Kentmere 200 and Studional

[Rob_0509]

Hello everyone. I'd like to develop a Kentmere 200 film (120 format) in the Compard R09 Studio (Studional) developer. I've searched the web, but without success. Does anyone here have a recommended time/dilution combination? Thank you very much.

 

[koraks]

Welcome aboard @Rob_0509 !

While the times are often not verified, I still mostly find them a good starting point - have a look at the Massive Development Chart: https://www.digitaltruth.com/devcha...er=Rodinal&mdc=Search&TempUnits=C&TimeUnits=D

Kentmere 200	Rodinal	1+25	200	10	10	20C
Kentmere 200	Rodinal	1+25	200	6	20C
Kentmere 200	Rodinal	1+25	200	8.5	24C	[notes]
Kentmere 200	Rodinal	1+50	200	11.75	20C
Kentmere 200	Rodinal	1+50	200	12	20C
Kentmere 200	Rodinal	1+50	200	10	20C
Kentmere 200	Rodinal	1+75	200	17	20C	[notes]
Kentmere 200	Rodinal	1+100	200	60	20C	[notes]
Kentmere 200	Rodinal	1+25	800	22.5	20C

 

[Rob_0509]

Thank you for your reply. That's a good starting point. Thank you for this chart.

 

[john_s]

Is Compard R09 Studio (Studional) the same as (or very similar to) the old Agfa Studional (which Agfa also called Rodinal Special)?

If so, it's nothing like Rodinal. It's a phenidone and hydroquinone developer, not diluted anywhere near Rodinal's dilutions, and was, one could say, more "conventional."

 

[mshchem]

I use stock XTOL, 8 minutes @ 20°C, continuous (Jobo) rotary agitation.

 

[Rob_0509]

Is Compard R09 Studio (Studional) the same as (or very similar to) the old Agfa Studional (which Agfa also called Rodinal Special)?

If so, it's nothing like Rodinal. It's a phenidone and hydroquinone developer, not diluted anywhere near Rodinal's dilutions, and was, one could say, more "conventional."

Yes, Compard R09 Studio is the same (or very similar) developer as Agfa Studional or Rodinal Special. It's a different product from the "classic" Rodinal. The times and dilutions indicated for Rodinal with Kentmere 200 can be a guideline, but shouldn't be used as is. The problem is that Kentmere 200 is a recent film, and there are still few references for developers using it. Agfa's Studional hasn't been produced for several years. It has recently been reintroduced, to my knowledge by Compard and Bergger, and its database of film developers is quite small compared to other developers. I think I'll buy a bottle of Rodinal to develop the Kentmere 200; it's less risky than experimenting with Studional. Studional is an excellent developer; I appreciate using it for its ease of use and the results it produces. But it still lacks some references to certain films.

 

[koraks]

Is Compard R09 Studio (Studional) the same as (or very similar to) the old Agfa Studional (which Agfa also called Rodinal Special)?

If so, it's nothing like Rodinal. It's a phenidone and hydroquinone developer, not diluted anywhere near Rodinal's dilutions, and was, one could say, more "conventional."

Good catch; my apologies, disregard my earlier post!

 

[Rob_0509]

Good catch; my apologies, disregard my earlier post!

No problem. It's true that the names originally given by Agfa and other manufacturers who adopted the formulas of these two chemistries are confusing: Rodinal, Rodinal Special (or Spezial), Studional, Rodinal R09 OneShot, Rodinal R09 Studio. It's not always easy to keep track of them.

 

[Keith Tapscott.]

The company that produced it should delete this R09 part on the label to stop people confusing it with Rodinal.

 

[Rob_0509]

Yes

The company that produced it should delete this R09 part on the label to stop people confusing it with Rodinal.

Yes, I totally agree

 

[Rob_0509]

I decided to try developing Kentmere 200 film in Studional. I based my calculations on the development times for Kentmere 100 and 400 in this developer: 8 and 10 minutes respectively in 1+31 dilution (Bergger Studional table). I opted for 9 minutes in 1+31 dilution at 20°C for Kentmere 200 exposed at ISO 200. The result is quite good (in my opinion, but I'm not an expert). I think it's a good starting point, probably to be refined depending on the shooting conditions and the desired result. Perhaps this will be useful to other members of the community in the future.

