hammam Posted October 13, 2009 Share #1 Posted October 13, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I have taken a long hiatus shooting exclusively digital, and now I'm back at b&w film, and processing. I'm a bit rusted, and I forgot a few things. For example: what can cause a thin neg, with the resulting dark scans? Can it be over or under-development? It is a roll of APX 100 in Rodinal 1+50 (usually a magic combination, for me, at least.) I don't think it's under-exposure across the board, because my previous roll with the same M7 (Tri-X in Xtol) was perfect. The APX is an older film (obviously, alas, more than a year, maybe two, since it was loaded in a cassette) and kept haphazardly in and out of the fridge. My Rodinal also is a bit old: a half-bottle kept for at least a year. But I've heard that Rodinal kept for a very long time, right? What is your opinion? Thank you. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 13, 2009 Posted October 13, 2009 Hi hammam, Take a look here Thin negs. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
christer Posted October 13, 2009 Share #2 Posted October 13, 2009 Underexposure causes thin negatives. First signs of underexposure can be found in the shadow areas of the print. Very old film may lose some speed and this may be a reason for underexposure, but probably not in your case Underdevelopment results in flat negatives, i.e. negatives with unsuffficient contrast. Reasons include: old developer (but Rodinal lasts forever), development time too short, developer too diluted, not enough agitation. Nothing beats making ten exposures from Zone 1 to Zone 9 plus one blank and measuring the densities. This will tell you everything about your exposure and development. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammam Posted October 13, 2009 Author Share #3 Posted October 13, 2009 Thanks, Christer. Maybe the flm has, indeed, lost some speed. I'll shoot the next one at 50, and see. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
noah_addis Posted October 13, 2009 Share #4 Posted October 13, 2009 If there is underdevelopment then the text burned in to the edge of the film will be thin. If the text is nice and dark but the image is thin, then it's underexposure. Of course, it is also possible that the film has lost some speed, but I kind of doubt it since it's not all THAT old. It'll come back to you, I've been having fun shooting more film lately too after a bit of a break:D Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hiles Posted October 13, 2009 Share #5 Posted October 13, 2009 (edited) Nothing beats making ten exposures from Zone 1 to Zone 9 plus one blank and measuring the densities. This will tell you everything about your exposure and development. Do this and you will eliminate guesswork. Do not take the film speed on the box as the final fact. Test, test, test. Once you have determined your REAL film speed, you need to determine your correct deveopment time. All the external suggestions including manufacturer's suggestions are only a place to start. You do not know until you have done your own careful tests. Two year old film will have no decernable loss of sensitivity. Edited October 13, 2009 by Michael Hiles Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bernd Banken Posted October 13, 2009 Share #6 Posted October 13, 2009 What time did you use and what kind of rythm pattern? Fe 1 minute from the start and then every 30 sec. for two seconds. Here my first try APX100, 09Rodinal and 1:25, 8 minutes: some grain but not so much (for my eyes..) http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/technik-industrie/95662-ju52-iii.html Cheers Bernd Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Johnston Posted October 13, 2009 Share #7 Posted October 13, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) i've always been curious about the shelf life of rodinal, both new/unopened, and of course opened concentrate and stoppered. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_s Posted October 13, 2009 Share #8 Posted October 13, 2009 The stock life of Rodinal is, of course, legendary. But I wonder if the later batches of Rodinal are the same. First, it used to be bottled with some crystals in the bottle. (Well, mine had some, but it was a very long time ago. Also it was rather dark in those days.). Also, it's in plastic now, not glass. As the post above suggested, if the edge numbering is faint, I would suspect the developer. Any chance that you left the camera on the ISO setting for the previous roll? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammam Posted October 14, 2009 Author Share #9 Posted October 14, 2009 (edited) The markings on the edges are nice and dark, so I suppose we can rule out under-development. I used Rodinal at 1+50, 13 min. at 20 C., constant agitation for the first 30 seconds, then two inversions every minute. I have double-checked my M, and the ISO was set at 100. I've also compared the meter readings in A mode against a D700, and the M7 is a bit «fast», like 1/45th. compare to 1/40th. But I don't think it is relevant. Besides, the D700 tends to over-expose a tiny bit, anyway. Against a spotmeter, the readings are the same in medium light (1/60th.) but the M7 is too fast in low light (1/45th. against 1/15th.) Then again, I shot Tri-X and TMY recently with good exposure. I am baffled. I just received a few rolls of Rollei Retro, so I will shoot one roll of that and one roll of my older APX, and process them together. We'll see. Thanks. Edited October 14, 2009 by hammam Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammam Posted October 14, 2009 Author Share #10 Posted October 14, 2009 I have also checked the batteries, and both were below 3V. More like 2.80, when fresh ones show 3.2 V. Can spent batteries fool the meter into under-exposing? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob_x2004 Posted October 15, 2009 Share #11 Posted October 15, 2009 (edited) The manufacturers marks on the edge are likely to be dark with just a whif of developer, teh exposed frames not, so you still need to bear that in mind. You are sure you got the shot of rodinal right and didnt miss a few mls? If it is an old bottle and been open for a while, you could do a test roll, cut it up in strips and try a couple of different development routines/concentrations but why not just throw it away and spend six bucks on a new bottle. Cant see how 1+50@13min with any agitation routine should not give you pretty dense negs. The quicker you either find your feet or find that the film is stuffed, the better, rather than discover your light meter/shutter speed is headed south. Edited October 15, 2009 by rob_x2004 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bernd Banken Posted October 15, 2009 Share #12 Posted October 15, 2009 The markings on the edges are nice and dark, so I suppose we can rule out under-development. I used Rodinal at 1+50, 13 min. at 20 C., constant agitation for the first 30 seconds, then two inversions every minute. I have double-checked my M, and the ISO was set at 100. I've also compared the meter readings in A mode against a D700, and the M7 is a bit «fast», like 1/45th. compare to 1/40th. But I don't think it is relevant. Besides, the D700 tends to over-expose a tiny bit, anyway. Against a spotmeter, the readings are the same in medium light (1/60th.) but the M7 is too fast in low light (1/45th. against 1/15th.) Then again, I shot Tri-X and TMY recently with good exposure. I am baffled. I just received a few rolls of Rollei Retro, so I will shoot one roll of that and one roll of my older APX, and process them together. We'll see. Thanks. Hammam, the reason is easy to find: http://www.fotoimpex.de/shop_system/images/artikel/media/13015_1_Rodinal-Datenblatt.pdf You stopped developing 4 minutes too early...... 17 minutes ./. your 13 minutes, or? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob_x2004 Posted October 15, 2009 Share #13 Posted October 15, 2009 (edited) Wow, Bernd, bad advice! I was wondering when that data sheet would raise its ugly head. The resulting negs are pretty much unusable and I am not sure why the 17min is in the data sheet. Maybe it has something to do with enlargers at the turn of the twentieth century. Yes I tried it. I had no way of printing and before the days of scanners and I five roll tank developed a heap of accumulated films and lost the lot. 13min for 100iso and 11min for 400 is pretty right. For me 12 1/4 to 12 1/2 and 10min for 400 is about right. How do you manage to make the 17min work? If anyone can give an explanation for the data sheets .65 contrast times please let me know. Maybe the condenser enlarger can shoot through the resulting neg, but you cant scan them. Edited October 15, 2009 by rob_x2004 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammam Posted October 15, 2009 Author Share #14 Posted October 15, 2009 Hammam, the reason is easy to find: http://www.fotoimpex.de/shop_system/images/artikel/media/13015_1_Rodinal-Datenblatt.pdf You stopped developing 4 minutes too early...... 17 minutes ./. your 13 minutes, or? I followed the recommendations of the «Massive development chart», here: « Digitaltruth Photo: The Massive Dev Chart » They may not be absolutely perfect times (what is, anyway?) but they usually give a pretty good starting point. I've always been satisfied with these. As for your reference, I don't understand it. They give 10 min. for Rollei Retro, and 17 min. for APX 100, even if the Rollei film is supposed to actually BE APX 100, which has been recovered by the company when Agfa went bankrupt. But thanks anyway. