Tri-X Rodinal troubleshooting

[esc_ctrl]

I just developed a roll of 35mm Tri-X according to my usual recipe: @1600 in Rodinal 1+100 90 min semi stand (first 1 min continuous agitation, the every 30 min one inversion)
However, the film came out completely blank!
No density or texture at all on the strip and hardly visible density on the tip (that is usually completely black).
Rodinal is quite brownish/dark, but allegedly it does not expire for years. The camera also works.
I must have made a mistake at some point, but I have no clue where.
Maybe temperature? Or is it even possible the film itself was damaged?
Any guess what went wrong?!

 

[JMQ]

Hmmm, it's been over 30 years since I used Rodinal, but I seem to recall that the dilution limit for Tri-X is 1:75, and your 90 min developing time seems a little long. At 20C (or 68F), it's about 14-16 min for Agfa400 film with 1st min continuous agitation, and then 4x per minute. So, I'd expect Tri-X to be in about that range or even less. I assume that you developed the right roll, and not a blank roll???? just saying....

Again, it's been a while...so someone else may want to jump in.

 

[Mike Riches]

I just developed a roll of 35mm Tri-X according to my usual recipe: @1600 in Rodinal 1+100 90 min semi stand (first 1 min continuous agitation, the every 30 min one inversion)
However, the film came out completely blank!
No density or texture at all on the strip and hardly visible density on the tip (that is usually completely black).
Rodinal is quite brownish/dark, but allegedly it does not expire for years. The camera also works.
I must have made a mistake at some point, but I have no clue where.
Maybe temperature? Or is it even possible the film itself was damaged?
Any guess what went wrong?!

If you have edge markings , film was not advanced in the camera.

 

[JMQ]

Sorry, forgot to mention Agfa 400 exposed at 400ASA.

 

[johannielscom]

If you have edge markings , film was not advanced in the camera.

My idea too.

Sorry, forgot to mention Agfa 400 exposed at 400ASA.

Almost irrelevant with Rodinal stand development, the film takes whatever developer amount it needs to form an image, whether it be 1 stop pushed, pulled or box speed.

I have used Rodinal 1:75 @ 60minute stand with 120 sized TriX @200 in the fridge to keep grain down and it comes out fine. 1:100 for 60 minutes is my usual recipe when not using fridge development with 35mm film. Works like a charm and after an hour nothing much happens anymore since most of the developer has reacted with the film anyway. I once forgot a tank of films until the next morning and after 18 hours of 1:100 stand, the film was about 1.5 stops more contrasty but still very usable.

 

[esc_ctrl]

I have used this recipe for about a year now and it has worked quite well for me so far.
Even if the film was not advanced, shouldn't the tip that was exposed when loading be completely black? It is still transparent and just barely more dense than the rest of the strip.

 

[Tom A]

The "original" Rodinal had an almost unlimited life-span. The later versions less so. It does sound like the developer was not working - died of old age. I find that 5-6 years is the maximum you can rely on with the "new" formula - which might explain the clear "start" of the film.
Do a check with a short strip of film - expose it to light and run it through. It should come out black - if it doesn't, time to dump the Rodinall.

 

[Timmyjoe]

I've used Rodinal when it was the color of strong coffee, and it still worked fine. I'm not sure that stuff can go bad. And I use 100:1 all the time, in fact just finished a roll of Plus-X in 100:1 @ 10 minutes, less than an hour ago.

I think what Mike and Johan mentioned is the most likely scenario. Did you back wind the roll right after you loaded it, like you do to take up slack? I've got an F3HP with MD-4 that is really easy to miss-load, and I've had the totally blank roll of Tri-X a couple of times (I'm embarrassed to admit).

Best,
-Tim

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

Maybe your Rodinal has gone bad? At such high dilutions, the effects of any loss of strength in the developer will be much worse than at normal dilutions.

 

[Mike Riches]

The "original" Rodinal had an almost unlimited life-span. The later versions less so. It does sound like the developer was not working - died of old age. I find that 5-6 years is the maximum you can rely on with the "new" formula - which might explain the clear "start" of the film.
Do a check with a short strip of film - expose it to light and run it through. It should come out black - if it doesn't, time to dump the Rodinall.

Do as Tom has said . Do a new test

 

[Mike Riches]

I've used Rodinal when it was the color of strong coffee, and it still worked fine. I'm not sure that stuff can go bad. And I use 100:1 all the time, in fact just finished a roll of Plus-X in 100:1 @ 10 minutes, less than an hour ago.

I think what Mike and Johan mentioned is the most likely scenario. Did you back wind the roll right after you loaded it, like you do to take up slack? I've got an F3HP with MD-4 that is really easy to miss-load, and I've had the totally blank roll of Tri-X a couple of times (I'm embarrassed to admit).

Best,
-Tim

Many years ago , I miss loaded a roll at a wedding shoot .

