Any advice for new Rondinax user?

RLangham · Jul 5, 2020

So a relative insisted on buying me a birthday present, and it happened to be that he knew where a Rondinax 35 U was for very cheap.

I had always wanted one, since I find using a dark bag to load my Yankee Clipper or Paterson is a bit of a hassle. I just tried it out and I wasn't disappointed. Loading was incredibly smooth even with a slightly wet reel, and the spout makes pouring chemicals back in the bottle very easy. I don't think I'll use my round tanks for anything but 120 now. I used 7-to-1 Dektol and an acid stop, and got good results by shake agitating for about five seconds out of thirty, which is the same routine I use with a round tank.

But I would like the thoughts of more experienced Rondinax users.

I watched a video by that Zenography guy and he seems to agitate by turning the winding handle, which has two problems to me: first, the loading guide then rubs against the outermost layer of film and scratches it. Second, when I was done loading the reel and cutting the film, I tightened down the winding handle to make more of a seal between the three gaskets and the tank, to avoid leakage... I note that the Zenography guy complains of leakage around the gaskets, having left them loose. Obviously turning the handle with the gaskets so extremely tight would wear on them, and I don't want to have to make replacements, so I would tend not to agitate by turning the handle.

So what is the agitation routine you use? And by the way, what's the minimum volume in oz. that will cover all the film? I put in about a pint and that seemed to be slightly too much, as it went into the film canister area and leaked from there.

AgX · Jul 5, 2020

The manual says "200ml".
It's up to you to calculate that into your unit.

The manual further says
-) to twist the knob continuously in a jerky way during pouring in of the bath
-) to bang the tank to release bubbles
-) to twist the knob every 2nd second in a jerky way during developing
-) to twist the knob during pouring out

-) to tighten the seal just that much that the knob still can be easily twisted

RLangham · Jul 5, 2020

AgX said:
The manual says "200ml".
It's up to you to calculate that into your unit.

The manual further says
-) to twist the knob continuously in a jerky way during pouring in of the bath
-) to bang the tank to release bubbles
-) to twist the knob every 2nd second in a jerky way during developing
-) to twist the knob during pouring out

-) to tighten the seal just that much that the knob still can be easily twisted

Ok, that all seems to suggest they didn't mean all the film to be submerged at once. I don't think I like that idea, especially for color development.

EDIT: I poured 200ml of water into the open tank-- it doesn't even come up to the axle hole. All due respect to the makers but I don't want to have to agitate that much or calculate development times if the film is always partially exposed to the air. I get that it would remain wet but it would still have places where the developer would evaporate and leave the film being underdeveloped in patches. That doesn't seem ideal.

abruzzi · Jul 5, 2020

I think the idea is to continuously agitate, turning the film on the reel through the developer. This is essentially what happens with Jobo or other continuous agitation systems. You only use enough chemistry to cover the lower half of the film, and the agitation takes care of the rest. It does mean potentially different dev times. The Lab Box, which is essentially a new clone of the Rodinax, has instructions for a half load of chemicals, or a whole load. The half load requires constant agitation because it doesn’t submerge the entire roll.

Donald Qualls · Jul 5, 2020

The partial submersion method works very well with continuous agitation -- and if the liquid doesn't come up to the knob shaft, it won't leak from there.

In essence, what continuous agitation with partial immersion does is the same as the old "see-saw" method Kodak used to recommend for developing roll film in trays (or for developing a 10x15 print in an 8x10 tray) -- or what a lot of the old movie film developing tanks did, in a slightly different way, by cranking the film from one reel to another, both reels submerged, but the film wound on the reel so not accessible to fresh developer between transfers.

The developer soaked into the emulsion continues to work for some time; as long as the film is back in the liquid before it exhausts, development will work as if continuous. You might note that times for Jobo and similar processing tend to be shorter than those for inversion tanks -- because the film gets fresh developer more frequently and more aggressively.

Even in an inversion tank, you can develop two rolls in liquid that only covers one (providing it has enough active developer -- this is a stock solution stunt, not one for highly diluted developers), if you use continuous agitation. You may see a very slight increase in contrast in the bottom roll vs. the top one (because it gets immersed first), but you might not, as well, because that same roll gets the stop bath first. I'd recommend trying this only in a stainless tank, rather than a Paterson or clone which has a lot of air space at the top under the funnel lid and inversion cap...

