Tips on using rodinal

[Aryel]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello,

Wanted to try Rodinal for quite some time already and I finally managed to find some (made by Rollei). 

I am planning to try it out on Fp4+, sfx200, and Hp5, maybe on delta3200 too. I shoot 35mm and medium format. Main application is darkroom printing. As far as I understood, a good starting point is 1:50. 

Any tips or advises?

Thanks a lot 😊

Edited October 9, 2021 by Aryel
Forgot to say: I usually use dd-x and id11

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[chrism]

With the increase in accutance, it can seem to increase grain. The fix for this is to avoid underexposure and excessive agitation. I'm fond of using it semi-stand, as this tames the tendency to grain, but have just this morning developed a roll of Adox CHS 25 in 1+50 for eight minutes with continuous agitation (motorized Lab-Box), and the drying negatives look just right.

[Pyrogallol]

Rodinal is my usual developer for FP4 and has been for several years. I use it 1:25 for 8 minutes with agitation, inverting tank, roughly every minute. I leave the last minute of development without agitation to add to the edge definition, but I can’t say it makes any noticeable difference. It can be grainy sometimes which might be if the temperature is a couple of degrees too high.

I recently bought some Fomapan 100 with their version of R09 Rodinal called Fomadon,  as it was on special offer together. The Fomadon R09 must be double concentrate as it only needs half the time, so I used it 1:50 for 9 minutes.

Another developer I use is Moersch Tanol, a two part staining developer which gives very nice smooth negatives that print well without being grainy.

Rodinal lasts very well, right to the end of the bottle, don’t worry about it looking dark brown, it lasts like that for years.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited October 9, 2021 by Pyrogallol

[spydrxx]

Have been using rodinal for a couple of years now. Mostly with semi stand development at 1:50 or 1:100. I prefer the pyro developers for tonality, but that bottle of rodinal does seem to last forever.

[Aryel]

Thanks a lot for the information. Thinking to start with fp4+. I think I will try   
@Pyrogallolmethod and develop the first roll with 1:25 and 8 minutes with agitation every minute and take it from there. 

@Pyrogallolhow do you usually expose the film when shooting? 

@chrism, @spydrxx, would you mind sharing how you develop semi-stand? Sounds really interesting to try as well.

Many thanks for your help. So many things to learn and try 🙂.

[chrism]

Semi-stand method is like this:

Use 1+100 dilution, and the one part of Rodinal ought to be at least 5ml per roll of film, so 505ml total for one film. Have to use a tank large enough for that, ruling out little tanks like a single roll Nikor for 35mm. Invert for the first 30 seconds, then set the tank down with a couple of bangs to knock out bubbles - easier to dislodge bubbles through the wider gaps of a metal Hewes reel than the plastic reel of a Paterson. Bubbles tend to gather at the top edge of the film and will leave round marks all along that edge if allowed to stay there. Invert again at 30 minutes, two or three times. Set down with a couple of bangs again, and once more leave the tank untouched for 30 minutes. At the end of the second 30 minute period (60 minutes total development), pour out and use a water stop; you can use stop bath, but it isn't really needed for a developer this dilute. Fix and wash as usual.

[Pyrogallol]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

FP4 at 100 iso using a handheld meter usually with the incident cover on the meter.

[Ornello]

Best advice is to use something else. Rodinal is the worst developer ever made. Try FX-39 instead, or D76 1:1.

[chrism]

31 minutes ago, Ornello said:

Best advice is to use something else. Rodinal is the worst developer ever made. Try FX-39 instead, or D76 1:1.

I wouldn't be quite so definitive. I use Rodinal where experience has shown it will work and give me nice results. It certainly could be used for everything, and maybe if I tried different regimes it would be good enough, but I currently reserve it for semi-stand 1+100 where it gives superb results on XP2 Super, and Delta 3200, and it is by far the easiest to use on my stock of old Adox CHS25.  I prefer to use HC-110 for my favourite XP2 (or Diafine if exposing at 200), and HC-110 can also be used for semi-stand development with time adjustments for film speed (I came across a sticky inside a cupboard door a few days ago from when I worked out the regime for 1+125 HC-110: 1 hour for ISO400, adding 30mins for each extra stop of film speed). But for slow films where grain isn't an issue, conventional development is quicker and just as good.

I suspect the message should be the same as for so many things; start with one developer, and get to know it inside out before playing the field and experimenting.

[Steve Ricoh]

On 10/9/2021 at 12:07 PM, Aryel said:

Hello,

Wanted to try Rodinal for quite some time already and I finally managed to find some (made by Rollei). 

I am planning to try it out on Fp4+, sfx200, and Hp5, maybe on delta3200 too. I shoot 35mm and medium format. Main application is darkroom printing. As far as I understood, a good starting point is 1:50. 

Any tips or advises?

Thanks a lot 😊

I recently developed HP4+ in Rodinal: 1+25 at 25C, 9 minutes, inverting as I would if developing in HC110 (starting temperature as far as I’m concerned is anything that comes out of the tap, unless it’s less than 20C). Nice grain.

Next up, I’m going for the same dilution at 30C using the cheapest film, such as Kentmere. 
But there again I love grain, like golf balls, but I respect some don’t like or choose the same aesthetics. 

[Aryel]

@chrism: thanks a lot, I’ll try semi-stand too with a roll of delta3200. Have one ready to be developed. 

@Ornello: only way to find out if it works for me is to try. 

@Steve Ricoh: very interesting too: water is around 28celsius here. I never thought of trying. I like grain a lot usually. I have some cheap film in the fridge. I’ll try this at some point too but I will keep this for later.  It would also make life easier 😊.  Thanks a lot for sharing. 

