weird film problem/rodinal first try

[Cleber Figueiredo]

hello!

first:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/cleberfigueiredo/sets/72157607436530850/show/
this was my first experience with reloaded film, and surely not a good experience... people on the store say it can be some mistake i've made when loading the film on the reel, but i doubt it... it seems to me that this is a problem with the bulk-loader bobin.

do any of you had any similar experiences?


second:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/cleberfigueiredo/sets/72157607436530838/show/
this is my first try on rodinal. it's a tri-x 400 pushed to 1600. and the results are mixed... some were ok, some have very little shadow detail

i've developed it on a small tank (250ml) with 5ml of rodinal, therefore dilution 1:50, for 14 minutes, at 24,5C (a simple conversion based on the massive dev chart on digitaltruth)

gently agitation on the first 30sec, 2 slow inversions every 3:30min

i'm not sure if the time was too little, or if my agitation method is wrong, or if the tank is too small, or what! really need your help here...

the grain is fine, though... for my taste!

would you have a theorie on why the film ended up like this? i cannot guarantee that my metering was spot right, but it's not a mistake i would do so easily...

 

[Bob Michaels]

I don't see any problems related to the use of Rodinal.

You have a shutter problem. Needs an experienced camera tech.

You have dust spots on your negs. Preliminary solution should be obvious.

You also have water spots or possibly too much Photoflo, can't tell which. I use 1-2 drops of Photoflo per 10 oz of distilled water and have eliminated this problem.

You may have newton rings from the scanner. Someone else will have to advise you on this as I simply never have them with my film scanner.

But, I don't think any of there have any bearing on the use of Rodinal as a developer.

 

[Cleber Figueiredo]

it can not be a shutter problem... or else the rodinal photos would have something similar. and that's the only one film where this happened

i use absolutely no photoflo... maybe that's my problem? after the final bath of 20+ minutes, i shake the film and hang it, until it dries

thank you for the reply!!!

 

[feenej]

Light leak maybe?

 

[tmfabian]

this is my first try on rodinal. it's a tri-x 400 pushed to 1600. and the results are mixed... some were ok, some have very little shadow detail

would you have a theorie on why the film ended up like this? i cannot guarantee that my metering was spot right, but it's not a mistake i would do so easily...

You're not going to have much shadow detail when you push a 400 speed film to 1600 regardless of developer. Something in your digitizing portion is causing some strange results for sure, but nothing I see there is attributed to rodinal.

since you're 100% certain it's not a shutter problem with the light leak dealy on the first roll...my only suggestion is to pump some more film through in a controlled experiment...1 roll of pre-loaded factory stuff and 1 roll from the bulk loader and see if the results repeat...if they do, then there's something wrong with the bulk loader.

as far as photoflo goes..i never touch the stuff, but i do wipe my negs down with a soft antistat cloth after they're dry to remove any watermarks.

 

[bcostin]

It looks like a light leak in the camera to me, probably around the sides of the rear door. The 1600 ISO Rodinal set appears to have been shot in subdued light. Wheras the D76 roll, where we see a lot of those white streaks, was taken in much brighter conditions. I suspect that there just wasn't enough direct light leaking into the camera for long enough to cause visible fogging with most of the frames on the Rodinal roll.

If you're sure it's not the camera my next guess would be the same as yours - a light leak in the bulk loader or the reloadable film cartridge. I'd check out the camera first, though. If the loader were leaking I'd expect an almost even fogging as the film was rolled rapidly into the cartridge.

 

[Cleber Figueiredo]

If the loader were leaking I'd expect an almost even fogging as the film was rolled rapidly into the cartridge.

that's what i think also


thanks for all your responses so far!

the newton rings are caused by the curling of the negatives (still couldn't find a way to get rid of it)

maybe you're right about the shadow details... but for me the results are still darker than i was expecting. maybe i under-developed it? would there be noticeable difference if i spent 2 more minutes developing it?

thanks again, guys

 

[Soeren]

Underexposure

Underexposure

Shadow details wont be affected much with increased Development, therefore expose for the shadows develop for the highlights.
If you want to take that route go for 1:100 or more and stand or semi stand development. Rather than pushing I'd use a faster film as Neopan 1600 or Delta 3200. Most films can take a lot of overexposure but allmost no underexposure, if its not on the film to begin with no developer will put it there. Yeah yeah I know, DDX will give you more "speed" and so will FX2 and probably some other few devs. 🙂