rob_x2004 Posted November 27, 2006 Share #1 Posted November 27, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) Who uses what and why? I admit I use 1+50 mainly, so I can get a handle on my development times at the temperatures where I am rather than any intimate understanding of the developers affect on the developed films properties. Anyone have any good reference sites for Rodinal users? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 27, 2006 Posted November 27, 2006 Hi rob_x2004, Take a look here Rodinal 1+25 v 1+50. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
richam Posted November 27, 2006 Share #2 Posted November 27, 2006 Rob, The apug B&W forum is full of Rodinal addicts, and I've found the best info there. Registration is free. I just did a "rodinal" search, and got some 1300 hits. You can narrow by adding keywords, e.g. "1:25", "1:50" or "dilution": http://www.apug.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=37 Also a lot of info on photo.net b&w processing forum: http://www.photo.net/bboard/forum?topic_id=1541 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zurenborger Posted November 28, 2006 Share #3 Posted November 28, 2006 also look into 1:100 or more with stand development. If done correctly this produces marvelous results for both 25 as 400 asa films. I find with rodinal you cannot pick tips off the web, you have to try it out yourself, different solution, films, speeds and timings Rodinal must be the most versatile developers in the market. I also use HC-110 which is not similar, but also very versatile. With the winter coming up I tend to use more Tri-x, this in combination with HC-110 producing great results too.... Both are cheap and can be kept for ages and a day. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob_x2004 Posted November 28, 2006 Author Share #4 Posted November 28, 2006 1:100 with 400ISO would have to be pretty interesting. How far along this track did you get? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zurenborger Posted November 28, 2006 Share #5 Posted November 28, 2006 1:100 with 400asa in stand development get's pretty contrasty and grainy in "normal" b&w would not advise it for family pictures (except for my auntie gretta who has more craters in her face than the south moon landscape) anyway, High ISO films, even pushed to 800 or 1600 and then toning produces good results (a matter of taste of course) good scenes for this are misty landscapes, or other with not much detail. It is the detail in this that spoils the image (obviously) Go for naturally blurred images and the result is nice, one better than the other.... An evening shot of christmas decorated shopping street shot with 400 f16 and 4 seconds for instance produces a surreal effect where you have to look twice to see what the motive is, but as whole is almost a piece of art. Another thing is composing, you must try to find some "quietness" in the image somewhere. .... anyway it's well worth testing, it's not only fun to do, but you can produce images with an "own signature" Another tip is to produce larger print sizes, you can easily go up to 20x30, well framed it will look great. As for the testing you can shoot a roll of 36 all at the same exposure and of the same scene, cut the negative in 7 time 5 frames and try different developing methods, based upon this you have a "mold" which you like and are able to continue on these settings and get to the perfect image. Film is cheap, developer and other chemicals are cheap, no limitations here, it's the time needed, but I find this the fun part so time is hardly an unovercomeable investment. And don't forget to take notes, you will lose track otherwise. I started doing this thing a couple of years ago after I read an interview with some photographer, can't remember whom, but he simply stated something in the line of "it's photographies biggest misconception that all images need to be sharp to turn it into a good image" something like this anyway. Since having read that I obviously still shoot some sharp images but am always looking for deliberate blurs, some combines with natural sharpness and other not. Try shooting a gloomy rainy busy downtown evening with Efke 25 at f8 with a shutterspeed of appr. 2 sec.the effect is wonderful which can further be enhanced by developing methods. As mentioned composing the picture well is important otherwise it might turn out a bit of a messy image..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob_x2004 Posted November 28, 2006 Author Share #6 Posted November 28, 2006 Also have a roll of APX 400TS which they wind onto bank security cameras. Figuring on taking it out after dark, will probably figure it out by the end of the thirty metres. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zurenborger Posted November 28, 2006 Share #7 Posted November 28, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) ... be systematic though, you really loose track fast and forget what the data was for this one and only fantastic shot.... check out this site if you haven't already ... Rodinal - Oldest Commercial Developer Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob_x2004 Posted November 28, 2006 Author Share #8 Posted November 28, 2006 Very very different development times from the AGFAs printed times that comes with the bottle. Interesting stuff, closer to what I went back to. Thanks Johan. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zurenborger Posted November 28, 2006 Share #9 Posted November 28, 2006 Everybody has their own idea about development times and agitation. Agitation is also important for the end result. I found the mentioned site to be pretty good as it helped me with my initial investigation into the world of Rodinal :-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zurenborger Posted November 28, 2006 Share #10 Posted November 28, 2006 For my collection of B&W "blurred" shots I use an old Super Angulon 3.4/21 chrome or a 1955 collapsible Summicron 2.0/50. Which are both perfect fot these type of shots. A 35mm asph. or the latest 50mm cron doesn't cut the cake all that well I find. An old minimal-, or none coated lens adds to the atmosphere Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
vic vic Posted November 28, 2006 Share #11 Posted November 28, 2006 hi rob and every one... rob.. u ask about the 1+25 and 1+50 and u get into the details in the differances.. plus aggitation issues.... i have to say that there are many more variables in photo making that make the differance, and that partly inculdes the fine tuning of negative (with this or that kind of development). forst of all about the 1+25 and 1+50. im dedicated rodinal user actually. i love this developer the most. the second one is id-11. i will take as an example three films... apx100, fp4 and pan-f. generally talking... the 1+50 delution will give u a cleaner and smoother image. it will increse effective speed of your film, and it will give less local contrast over the all tonal ranges. it will preserve highlights (especially the etreme highlight will bebefit form it), but with it, i have to mention that rodinal (even 1+25) can preserve highlight within controlable range anyway, unlike id11 that can go slightly harsh sometimes. the main differance in character of rodinal and id11 is that id11 will give u smoother grain even in highlights but may go harsh in gradation, while rodinal may exhebit more grain but finer tonal gradation the 1+50 will also increase the crispnes in details, or in other words - better practical resolution. this is true about all the three films i have mentioned, but the charaterized effect is most vissible on the fp4. pan-f for example is very nice with this combo and capable to give extrimly smooth gradation and fine details, on 35mm format, it is something that may remind the look of medium format (but not equals by any way). the appearance and the "look" of the print is very deep and moody, and the high contrast of pan-f keeps the overall tonal gradation very equal and interesting. this combo (1+50) can be very helpful in harsh lighting. slightly balanced development will equalize a bit the differances between the sun-lit areas and the shadows for example, and later, in the daroom, this image can be printed on higher contrast paper (or gradation with multi-grade papers). with agfa apx100, i dont like this combo usually.. why, cause if u dont push the contrast, then the film may appear a bit dull in overall contrast over the tonal range, and especially the local contrast areas in the mid grey appear slightly dull. in case that u do push the contrast in this combo, then this film my exhebit a little of "metalic" feeling on the print. 1+25... this is the most beautiful thing about rodinal. yes.. it is a bit rough on the negative (compared to 1+50 and id-11 at 1+1), but it is simply the most beautiful thing. in my taste.. apx100 and rodinal 1+25 is the finest TASTE of b/w photography :-)))) again.. usually rodinal is no harm on highlights harshness even at 1+25. and the apx can retain very nice shadow details anyway. so what u get is amazingly beautiful gradation over the whole tonal range... amazingly beautiful gradation in all parts of local contrast.. and above all... amazingly beautiful and subtele texture to the negative with rodinal grain. about the same i can say about the fp4, and also pan-f. pan-f still remains extrimly smoth, but this combination can give the pan-f amazing puch in tonality especially in comfortable lighting conditions. i also use rodinal for hp5 (at 1600) and neopan1600. with proper exposure and proper agitation of the tank u might be suprised how well those negative "look". yes, they are grainy, but no harsh at all in the grain and texture rendering because of the agitation adjustment. the hp5 in this case will be contrasty of course, but then u can use more yellow filtration on multi-grade paper, and that will re-balance the grain issue surprisingly well... tmax100 for example is very dull with 1+50. the 1+25 gives this film very good punch and extrimly good gradation. the 1+25 makes this film to pop-up on the paper (something that doesnt happen usually with tmax100 film comapered to apx and fp4). the grain with tmax100 is not exactly an issue on resonable elargemnts (say 12x16"/ 30x40cm paper or slightly more from 35mm film). now the other variables.... what do u do with your film??? u ask question that goes into details of tnings and fine tuning your negative. all those film perform beatifully with their own character, so the choice of developer and even further tuning with delution is a matter of fine tuning... so here, the intended use of the film is even more important.... this is something that many people dont even mention.... do u want to scan it?? do u want to print it in the darkroom???? if u want to print it in the darkroom... a few important things... a tuning and fine tuning of the negative should be according to the enlarger u use... good enlarger is strong one of course (one that is stiff and ,doesnt dance), but here are two more important factors (not less iportant than strong enlarger build quality)... 1. a good lens. good lens is important not only of resolution but also for tonal gradation rendering. top lenses are essensial for big enlargements... coppanon-s schneider (and aporodagon rodenstok) are top lesnes. nikon and good meoptas are very nice for up to 9x12" prints. the other budget stuff is not good beyound 8x10". again.. it is not only resolution issue.. it is gradation as well... 2. even more important is the light sourse of the enlarger... why is that.... weak light sourse, will loose the luminosity. in my experince, for fine printing, 100w defused light head is sufficient up to hardly 9x12" print size from the 35mm format (full frame of course). beyound it, u will simply loose luminosity and the more u enlarge, the more the photo will become dull in tonal values. in order to maintain the tonal gradation, u will be forced to make a extra-boost in development of negative which will reduce the quality and the intended "look" of the print . make no mistake.. the variable contrast paper is great control over tonal gradation but it is not the solution. it is good for tuning and fine tuning the gradation, but not for saving the photo from weak enlarger. a good light sourse, at least 250w on diffused halogen light sourse, is not just nice to have, but it is extrimly important for NEGATIVE REPRODUCTION AND INTERPRETATION. and this is the minimum light sourse that will give u the sufficient perormance in order to exhebit your fine tuning of the negative with various developers and various delutions. even better to have 400w (or on some other enlargers have 500w), taht will give u freedom in enlargemnt. those enlargers have ND control (neutral density) that will help u adjust the luminosity level for your enlargement factor of negative. by the way.. the same holds as true about colour prints wether from negative or from slide. so.. there is no need to give extra-boost to the negative for big prints via extra-development for compensation... and u will have not only better tonal gradation but also a better texture reproduction of the negative. again.. since u fine tune the negative with the developer choice and delution choice, having a good tool that will reproduce faithfully and will give u room for interpretation is important. if u sacn... this is a different story. one should remember that many characteristics that are true for darkroom use of negative are not relevant for scaning. all those talks about gradation issues, all those talks about texture etc - they are simply different when u scan. ususally, the finer the film the better for scan. a special care should be taken with "sharpening". people many times mention that they can get down to the grain with the scanner... this is not true, those are only articacts that come from limitations of the scanner and editing.... only few scanners (top post productions and drums) can do it faithfully, and then the question is : what is the point... it is analitically correct rendition as if u see it under micro-scope... but even with those top scanners are not what u get in the darkroom with "light transmition throungh the film as image formaing". it is extrimly hard work to get out of those top scanners files a printed image that reminds somehow a darkroom print. about gradation of tonality of negative for scan... i mean b/w negative of course.... a normal gradation is the best in my opinion. no special adjustments that are common for darkrrom... just make sure that : 1. u have nice and well visible details in shadows if u may want them, and 2. u have not harsh highlights cause no matter what scanner u have, it will be ugly. about greys and midtones.. no worries.. this can be worked out with gradation curves in photoshop, silverfast etc... and it can be done very successfuly indeed. again... when u want the shadows, it is different on scan... u dont have the ability to fine tune it with "light transmition through film" as in the darkrrom, so it is better to keep the shadows more visible on negative for scan. otherwise, the jump from black to dark tones on the digital is not as faithful as in darkroom and u will deal with tuggeling rather then tonal gradation in this dark tonal values. and important thing... if u can - just print the b/w photos in darkroom. :-)))))))))))))))))) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
christer Posted November 29, 2006 Share #12 Posted November 29, 2006 victor, interesting. looking forward to the completion of your website. chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrid Posted November 29, 2006 Share #13 Posted November 29, 2006 1+25... this is the most beautiful thing about rodinal. yes.. it is a bit rough on the negative (compared to 1+50 and id-11 at 1+1), but it is simply the most beautiful thing. in my taste.. apx100 and rodinal 1+25 is the finest TASTE of b/w photography :-)))) Ah, yes. Rodinal 1:25 / 1:50 and AGFA APX100. Add the Summicron DR to the mix and it truly was magical. Too bad APX100 went to the great darkroom on the sky, it really was special. Here are some shots I took with that combo. I made some prints of these on Agfa Classic Glossy fiber and even laymen comment on their appearance. This was taken with a 1.4/35 Summilux-ASPH http://www.elanphotos.com/ElanFotos/Portfolio/pages/slide_090.htm Here is the pre-ASPH Lux at work. http://www.elanphotos.com/ElanFotos/Portfolio/pages/slide_120.htm I'm now experimenting with Plus-X and Rodinal. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
M'Ate Posted November 30, 2006 Share #14 Posted November 30, 2006 Victor, WOW ! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wbesz Posted November 30, 2006 Share #15 Posted November 30, 2006 Victor, thanks for your detailed explanation and enthusiasm for developing film. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andym911 Posted November 30, 2006 Share #16 Posted November 30, 2006 Victor, I also appreciate your detailed comments, very helpful. I also use only Rodinal after doing too much experimenting over the last years. Now it is my only developer and I have only used it at 1:25, mainly on TRI-X and some Delta 100. I consciously have stuck to this and my print results have improved tremendously since I stopped experimenting.I love Rodinal because it is easy to mix, keeps for ages even when it looks brown it delivers the goods and it is predictable for me.I know exactly what look I will get if I expose TR X at 400-320 or 200. I am now going to try the 1:50 based on a lot of what I have read and indeed confirmed by Victor above.Looking forward to the results.. Andy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevez4 Posted November 30, 2006 Share #17 Posted November 30, 2006 There was never anything quite like 50 dilution Rodinal and Plus x exposed at 320. It really great to see that you folks still appreciate it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
christer Posted November 30, 2006 Share #18 Posted November 30, 2006 andym, i have also tried rodinal with delta 100 but i did not like the grain, except when i put some sodium ascorbic into the developer. then came the upheaval with ilford and the supply rupture so i went over to kodak tmax 100 and i like it very much (without the ascorbic..) on the other hand for 400 film in rodinal 1+25 i prefer ilford hp5+ to tri-x Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
vic vic Posted December 1, 2006 Share #19 Posted December 1, 2006 hi all hope my description will be of some help to those who still have the DIGNITY with photography and shot film :-))))) p.g - i really loved many of the images on your website... the contrast between the city before and after the disaster is very emotionally charging. andy... very true.. too much experiments are disturbing... photographers r not supposed to be technical people too much. crister.. a nice film that somewhat combines all the qualities of finess of super-modern films with some beauty of traditional films is fuji acros 100. very nice film and worth a try. and ya.. i also think that hp5 is a better film especially for push (well maybe i say it because i so femilar with it). with it, the tri-x 320 is the most beautiful film on 4x5" format in my opinion. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Antony Posted December 2, 2006 Share #20 Posted December 2, 2006 I use Rodinal mainly at 1:100. I find it gives a lovely full range of tones with mono films that otherwise have too much 'punch' for my taste. I use for Acros rated at 80ISO 18mins @ 20c with agitation for 30 sec them every 2 mins for 10 secs For plus -x I use 100ISO 16 mins 1:100 same agitation. I get a very nice tonal range with plus-x http://www.pbase.com/mark_antony/image/65931924 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.