ColSebastianMoran
( IRL Richard Karash )
3/ Why there are some "strips" in my photo? (please look at the 1st photos)
#1
The light stripes in your print: I think it's a light leak. See a very similar light leak in this thread post #3. It my case, it was a light leak at the film door hinge on a fixed-lens rangefinder camera.
To test your camera:
- Load film
- Shoot four blank frames (for example, with the lens cap on)
- Leave the camera in bright light, but not direct sunshine, for a day or so.
- Shoot one frame to mark the spot on the film which was behind the lens during the test.
Hope this helps. Great to see your photos from Viet Nam!
ColSebastianMoran
( IRL Richard Karash )
for kiemchacsu
I have one other suggestion about your scans. In the first images you posted, you seem to have included part of the unexposed film between frames in your scan. When you do this, it confused the automatic adjustments in VueScan.
I always get better results when I am careful to avoid including any unexposed area in the scan. I think that may be one reason why your second scan of the image has better tones.
I have one other suggestion about your scans. In the first images you posted, you seem to have included part of the unexposed film between frames in your scan. When you do this, it confused the automatic adjustments in VueScan.
I always get better results when I am careful to avoid including any unexposed area in the scan. I think that may be one reason why your second scan of the image has better tones.
Colin Corneau
Colin Corneau
I'm a big Rodinal (or as it's called here, Blazinal) fan but if it's grain you want and especially if you're pushing...I'd really consider Microphen.
It's made for pushing, will give grain equal or similar to Rodinal and it's reliable.
And it goes without saying, but experiment specifically with a few rolls first before you commit to a solid project...best of luck to you
It's made for pushing, will give grain equal or similar to Rodinal and it's reliable.
And it goes without saying, but experiment specifically with a few rolls first before you commit to a solid project...best of luck to you
kiemchacsu
Well-known
I think in this situation Ronald is correct. I haven't seen any light leak problem with my M6 until I developed that roll without having properly agitation and inversion.
Fotohuis
Well-known
Rodinal 1+100 is working as low contrast developer with very high acutance. You can use this for Ortho or PAN F+ film.
For stand you can use 1+150 -200 , after 40-60 minutes the Rodinal is completly oxidized and the process went in depletion. It's working very semi-compensating. But IMO it's a method who is not always accurate and possible to redo exactly in the same way.
But that's only MY opinion. I have seen good examples too.
Only two factories are producing Para-Amino Phenol developers:
Calbe (old type) and CCP&S (former Agfa chemical plant). The last change in Rodinal (Agfa) was somewhere in the 90's.
The actual Rodinal / R09 one shot has a minimum life span of 5 years. I am not a fan of using old chemicals at all but if it's not possible to use up a 120ml bottle R09 one shot / Rodinal within 5 years which is 10-20 films, it's maybe time to find another hobby.
About the stripes and sprocket holes in the picture: Yes, this is an agitation problem.
For stand you can use 1+150 -200 , after 40-60 minutes the Rodinal is completly oxidized and the process went in depletion. It's working very semi-compensating. But IMO it's a method who is not always accurate and possible to redo exactly in the same way.
But that's only MY opinion. I have seen good examples too.
Only two factories are producing Para-Amino Phenol developers:
Calbe (old type) and CCP&S (former Agfa chemical plant). The last change in Rodinal (Agfa) was somewhere in the 90's.
The actual Rodinal / R09 one shot has a minimum life span of 5 years. I am not a fan of using old chemicals at all but if it's not possible to use up a 120ml bottle R09 one shot / Rodinal within 5 years which is 10-20 films, it's maybe time to find another hobby.
About the stripes and sprocket holes in the picture: Yes, this is an agitation problem.
kiemchacsu
Well-known
My wife would be surprised seeing me giggling when I read your response. I am not a fan of old chemical either, that's why the Rodinal which I bought in a flea market (unopened but couldn't define the date) is on the shelf more than 2 years now. I just wanted to give it a try after exclusively using Tmax dev and HC-110.
I definitely will give it another try to see what would happen.
kiemchacsu
Well-known
Hi all,
I've developed another roll of Tri-X (rated at 400asa) in Rodinal 1+50, 13mins. I think the result is quite good. Even though, I think agitation/inversion each 3mins is a little bit too low hence there are some "strips" in the negative. Next time, I will try agitation every 1 minute.
P.S: Is it true that Rodinal will give the less sharp result than Tmax dev or HC-110? That's my observation, I might need more experiments to confirm that.
