wasted a few rolls (and most importantly, a lot of pics). :/
I guess the dilution is not very important as long as there are at least 3 mL per roll and the soup concentration is not too high either, to allow exhaustion of the developper near the film in stand development. I only do 30 sec of inversions at the beginning and a swirl at 30 min, so the developper must exhaust near the film, and perhaps if my R09 is expired and less effective, that would explain why 7+700 on a 120 film gave better results. Perhaps I will try 5+500. Would you have any examples?
Kabouik
Member
And for the record, here's what I have been getting lately with my Rodinal:
I should have noticed it before, I can't understand how I did like 3-4 rolls before noticing.
The negatives on the left are not properly exposed but this was due to the vintage camera, the negatives on the right are properly exposed, but way underdevelopped. Same Rodinal dilution and stand development process for both sides, but different dates.
I should have noticed it before, I can't understand how I did like 3-4 rolls before noticing.
The negatives on the left are not properly exposed but this was due to the vintage camera, the negatives on the right are properly exposed, but way underdevelopped. Same Rodinal dilution and stand development process for both sides, but different dates.
Roma
Well-known
Rodinal isn't really meant to be used for push processing. Sometimes I shoot Tri-x at higher speeds and develop in Rodinal, and it's very good at controlling highlights, but that's about all you can expect out of it.
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
Hi Nikos,
I've used Rodinal for 20+ years, and I cursed my career using HP5+, the standard for the place I studied at, and I've also used Rodinal for stand development with several films for a few years too... I do it when I want to get the most out of a pushed film, so I'm talking about 1600 and up. Rodinal can be very well used for real stand development (totally still), but for sure it's one of the worst developers for pushing. Yet it's perfectly fine for 800 and even 1600 shooting.
As Roland (ferider) said, shooting HP5 at 800 is not a situation requiring stand development... And it's simply not your best option... Again, Roland's right: you can get better results with an appropriate standard development, and that way you'll assume less risks.
I recommend you using the 1+50 dilution: having used Rodinal from 1+25 to 1+300, I find (lots of other people do too) 1+50 a sweet spot. For a single 35mm roll I use 8ml and add water to make 400ml.
Rodinal shows the grain as it is, and that's its beauty, a crisp, clean grain. If you want to control grain, I mean visible but beautiful and unobtrussive, with a sharp looking image, try 18 Celsius, with 30 seconds gentle inversions in the beginning, and 2 very slow inversions every minute. Rodinal is highly temperature and agitation sensitive... Both of them bump contrast and grain.
Now, about the light your scenes have: you can use film's latitude to your benefit by finding a development time that gives you nice (not too flat) negatives for scenes with low contrast, like overcast days... Let's say you shoot a roll on dull overcast light and you develop it for, say, 24 minutes at 18C... If you shoot a direct sun scene in the middle of that roll, you can give that shot one more stop of light than what would be normal at 800: that way you get cleaner shadows, and yet film's latitude is more than enough to record your highlights with detail. I have used +2 when there's a relevant element of the image in the shades, and yet film's wide enough.
If you want a precise recipe for HP5 at 800, some time ago I use semistand development mostly, with 1+100... If you give it a try, you'll be happy not only about beautiful negatives, but also about a comfortable development time for you, because you can do other things during the process:
Rodinal 1+100 (in my tank 4ml + water to make 400ml), 18C, 90minutes, two gentle inversions every 15 minutes (so apart from the first 30 seconds, you invert the tank twice only 5 times during the hour and a half).
For doing it at 1600, I use 6ml Rodinal instead of 4ml: that's 1+67, more or less... That's my limit for Rodinal.
The best option for high ISOs I've found in many years of testing most developers including all options by Ilford and Kodak, is Xtol 1+1... Incredibly effective with TMax400, by the way.
Good luck!
Cheers,
Juan