 

[John Wiegerink]

I decided to try developing Kentmere 200 film in Studional. I based my calculations on the development times for Kentmere 100 and 400 in this developer: 8 and 10 minutes respectively in 1+31 dilution (Bergger Studional table). I opted for 9 minutes in 1+31 dilution at 20°C for Kentmere 200 exposed at ISO 200. The result is quite good (in my opinion, but I'm not an expert). I think it's a good starting point, probably to be refined depending on the shooting conditions and the desired result. Perhaps this will be useful to other members of the community in the future.

I think most developers on the market right now are very good so it's a matter of choice based on whatever the photographer wants in the end. There are certain developers that do make a difference in the ends results, just ask folks who do alternative processes. If you like what you got with Studional then stick with it until it doesn't please you anymore. There are folks here that tried Rodinal as their first developer years ago and have never tried anything else to this day. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

 

[miha]

The company that produced it should delete this R09 part on the label to stop people confusing it with Rodinal.

The confusion is not from yesterday. Even in Agfa times, Agfa Rodinal Special, Agfa Rodinal Spezial, and Agfa Studional were the same developer under different names.

 

[Rob_0509]

I think most developers on the market right now are very good so it's a matter of choice based on whatever the photographer wants in the end. There are certain developers that do make a difference in the ends results, just ask folks who do alternative processes. If you like what you got with Studional then stick with it until it doesn't please you anymore. There are folks here that tried Rodinal as their first developer years ago and have never tried anything else to this day. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

I also think that most of the developers currently available are very good. I've used several and I've never been disappointed. Studional is perhaps my favorite… along with Diafine.

 

[Rob_0509]

The confusion is not from yesterday. Even in Agfa times, Agfa Rodinal Special, Agfa Rodinal Spezial, and Agfa Studional were the same developer under different names.

Indeed, I remember that at that time, manufacturers liked to play with the names of their products, and it wasn't always easy to keep up

 

[Paul Howell]

I recall reading a story in a photo magazine sometime in the early 70s discussing adding Sodium Sulfite to Edwal FG7, the author mentiond that he added Sodium Sulfite to Rodinal to make Rodinal Special for increase film speed and finer grain.

 

[Rob_0509]

I don't know the exact composition of Studional; I think it's a developer based on phenidone and hydroquinone. I read that it also contains triethanolamine. In any case, it's a different product from Rodinal; it's not better or worse, just different. The confusion between the two products stems from the fact that Agfa made the marketing decision to change the original names—Agfa Rodinal and Agfa Studional—to Rodinal and Rodinal Spezial. It's possible, even certain, that in the past, photographers experimented by modifying the Rodinal formula to obtain different results compared to the original formula. Currently, Studional is available under the following names: Compard R09 Studio, Bergger Studional, and Bellini Hydrofen, which acquired the entire catalog of Ornano, a company that marketed an equivalent to Studional: Ornano STD.

 

[Paul Howell]

I used the Agfa version of Studional when a lab closed and sold me a case for $20.00. Lasted 3 years. I liked it, used standard Rodinal for larger negatives Studional for 35mm and 6X6.

 

[Rob_0509]

I started out in film photography using Rodinal, and I was happy with it. Well, to be fair, back then I was just happy if there was anything at all on the negatives . Joking aside, it's an excellent developer; it definitely evokes strong feelings—you either love or hate its characteristics. Since then, I've used many others, generally with great satisfaction. Studional (which I just discovered) is my current favorite. I used Bellini Hydrofen four years ago, without realizing it was an equivalent of Studional… but I have some doubts about the actual similarity between the original Studional and the product marketed by Bellini. The recommended times and dilutions are different, and personally, I find the results better with the "real" Studional, but that's just my personal opinion. I'm hesitating between spending my retirement with Studional or going back to Diafine.

 

[Paul Howell]

Diafine is now very expensive, (at least here in the U.S) now over a hundred dollars U.S a gallon, quart kits are hard to find.

 

[Rob_0509]

Yes, it's very expensive. In Europe, it's about €60 ($73) for the original Diafine to make one US gallon. Bellini (him again) sells a liquid version to make 2 liters of stock solution for €40 ($49). It's certainly an expensive developer to buy, but it can be economical to use given its shelf life and film capacity; that's just my opinion.

 

[Paul Howell]

More expensive here than in the E.U, you are right it will process an lot of roll, long shelf life.