1204_13_400TX by kiemchacsu, on Flickr
I've developed another roll of Tri-X (rated at 400asa) in Rodinal 1+50, 13mins. I think the result is quite good. Even though, I think agitation/inversion each 3mins is a little bit too low hence there are some "strips" in the negative. Next time, I will try agitation every 1 minute.
P.S: Is it true that Rodinal will give the less sharp result than Tmax dev or HC-110? That's my observation, I might need more experiments to confirm that.
1204_13_400TX by kiemchacsu, on Flickr
mbdiesel
Established
[QUOTE I am not a fan of old chemical either, that's why the Rodinal which I bought in a flea market (unopened but couldn't define the date) is on the shelf more than 2 years now. I just wanted to give it a try after exclusively using Tmax dev and HC-110.
I definitely will give it another try to see what would happen.[/QUOTE]
I have have an opened Agfa rodinal bottle that I bought back in 2001 and still works fine. Rodinal in its original concentrated form will discolor over time after opened, but it will last a long time.
I definitely will give it another try to see what would happen.[/QUOTE]
I have have an opened Agfa rodinal bottle that I bought back in 2001 and still works fine. Rodinal in its original concentrated form will discolor over time after opened, but it will last a long time.
Fotohuis
Well-known
Rodinal in 1+100 is a real high acutance type developer. Higher acutance you can only get with developers like:
Tetenal Neofin Blue, FX-39, Beutler, FX-1.
But a modern technology film like Delta or Tmax have the impression to be very sharp.
In fact, Tri-X 400 is not a sharp film at all!
Tetenal Neofin Blue, FX-39, Beutler, FX-1.
But a modern technology film like Delta or Tmax have the impression to be very sharp.
In fact, Tri-X 400 is not a sharp film at all!
charjohncarter
Veteran
Did you mean Tri-X 400 or Tmax? Or are all of them not sharp. I agree Tmax does not have as high resolution as you would think, because of low acutance.
Fotohuis
Well-known
Tri-X 400 has not a high resolution, neither is a very sharp film. But it's a very flexible film.
traveler_101
American abroad
I am a beginner so not to be taken too seriously . . . but frankly, I don't understand the point of developing Tri-x in Rodinal when you have D-76 which complements the film quite well. I was told by a member here in a private e-mail that if you do use Rodinal you should pull Tri-x down to 250 and use the Rodinal @ 1:50.
charjohncarter
Veteran
To make you feel better, I don't like TriX in Rodinal with 35mm. It is true that Rodinal losses speed, so 250-200 is what I use. But everyone is different and likes different looks.
Fotohuis
Well-known
Yes, you will have some speed loss with Rodinal (para-Amino Phenol) but this developer is working on the surface only and due to the high acutance you will have very sharp negatives. On the other hand Rodinal will emphasize the grain of the film.
In 35mm this is more visible then on roll film or even a larger format.
In 35mm this is more visible then on roll film or even a larger format.
gho
Well-known
Maybe these datasheets are a good starting point:
http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/Developers/Times_Rodinal/Rodinal.pdf
http://www.fotoimpex.de/shop_system/images/artikel/media/37805_1_Rodinal-Datenblatt.pdf
For Tri-X@400 (1+25) they say 7 minutes given their recommended agitation scheme.
For pushing I would try the following fomula with a test shot:
push_time=base_time*1.3^stop
The 1.3 is just a rule of thumb, if it comes out underdeveloped, give more light or extend development time. It will probably be quite grainy (well pronounced grain) and contrasty, but if you like that look you are good to go. As you are steepening up the gradation curve, it may be a good advice to meter and expose for the zones that you want to have highest grey value separation in.
Please post results, I am curious how it will look like and good luck!
http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/Developers/Times_Rodinal/Rodinal.pdf
http://www.fotoimpex.de/shop_system/images/artikel/media/37805_1_Rodinal-Datenblatt.pdf
For Tri-X@400 (1+25) they say 7 minutes given their recommended agitation scheme.
For pushing I would try the following fomula with a test shot:
push_time=base_time*1.3^stop
The 1.3 is just a rule of thumb, if it comes out underdeveloped, give more light or extend development time. It will probably be quite grainy (well pronounced grain) and contrasty, but if you like that look you are good to go. As you are steepening up the gradation curve, it may be a good advice to meter and expose for the zones that you want to have highest grey value separation in.
Please post results, I am curious how it will look like and good luck!
gho
Well-known
Good idea, makes sense to me. I get stripes if I do not agitate enough or if the fixer is exhausted.