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bernd Banken Posted October 15, 2009 Share #15 Posted October 15, 2009 Two weeks ago 20 rolls of Retro 100 arrived. But at the moment the APX leaves the fridge. In a parallel thread on the other side some dark room gurus mentioned the 17 minutes and the "special" agitation method for Rodinal which will give the so called "edge sharpening effect". They mentioned always the 17 minutes for 1:50. My little plastic bottle of "R09 one shot" recommends on the sticker: 1:25 8 minutes and 1:50 17 minutes both for APX100 and Rollei Retro 100........ BUT here is a frame which I developed in 13 minutes 1:50 and it worked.... http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/technik-industrie/95662-ju52-iii.html The Retro 100 will be tested from my side too. Cheers Bernd Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bernd Banken Posted October 15, 2009 Share #16 Posted October 15, 2009 @ Rob My first APX as explained above I developed for 13 minutes (but didn't remember...). Before only Fuji in Diafine were my films. So the result of the JU52 are pretty near at your recommendation, as I followed some advise but not from the printed bottle sticker. Ughhhh! The two other rolls of APX got the 1:25 in 8 min. because 17min. were so boring in my bathroom.... As explained to Hammam I have no idea what's right or wrong...... Cheers Bernd Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bernd Banken Posted October 15, 2009 Share #17 Posted October 15, 2009 Rollei Retro 100 in Rodinal - Photo.net B&W Photo - Film & Processing Forum At point 6 the secret is revealed: Old version of APX and NEW version of APX/Retro 100! Not all manufacturers of developer changed their data sheets....... Cheers Bernd Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob_x2004 Posted October 15, 2009 Share #18 Posted October 15, 2009 Bernd I think point 6 mentions a new film 2005. But that is still not right in explaining the 1+50 development time. I had problems back in 1995 or 1997 when I wrecked a lot of rolls. Rodinal sold now in the clear plastic bottle (which came along in Aus about 2005, coincidence?) still carry that old tech data sheet. I think there must be some theoretical or calculated explanation for the 17min. The only explanation I could come up with for anyone getting decent results out of 1+25 @ 8min was the way Rodinal works, and the boundary layer that forms till inversion puts fresh chemical against emulsion. Up to a point I think concentration might be not as important as time, or the number of times you put unexhaused chemical against the film with inversion. I suspect 1+25@8min will be similar to 1+50@8min, and very different from 1+50@17min, because it has had eight more hits of fresh Rodinal. I guess I should try 1+25 some time. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammam Posted October 15, 2009 Author Share #19 Posted October 15, 2009 When you ride a motorcycle (like I do) there is a saying that adjusting suspensions is something of a dark art. It looks like processing APX 100 or Rollei retro in Rodinal is being that as well Anyway, I've almost always followed the recommendations of the MDC, with good results, so I might as well stick to it. As for new vs old APX, that's another story. Is there something like «new» APX these days anyway? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbelyaev Posted October 15, 2009 Share #20 Posted October 15, 2009 I have taken a long hiatus shooting exclusively digital, and now I'm back at b&w film, and processing. I'm a bit rusted, and I forgot a few things. For example: what can cause a thin neg, with the resulting dark scans? Can it be over or under-development? It is a roll of APX 100 in Rodinal 1+50 (usually a magic combination, for me, at least.) I don't think it's under-exposure across the board, because my previous roll with the same M7 (Tri-X in Xtol) was perfect. The APX is an older film (obviously, alas, more than a year, maybe two, since it was loaded in a cassette) and kept haphazardly in and out of the fridge. My Rodinal also is a bit old: a half-bottle kept for at least a year. But I've heard that Rodinal kept for a very long time, right? What is your opinion? Thank you. 35mm APX100 is too grainy in Rodinal to my taste. I prefer developing it in Rodinal Special. Typically I rate it as EI100 when I plan on developing in Rodinal special. You may want to dilute RS 1+30, time 6min 30 sec, agitation every 1 min, t 68f. A sample image you could find here: Flickr Photo Download: kauai200803280326 I like APX100 in Rodinal when I shoot medium format. You may want to rate APX100 as EI50 or 64. Dilution 1+50. Agitation q1min. t68f. Time 13min. Here is a sample image: Flickr Photo Download: sl66 Good luck! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.