Comparing grains, Rodinal & Xtol

MsLing

Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2023
Messages
103
Location
Guangzhou China
Format
Multi Format
So a brainwave I caught, and it drove me to compare grains that various developer produced. I chose 10x objective and a eyepiece camera which IDK its magnification factor. Maybe 15x I guess. Sheets I selected were both Foma Retro 320 Soft, yes only two sheets in same case so that I can control variables well. One sheet was developed by Rollei R09, a variant of Rodinal. Dilution 1+300, 24C, 180min, agitate 10s every 60min. Another was result of Xtol stock. Developer temp was 21C, agitate 10s per min.


This is R09.

And this is Xtol.

Obviously, R09, though diluted in such a crazy ratio, still made sharper and larger grains, they are violent under microscope. Xtol's seems much finer, I think high solvent cause the fact.

BTW, I also made some shoots check whether my Epson is sharp and focused well or not. It's not bad, right? And I shouldn't use Retro 320 if I'd like to achieve higher resolution.


This photo was shot with microscope.
 

koraks

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Nov 29, 2018
Messages
21,963
Location
Europe
Format
Multi Format
MsLing said:
BTW, I also made some shoots check whether my Epson is sharp and focused well or not. It's not bad, right?
Click to expand...

Hard to tell; it's a 4x5 sheet we're looking at, so even a somewhat fuzzy scan at this size would still look sharp. But at this size it certainly looks just fine!

The difference in grain is pretty big, isn't it? I noticed something similar the other day when I was scanning some Fomapan 400 negatives processed in different developers.

510 Pyro


Pyrocat HD

For the grain comparison, did you select areas of equal density on both negatives? I admit the comparison I posted is sloppy in this respect. Grain renders very differently depending on density - and the way it's observed (photographed, scanned, enlarged) also makes a big difference. It's quite a tricky subject if you think about it. Overall, your observation of course rings true - R09 stand developed for a couple of hours will give much coarser grain than XTOL.
 
OP
OP

MsLing

Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2023
Messages
103
Location
Guangzhou China
Format
Multi Format
koraks said:
For the grain comparison, did you select areas of equal density on both negatives?
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, my densitometer passed away last year, then I used my spotmeter to find two area that were both 90lux. Highlight with red arrow.

 

Paul Howell

Subscriber
Joined
Dec 23, 2004
Messages
9,594
Location
Scottsdale Az
Format
Multi Format
Wonder what the grain would if you compared R9 at 1"25 to 1:300? As I print 4X5 only up to 11X14 for past several years I've been using DK50 and Acufine for increased sharpness, gain is good with 4X5.
 

retina_restoration

Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2023
Messages
1,046
Location
Wilammette Valley, Oregon
Format
35mm RF
Nothing surprising here. I don't mind how Rodinal and its clones renders grain size, but what I do find objectionable is how it makes grain clumpy, with uneven blobs of varying density in areas of continuous tone.
 

F4U

Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2025
Messages
381
Location
Florida
Format
8x10 Format
Rodinal was invented in the 1890's. Back then most any film format produced a large enough negative that grain was not really considered. Most ordinary people would not have owned a camera at all, or owned a Kodak "you push the button, we do the rest". Actually Rodinal is still perfectly acceptable stuff on large format photography to this day..
 

loccdor

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 12, 2024
Messages
1,502
Location
USA
Format
Multi Format
You can reduce grain in Rodinal by using a higher concentration like 1+25. The dilute 1+300 you used actually accentuates grain. Although it's never a low-grain developer, with some slow films it has minimal grain (Agfa Scala 50 aka HR-50 for example, also Kodak Technical Pan).

In 35mm and at 400 speed, I rarely use Rodinal. Not only for grain but also film speed. But I don't mind its grain in medium format or higher.
 

albireo

Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2017
Messages
1,352
Location
Europe
Format
Multi Format
I absolutely love Rodinal on 100 ISO 120 film, exposed and developed correctly. With Foma 100 in 6x6 I use nothing else than the humble Fomadon R09 1:50, regularly inverted (I like to do once per minute). The straight curve of Foma 100 in Rodinal 1:50 is something to behold. I think someone had shown plots of it on here some time ago.

Even Acros II looks gorgeous in it - which reminds me I need to buy a couple of rolls for the Spring sun.

Nothing clumpy or or uneven whatsoever about Rodinal, unless I've tortured the negative with atrocities like 'stand' or 'semistand' development. Underexposure and/or overdevelopment are the death of Rodinal.
 
Last edited:

Sirius Glass

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
50,283
Location
Southern California
Format
Multi Format
I would expect XTOL, replenished XTOL and all forms of Pyro to produce small grained negatives based on what I have experienced and read.
 