I use both HC-110 and Rodinal. From my experience, Rodinal is grainier and the percieved sharpness is a little bit higher. I like both developers. I find HC-110 is less corrosive.
kiemchacsu
Well-known
Hi Ronald,
I just developed a roll of Tri-X at 250, Rodinal 1+50 9mins 20C.
The results are amazing, I like the tone very much, good shadow/highlight and grain is very smooth
1206_20_F3_Tri-X_2 by kiemchacsu, on Flickr
arcimboldo
Member
Here is an interesting threat in german concernig the strips:Hi all,
Curently I tried the "new" developer for me, the Rodinal. I would say that I am quite familiar with Tmax dev, HC-110 but since I have a very old Rodinal bottle in my box, I decided to give it a try. However, the result is a bit lower than my expectation or at least my standard with HC-110 or Tmax.
The Tri-X was rated at ISO1600, I used 1+50 dilution (dropped 6ml syrup into 300ml water). 20mins at 19C (digitaltruth reccomends 18.5mins at 20C), continuous agitating 1 first minute. Afer that swirl few seconds every 3 minutes. I have some issues as below:
1/ The result came out too much contrast in some frames but in some frames they are okay, why different contrast in one roll and almost the same light condition? (photos #2 and #3)
2/ Any formular of Tri-X and Rodinal (speed of film, dilution rate) for optimum result? I prefer a little bit grain (but not so obtrusive) with smooth tone range.
3/ Why there are some "strips" in my photo? (please look at the 1st photos)
4/ The negative looks quite yellow tint, is it the reason of fixer? I used Amoloco fixer. According to my experience, Normally the Tri-X negatives came out a bit blue tint or sometimes magenta tint.
Thank you for all advices.
#1
#2
#3
http://www.aphog.de/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=21349
Photo_Smith
Well-known
Thank you for responses.
After re-checking my negatives, I think that the over-contrast images are caused by scanning process. I re-scan using Vuescan with "none" option (everything is default" and the photo below is the result. Could you evaluate thi negative is over-developed?
Those results don't look like over development to me. There is something else happening, possibly fogging or film stress (bending or stress during loading see pic)
deliberate folding before process to cause stress fog
For correct evaluation I'd need to see the negatives (or a digi snap of them) without that I'm guessing underexposed and under developed possibly with slight fogging.
I don't think the marks are made during processing as Rodinal is very resistant to bromide drag much more so than say D76 and you've really got to shake it to make the over agitation show and I don't see excessive contrast in your images.
If you want grain with the Tri-x and Rodinal combination slight underexposure and more agitation will achieve that in fact Rodinals grain can be controlled with different agitation.
Here is my recipe rate at 640EI possibly 800 in normal light develop for 1/3 longer than the 400 time. Agitate for the first min then 2 inversions every 30 seconds. This gives gritty grain.
Very important to get the exposure right, meter for the emerging shadow detail then stop down 2 stops.
grain from Tri-x
Athiril
Established
Rodinal is not a high acutance developer, it is medium acutance at it's highest.
Example (crops digitally enlarged to show differences easily without straining);
Untitled-1 provides this, while actually providing a lower-contrast negative, as in. dMax - dMin is smaller, and can be printed with a higher/harder filter/paper grade than the Rodinal results, while matching the same highlight and shadow placement on the print (or scan). There are some details more visible on the Untitled-1 crop, though it is not a high resolution scan.
The film is HP5+
U1_v_Rodinal by athiril, on Flickr
In regards to the other developers;
Straight from Kodak
Also I've tried printing some of my stand and semi-stand developed negs (Rodinal 1+100). Scans beautifully. Couldn't print them on grade 0 normally. Eg, a normal grade 0 print, when the time is just right to fit all the shadows in.. took another 4+ stops of exposure from the enlarger to print the highlights in, of course then, the shadows are beyond gone. Very wide range neg.
Example (crops digitally enlarged to show differences easily without straining);
Untitled-1 provides this, while actually providing a lower-contrast negative, as in. dMax - dMin is smaller, and can be printed with a higher/harder filter/paper grade than the Rodinal results, while matching the same highlight and shadow placement on the print (or scan). There are some details more visible on the Untitled-1 crop, though it is not a high resolution scan.
The film is HP5+
U1_v_Rodinal by athiril, on Flickr
In regards to the other developers;
Straight from Kodak
Also I've tried printing some of my stand and semi-stand developed negs (Rodinal 1+100). Scans beautifully. Couldn't print them on grade 0 normally. Eg, a normal grade 0 print, when the time is just right to fit all the shadows in.. took another 4+ stops of exposure from the enlarger to print the highlights in, of course then, the shadows are beyond gone. Very wide range neg.