Thin negs w/Rodinal 1:100

[Sisyphus]

I do not feel like I have problems with contrast. I generally mark the exposed rolls of film with notes, process similar rolls together, therefore compensating agitation. If it was a low light situation if it is a low light or low contrast situation--I will agitate more vigorously, or if it was high contrast situation--I will agitate less so.

I am pleased with my results, and I do not feel my images are too grainy, compared to others who process their film using Rodinal, or too contrasty. It is difficult to compare these days though, since I hardly know anyone printing in the darkroom these days.

One other note about grain, I realized for me that temperature and agitation seem to be crucial for smaller appearing grain or larger appearing grain and contrast. So, I will be sure to keep my temperatures, including the pre-soaking of the negatives and the water stop bath between 66-and 68 degrees.

If you look at my blog and website, all the black and white is tri-x film processed in Rodinal. The first six or so images on my blog are from black and white RC prints, the other scans are directly from the negatives.

Let us know how your next batch comes out and post some images if you can.

Best

 

[thafred]

Rem
Last year I tested this combination (Rodinal 1:100 and TriX) for my shooting because I mostly shot APX 100 and TriX and wanted to dev. them together in one go. I found that with Rodinal 1:100 and my normal agitation (few turns every 3 minutes) at 20min it works out as ASA 200 for TriX. A whole stop of speed loss but the negatives look great and Scan or Print even better (very nice grain and compensation at this dilution)

just a neg scan but the print looks very much the same:

Best.

 

[remegius]

Rem

just a neg scan but the print looks very much the same:

Best.

Thanks...I'm going to give the 1:100 lower ASA a try. Should be able to shoot a couple of rolls tomorrow.

Cheers...

 

[remegius]

BTW...that scan looks great!

 

[titrisol]

20 minutes fro TX?
that sounds short IMHO
Efke 25 takes 10 minutes, and 100 takes 15-20
so 400 would take 30 minutes at least

I haven't developed film in quite a while, and decided that I wanted to get back into it with the idea of printing from scanned negs. Anyway, I shot some TriX (35mm) at 400 and developed it in Rodinal 1:100 for 20 minutes. Whoo boy...thin negatives. I'm a little surprised by this, and am wondering if there is a finite shelf life to Rodinal. The Rodinal I'm using has been sitting for about 3 years or so, but I would have thought that in its concentrated form it would be pretty long lasting. I was pretty lax about agitation, only agitating every three minutes, and that might not be enough. Anyhow, I would appreciate any feedback that the group might offer.

 

[remegius]

If there is one thing that stands out from this thread, and all the other threads that I have read concening Rodinal and TriX (and all other films, for that matter), it is that folks are all over the board with this developer. They are all over the board with respect to speed, dilution, agitation---everything. So, what I have decided to do is to go back to the basic AGFA recommendations, and move out from there. I have a roll of TriX which I shot at 400 and will develop 1:50. I'll let you know what happens.

Cheers...

 

[drewbarb]

Yep - there are a million ways to use most developers, and limitless possible results from the endless combinations of film, developer, and technique.

Rodinal at 1:50 has been a favorite of mine with many films for years. I tried 1:25 often enough, but generally liked 1:50 better. Then, a few months ago, I started reading all these threads here which talk about 1:100, stand development, and various other ways to use Rodinal. So I've tried some of them. As with most new processes, my first results were less than perfect. I could test to find good results with stand dev'ing and greater dilutions- and I know it's possible, because I've seen others good results here- but your point is well taken. I think I'll stick with what has worked for me in the past, and do some better testing when I feel inspired and have the time and film to burn on it.

 

[rich815]

If there is one thing that stands out from this thread, and all the other threads that I have read concening Rodinal and TriX (and all other films, for that matter), it is that folks are all over the board with this developer. They are all over the board with respect to speed, dilution, agitation---everything. So, what I have decided to do is to go back to the basic AGFA recommendations, and move out from there. I have a roll of TriX which I shot at 400 and will develop 1:50. I'll let you know what happens.

Cheers...

No, the problem with this thread is many people are posting their times without full discussion of agitation technique, which makes no sense.

 

[charjohncarter]

Boy, is Rich815 right on that one.

 

[remegius]

Well, I did what I said I'd do. I started with the AGFA sheet. TriX@400, 1:50, 12 min, 20C, 1st 30 secs, then 5 secs every 30 secs or so. Guess what? I have negatives that actually look like negatives, with what appears to be a full range of tonality. They are still drying, so I can't report beyond that. And unfortunately, I'm still waiting on my V500, and only have an old Scanjet 3970 to play with (not good). But I will give it a shot and see if I can come up with something that will indicate how this development worked out.

Cheers...

 

[MikeCassidy]

I do Rodinal 1:50 with Tri-X rated 400 ISO, 12 minutes; I agitate one every 2 minute, 3 inversions.

I've been getting nice negs.
I am experimenting with Tri-X at 200 ISO and probably 10.5 minutes.

 

[Trius]

Boy, is Rich815 right on that one.

Absolutely. Agitation is the "poor cousin" in b&w developing, I think. The
"standard" was always 5 or 10 sec. every minute, or some manufacturers recommended 5 sec. every 30 sec.

My own opinion is that with modern films, less is more. Everyone should do controlled tests to find their own best practice, but "excessive" agitation contributes to excessive grain, higher contrast and sometimes blocked highlights.

The "beauty" of Rodinal is its dilution flexibility, as well as its keeping properties. By varying dilution, you can manage contrast with modern films as well as you could with varying times with older emulsions. Older emulsions were more responsive to + or - development than modern emulsions.