Lachlan Young

Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2005
Messages
4,900
Location
Glasgow
Format
Multi Format
Rodinal is not sharper than Xtol/ D-76 etc, but much grainier - that much has been repeatedly shown from high quality microdensitometry over the years. What hasn't seemed to have made much of a splash with people (outside of industry materials) is that pH and sharpness seem to follow essentially a bell shaped distribution - peaking at about a ph of 10, but with D-76 and Rodinal essentially sitting parallel. At that point, it rapidly starts to become clear why (despite them easily having the means to do so) none of the big western manufacturers post-WW2 chose to make a direct Rodinal equivalent - especially if you are tasked to make a developer that is as capable at 30x enlargements as at 4x.
 

RalphLambrecht

Subscriber
Joined
Sep 19, 2003
Messages
14,628
Location
K,Germany
Format
Medium Format

and if used with modern films, such as, Tmax, or FP4+, it is surprisingly fine-grained and not much different from D76 1+1 in my tests.
 
OP
OP

MsLing

Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2023
Messages
103
Location
Guangzhou China
Format
Multi Format
Paul Howell said:
Wonder what the grain would if you compared R9 at 1"25 to 1:300? As I print 4X5 only up to 11X14 for past several years I've been using DK50 and Acufine for increased sharpness, gain is good with 4X5.
Click to expand...

I'll try next time. I always use high diluting ratio that higher than 1:100 to make film curve easy to be printed without densitometer.
 

Film-Niko

Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2009
Messages
708
Format
Multi Format
MsLing said:
Obviously, R09, though diluted in such a crazy ratio, still made sharper and larger grains, they are violent under microscope. Xtol's seems much finer, I think high solvent cause the fact.

This photo was shot with microscope.
Click to expand...

I am checking my film and BW developer test results regularly with 12x loupe and a microscope. Differences are of course always more obvious and easier to identify at high(er) enlargements.

General results:
- Stand development with Rodinal is not recommended: Grain is coarser, resolution lower (due to swelling) compared to standard development. Also you get very uneven development with big density differences across the negative (easy measurable with a densitometer). And additionally the danger of bromide stripes (esp. with 35mm film).
To tame high contrast with Rodinal the best method is to use 1+75 or 1+100 dilution and one turn / agitation every 60 seconds. By that you'll get the contrast tamed to the wanted level, but you avoid all the problems and quality reductions of stand development mentioned above.

- The higher the dilution, the coarser generally the grain. You see that with XTOL, D-76, ID-11, HC-110 and Rodinal.

- Based on objective and scientific parameters, Rodinal is not sharper than e.g. XTOL 1+1. That is very clearly seen under a microscope. But at low and low-medium enlargement factors Rodinal offers with certain films a very good subjective sharpness impression. That is why quite a lot of photographers like using Rodinal, especially for 120 and LF.
 

baachitraka

Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2011
Messages
3,546
Location
Bremen, Germany.
Format
Multi Format
Still the rodinal is the best and I adore the grain.

Try lith printing negatives developed with Rodinal.
 

Jan-Peter

Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2013
Messages
46
Location
Lake Constance
Format
Multi Format
Thanks for tis kind of comparison: Rodinal versus XTol.

I have never tried the XTol so far - however hundreds of film during my school days mainly Agfa Isopan film - later Tri-X film, also. - My conclusion ingeneral is: Rodinal comes handy when you want to have a film developed instantly - HOWEVER: Rodinal is NO fine grain developer !! - Particularly NOT for "fast" film such as Tri-X , et.al.

My father and I always used 1:50 dilution not exceeding 20°C temperature. - In Germany there is someone called Uwe Pilz who said Rodinal works particularly well in the low temperature range, e.g. 14 to 18°C - if you can managed that. Uwe has a German website where you can read a lot of good advice!

Jan-Peter
 
OP
OP

MsLing

Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2023
Messages
103
Location
Guangzhou China
Format
Multi Format

Trask

Subscriber
Joined
Oct 23, 2005
Messages
1,926
Location
Virginia (northern)
Format
35mm RF
As I don't speak or read German, I copied the text and pasted it into a WORD document so I could use WORD's translation prowess. I was very amused when the (long) German word "Zweibadentwicklung" (two bath developer) was translated by WORD as "two bathroom developer"! If anyone has the details on this new technique, I'm interested.....
 

Sirius Glass

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
50,283
Location
Southern California
Format
Multi Format

I use one bedroom and one bathroom to enlarge and print.
 

Jan-Peter

Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2013
Messages
46
Location
Lake Constance
Format
Multi Format
The bed- and bathroom development excited my wife just this moment - we might also try it tonight! - Just recently I developed thre Polypan 50 35mm-films in Ilford ID-11, 1+3, 21° and 24 mins. -They came out of the bedroom - and was perfectly developed!

Jan-Peter

Lak of Constance
 

jmoche

Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2009
Messages
50
Location
Woodland Hills, CA
Format
35mm

And a bottle from the 1890's, despite some accumulated crud at the bottom, will work just fine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…