MattKing · Jul 5, 2020

From time to time I use continuous rotary agitation with half filled Paterson tanks and replenished developer.
It works fine, although because of a tendency for 120 film to wander in the reels, I've gravitated to using inversion agitation during the development stage.

RLangham · Jul 5, 2020

Ok, so I'm getting to where I'm fine with the idea of continuous partially submerged agitation, but I still say the pivoting guide that funnels the film into the reel will sit down on and scratch the outermost film in this particular model of tank.

RLangham · Jul 5, 2020

Even in an inversion tank, you can develop two rolls in liquid that only covers one (providing it has enough active developer -- this is a stock solution stunt, not one for highly diluted developers), if you use continuous agitation. You may see a very slight increase in contrast in the bottom roll vs. the top one (because it gets immersed first), but you might not, as well, because that same roll gets the stop bath first. I'd recommend trying this only in a stainless tank, rather than a Paterson or clone which has a lot of air space at the top under the funnel lid and inversion cap...

Yes, I couldn't with my Paterson--it leaks from the gasket and the funnel lid furiously if I overfill it and shake it.

pentaxuser · Jul 5, 2020

This thread could be re-named as " Help me Rondinax, help, help me Rondinax" Perhaps more eye-catching and it would appear that Rondinax helped the Beach Boys back in 1965.

Just a suggestion

pentaxuser

RLangham · Jul 5, 2020

pentaxuser said:
This thread could be re-named as " Help me Rondinax, help, help me Rondinax" Perhaps more eye-catching and it would appear that Rondinax helped the Beach Boys back in 1965.

Just a suggestion

pentaxuser

Who knows? They could have dabbled in photography and been able to afford the best in niche photo equipment.

Not the Beach Boys, but I know Ringo Starr was, like you, a Pentax user...

AgX · Jul 5, 2020

RLangham said:
I don't think I like that idea, especially for color development.

As far as I can see, Agfa never advised a Rondinax for colour development, but I think it is doable. Either by immersing the tank in a tempering bath, or by employing Kodak's method of filling tempered processing bath into a cold processing tank (described in one of their late processing manuals).
The higher temperature puts strain on the thermometer, but it should stand it.

RLangham · Jul 5, 2020

AgX said:
As far as I can see, Agfa never advised a Rondinax for colour development, but I think it is doable. Either by immersing the tank in a tempering bath, or by employing Kodak's method of filling tempered processing bath into a cold processing tank (described in one of their late processing manuals).
The higher temperature puts strain on the thermometer, but it should stand it.

Oof, now that you mention it, that would be asking a lot of that thermometer. It goes up to 83 F and about 30 C... do you know how these alchohol thermometers behave when overheated by about ten degrees Celsius or twenty degrees Fahrenheit?

MattKing · Jul 5, 2020

RLangham said:
do you know how these alchohol thermometers behave when overheated by about ten degrees Celsius or twenty degrees Fahrenheit?

Poof!

RLangham · Jul 5, 2020

MattKing said:
Poof!

Eesh... so I suppose I'd have to look up the color developing times for 83 F.

AgX · Jul 5, 2020

The capillary goes to 33°C and then starts a little bulb space.
One should not forget that already at transport or storage (attic) it easily will undergo higher temperatures.

RLangham · Jul 5, 2020

AgX said:
The capillary goes to 33°C and then starts a little bulb space.
One should not forget that already at transport or storage (attic) it easily will undergo higher temperatures.

I suppose you're right...

AgX · Jul 5, 2020

Partial submersion:
It is as old as spooled film, a most common developing technique in commercial photography. The OP seemingly got the misconception that the moment the film leaves the bath development will cease.This is not the case as fluid has diffused into the emulsion and in addition there is a liquid-film clinging to the emulsion surface. However, the longer the off-bath period is, the greater the chance for high-density areas to deplete the developer: Something that would lead to lesser contrast compared to film being always within the bath. But this typically can be controllled by rotation speed.
The extreme in this context is reel-to-reel development, which in effect mean spartial submersion too, but this was a niche-technique anyway.

AgX · Jul 5, 2020

RLangham said:
Ok, so I'm getting to where I'm fine with the idea of continuous partially submerged agitation, but I still say the pivoting guide that funnels the film into the reel will sit down on and scratch the outermost film in this particular model of tank.