[Steve Ricoh]

24 minutes ago, Aryel said:

@chrism: thanks a lot, I’ll try semi-stand too with a roll of delta3200. Have one ready to be developed. 

@Ornello: only way to find out if it works for me is to try. 

@Steve Ricoh: very interesting too: water is around 28celsius here. I never thought of trying. I like grain a lot usually. I have some cheap film in the fridge. I’ll try this at some point too but I will keep this for later.  It would also make life easier 😊.  Thanks a lot for sharing. 

I’ve posted a couple of my Rodinal developed HP4+ over on the ‘I love film’ thread, should you be interested in the results I’m getting.

If you’re a fellow grain lover, a tip I was given is to use a cheap film as mentioned previously, underexpose, ie rate 400 Kentmere at 1600, and develop hot in Rodinal 1+25 agitating as though you were using ‘baby’ developers. 

[Pyrogallol]

Years ago for extra grain I used Tri X in print developer.

[Ornello]

21 hours ago, chrism said:

I wouldn't be quite so definitive. I use Rodinal where experience has shown it will work and give me nice results. It certainly could be used for everything, and maybe if I tried different regimes it would be good enough, but I currently reserve it for semi-stand 1+100 where it gives superb results on XP2 Super, and Delta 3200, and it is by far the easiest to use on my stock of old Adox CHS25.  I prefer to use HC-110 for my favourite XP2 (or Diafine if exposing at 200), and HC-110 can also be used for semi-stand development with time adjustments for film speed (I came across a sticky inside a cupboard door a few days ago from when I worked out the regime for 1+125 HC-110: 1 hour for ISO400, adding 30mins for each extra stop of film speed). But for slow films where grain isn't an issue, conventional development is quicker and just as good.

I suspect the message should be the same as for so many things; start with one developer, and get to know it inside out before playing the field and experimenting.

Rodinal produces lower speed, rather nasty graininess, and poor definition. It ranked last in developers. This was established in a series of tests done by Leica Fotografie back around 1968. I have attached the scans of the article. Note that Rodinal gives the worst performance on every film. With very slow films, there is little difference, because such films are so sharp and fine-grained to begin with. But with medium- and high-speed films, there are far better choices.

LF Film-developer survey4.pdf LF Film-developer survey3.pdf LF Film-developer survey2.pdf LF Film-developer survey.pdf

Edited October 10, 2021 by Ornello

[chrism]

I note the table of results shows Rodinal producing the same level of graininess as D-76. That surprised me; I thought it would have performed less well.

[Doug A]

I was surprised that Rodinal did as well as reported here for these objective measures. My only quibble with their tests might be with the 23x magnification for what they admit is a subjective evaluation of graininess. Surely 10x or 12x would have been more realistic, and might well have produced different results. 

But in the real world all that really matters in evaluating film/developer combinations is the subjective impression of the print. And the higher acutance (edge contrast) of most films developed in Rodinal creates a greater impression of sharpness in the print. For some photographers that is a more important consideration than speed, resolution or graininess. It is not only the very low cost and very long shelf life of Rodinal that have kept it on the market for 130 years. 

Edited October 11, 2021 by Doug A
grammar

[Aryel]

12 hours ago, Steve Ricoh said:

I’ve posted a couple of my Rodinal developed HP4+ over on the ‘I love film’ thread, should you be interested in the results I’m getting.

Thanks, I did a search on Rodinal and found plenty of beautiful photos, I am sure to reach yours soon 😊. 

6 hours ago, Ornello said:

odinal produces lower speed, rather nasty graininess, and poor definition. It ranked last in developers.

Thanks for sharing this survey. It is interesting, maybe this also explains the special look. 

I haven’t been very adventurous in my darkroom journey so far. Excited to try something new to me and messing up with cheap films sound quite fun. I find my photography a bit repetitive these days and I am also hoping that exploring a radically different developer (vs dd-x) will in turn also encourage me to explore different venues whilst shooting. I am also after a ‘dreamy’ look, for a mini project trying to explore a bit more abstract photography. I have plenty of reasons to try the worst developer but the main one is that I usually find the images I see attractive. 

[Pyrogallol]

Most of the time I am using pre-war uncoated Leica screw lenses so an extra bit of grittyness and contrast helps the result.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Aryel]

18 minutes ago, Pyrogallol said:

Most of the time I am using pre-war uncoated Leica screw lenses so an extra bit of grittyness and contrast helps the result.

I am waiting for a 1941 Summitar for this purpose. I could not resist picking  it up along the v1 summicron 50 I wanted to try.  Supposed to arrive today 😊

[Ornello]

On 10/10/2021 at 8:40 PM, Doug A said:

I was surprised that Rodinal did as well as reported here for these objective measures. My only quibble with their tests might be with the 23x magnification for what they admit is a subjective evaluation of graininess. Surely 10x or 12x would have been more realistic, and might well have produced different results. 

But in the real world all that really matters in evaluating film/developer combinations is the subjective impression of the print. And the higher acutance (edge contrast) of most films developed in Rodinal creates a greater impression of sharpness in the print. For some photographers that is a more important consideration than speed, resolution or graininess. It is not only the very low cost and very long shelf life of Rodinal that have kept it on the market for 130 years. 

Actually, Rodinal does not give high acutance, at least not higher than most developers. It is a non-solvent developer, but not all non-solvent developers are high acutance, though all high-acutance developers are low- or non-solvent..

For those who want what Rodinal is supposed to offer, I suggest FX-39 II, at 1+14 dilution, using the times for the 1 +9 dilution.

See:

https://www.catalinsamoila.com/perfect-developer/

Edited October 15, 2021 by Ornello