 

[Sid836]

Always have in mind that to fully develop a 36exp film, at least 10ml of rodinal are required. Many cut this proportionally down to the quantity of a 1:100 ration for say a 350ml tank, but this is wrong. This is why most end up with too thin negatives after that stand development. To fully develop a negative with stand development at 1:100 10ml of Rodinal in 100x10ml water are required. Those 10 ml of Rodinal is the amound of developer required to get a fully developed negative after the stand and the total volume of the solution should be no less than 1010 ml.
The too thin developed negatives after a stand are mainly due to insufficient developer to get the entire film adequately developed. Try it and you will be amazed by the difference.

 

[jmilkins]

Can someone help with a definition of new vs old rodinal? I have a 2004 sealed bottle I would like to use - any idea which this is?

 

[teddy]

This image taken with a Collapsible Summicron and an orange filter was shot with Tri-X and developed in Rodinal 1:100 @ 60 mins, semi stand with an average temperature of around 24 celcius. 20 inversions at first, then 5 inversions every 15 mins. I've always done this without any hassles. I'm not sure if my negs are too thin - I'm still a n00b and learning. I think perhaps the camera didn't pick up your film, you developed a new roll by mistake or perhaps for some reason your batch of Rodinal has gone bad?

 

[AndersG]

If you have kept a piece of the completely exposed film leader from your recent films you could compare their density to see if there is a weakening trend. The last year I have developed a few films using Calbe R09 from 2005 and there is a loss of density compared to my earlier films using that developer (2006). For the last films I decreased the dilution to 1+25 based on 20ml compared to 1+50 based on 7ml, later 10ml, I used before. There was still a loss of density so this bottle is due to be retired.

These days I also always first put a small piece of exposed film in the developer to see that it indeed turn black before processing the film. I work with film purely for pleasure so I can risk getting a poor result - otherwise a fresh bottle of Rodinal is not expensive.

 

[Mablo]

Can someone help with a definition of new vs old rodinal? I have a 2004 sealed bottle I would like to use - any idea which this is?

2004 is definitely the old and true Rodinal whick keeps until the Kingdom come. I have an unopened bottle from early 1980's and I'm sure it still works perfectly (if I ever decide to open it).

What comes to using 35mm Tri-X and Rodinal I'm not a fan of stand developing. It's quite easy for sure but results are usually quite flat and dull. No shiny blacks, no bright whites, just grey tones. My recommendation is for normal daylight to use 1+50, overexpose by a stop and agitate *very* sparingly. You get strong, beatiful tones and very little grain. This one is basically right out of the scanner:

 

[esc_ctrl]

Been thinking about this all day long... The Rodinal (Adonal) should not have expired as I usually go through a 500ml bottle within a year. I don't think it's from the winding, since I always wind once while the back is still open to check it the film is taken up. Also as I said, the first couple of inches of the strip should be completely black, here just a very slight density is visible. Also wrong temperature, agitation, dilution etc. should still develop the negs, albeit thinner. I've heard about the 10ml minimum rule, but never abided. Still worked fine for me. To be safe(r), I guess I'll go for 600ml dilution from now on.
My guess is that no developer at all reached the film. I used a 600ml tank with two spools, only one loaded. Maybe the spool was stuck on top so the developer was beneath the spool.
What do you think?

 

[shadowfox]

2004 is definitely the old and true Rodinal whick keeps until the Kingdom come. I have an unopened bottle from early 1980's and I'm sure it still works perfectly (if I ever decide to open it).

What comes to using 35mm Tri-X and Rodinal I'm not a fan of stand developing. It's quite easy for sure but results are usually quite flat and dull. No shiny blacks, no bright whites, just grey tones. My recommendation is for normal daylight to use 1+50, overexpose by a stop and agitate *very* sparingly. You get strong, beatiful tones and very little grain. This one is basically right out of the scanner:

Agree 100%

I don't even find stand development easy at all, to me, it just prolong the agony and hassle of developing (I love film photography, but development is definitely not my favorite part of the process).

My recipe is 1+50 dilution for 11-14 minutes with 3 gentle tumbles every 4 minutes or so.

 

[Drago]

I have never understood how you could get tri-x at 1600 with Rodinal ... To believe in myths ok, but in reality ? Rodinal is one of the best developers, but surely it's not intend for fast films. You can shoot 400 ASA in it if you like grain ( it's not visible in 120 format ) , but anything beyond that you'r already pushing it 🙂 And stand development is not miracle either

 

[esc_ctrl]

Here's an example. I need fast shutterspeeds, so 1600 is the way to go for me. You do loose details in the blacks quickly, but that's more acceptable than blurry motion, at least for me. 90 min semi stand is the only way to keep grain acceptable and retain at least some details is the depths. Tried pushing it with lower dilution, normal agitation, other developers, etc., it's just a mess...
But back to topic 🙂 I'm still not sure what went wrong this time.