Are you sure you operate the reel the right way? That is the prescribed direction. Otherwise the funnel would glide into the film winding.
In any case the points of the funnel should not scratch the film. If in doubt you can grind them round and polish them.

RLangham · Jul 5, 2020

AgX said:
Are you sure you operate the reel the right way? That is the prescribed direction. Otherwise the funnel would glide into the film winding.
In any case the points of the funnel should not scratch the film. If in doubt you can grind them round and polish them.

I thought just about anything could leave a mark on wet film... though I suppose the emulsion is away from the funnel.

Donald Qualls · Jul 6, 2020

RLangham said:
I thought just about anything could leave a mark on wet film... though I suppose the emulsion is away from the funnel.

There's gelatin on the base side of most films, too. Anti-curl coating, something to hold dye for antihalation, anti-static... And yes, it scratches more easily than the actual plastic film base. Base side scratches are a thing, but very seldom deep enough to penetrate the acetate/polyester.

OTOH, I'm pretty sure that if there were film scratching issues with the Rondinax (or the new LabBox multi-format Rondinax copy), we've had heard about it, either in more than fifty years that the Rondinax has been around, or in the hoopla surrounding the Kickstarter, beta tests, and actual fulfillment for the LabBox (which is or was commercially available after the Kickstarter was fulfilled). From what I've seen (videos of the LabBox loading process) it doesn't look like the film guide actually touches the film once loading is completed -- that is, it's just clear of the outside of the reel, which itself is proud of the outermost film surface, even with a maximum length film roll (as long as you didn't bulk load 45 exposures in a 35mm cassette, for instance).

Deleted member 88956 · Jul 6, 2020

There is a very good video on YT showing Rondinax in actual use, not much else is to add. It is effective but testong will be needed to get development right. For color film ... I doubt this is what you want.

RLangham · Jul 6, 2020

Donald Qualls said:
There's gelatin on the base side of most films, too. Anti-curl coating, something to hold dye for antihalation, anti-static... And yes, it scratches more easily than the actual plastic film base. Base side scratches are a thing, but very seldom deep enough to penetrate the acetate/polyester.

OTOH, I'm pretty sure that if there were film scratching issues with the Rondinax (or the new LabBox multi-format Rondinax copy), we've had heard about it, either in more than fifty years that the Rondinax has been around, or in the hoopla surrounding the Kickstarter, beta tests, and actual fulfillment for the LabBox (which is or was commercially available after the Kickstarter was fulfilled). From what I've seen (videos of the LabBox loading process) it doesn't look like the film guide actually touches the film once loading is completed -- that is, it's just clear of the outside of the reel, which itself is proud of the outermost film surface, even with a maximum length film roll (as long as you didn't bulk load 45 exposures in a 35mm cassette, for instance).

Upon examination, there does seem to be some component that pushes the film guide up off the film, since after you load a 24 frame roll, cut it and give it an extra turn, the guide indicator lifts up and points to "36"

bnxvs · Jul 6, 2020

AgX · Jul 6, 2020

Does anyone use the film-lenght indicator at the side of the Rondinax 35U ?

RLangham · Jul 6, 2020

AgX said:
Does anyone use the film-lenght indicator at the side of the Rondinax 35U ?

What do you mean? It's automatic.

AgX · Jul 6, 2020

At the operating side you will see an opening with right to it the figures 12, 24, 36. In the opening you can see an indicator, connected to the funnel you had it about in the contetext of scratching. The funnel thus acts as feeler for the windings.
By reading this "meter", due to its imprecision rather a indicator, one gets an idea of the length of film already fed to the spool. Thus if knowing about the numbers of exposures done, one can by this indicator roughly control the lenght to be cut off and be processed. This is an alternative to opening the camera in the dark and cutting off the lenght already exposed. The daylight alternative of course fits the daylight-handling idea behind this Rondinax.

Any advice for new Rondinax user?

RLangham

AgX

RLangham

abruzzi

Donald Qualls

MattKing

Moderator

RLangham

RLangham

pentaxuser

RLangham

AgX

RLangham

MattKing

Moderator

RLangham

AgX

RLangham

AgX

AgX

RLangham

Donald Qualls

Deleted member 88956

RLangham

bnxvs

AgX

RLangham

AgX

Any advice for new Rondinax user?

Moderator

Moderator

Deleted member 88956

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency