Cross process C-41 film stand developed in Rodinal (B&W chemistry)

StoneNYC · Jan 22, 2013

I've got about 10-15 old Kodak Gold films from 200-800 speed, I know I will have to drop the speed by a stop because they are all old and haven't been kept well. But I figure they would be good to practice some stand developing with cross processing in B&W chemistry. I've only done this once in Ilfsol 3 and the images were very dark and hard to see even after scanning.

There are various rules but I wanted to ask the experts.

I've shot a roll of this a few years ago and processed normally and the images were really grainy and dull so I would prefer to use this as B&W but also would like to stand process it and I've read that Rodinal is perfect for this, and since its finally become available again I bought some and would love to try it on this x-process. However I have the following developers available if there is a better choice in order of preferred and available...

Rodinal (Adonal)
HC-110
Ilfsol 3
DD-X
D-76

Thanks for any advice on times and dilutions (like 1:50 for Rodinal or 1:200 etc) as well as shooting EI for a stronger image to cut through the thick orange base when scanning. ALSO as I said its old film but for consistency sake, let's assume its new C-41 film and I'll do any age compensation.

Thanks!!

~Stone

Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

StoneNYC · Jan 30, 2013

removed account4 · Jan 30, 2013

hi stone

never done it in rodinal
but i have processed both e6 + c41 in coffee
the orange ( and yellow ) masks are killer
but if you can get through them, you get smooth grain.

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

stand develop like everything else ... 25-30mins
the developer was about 4months old, unreplenished ..

good luck !
john

StoneNYC · Jan 30, 2013

jnanian said:
hi stone

never done it in rodinal
but i have processed both e6 + c41 in coffee
the orange ( and yellow ) masks are killer
but if you can get through them, you get smooth grain.

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

stand develop like everything else ... 25-30mins
the developer was about 4months old, unreplenished ..

good luck !
john

Well it's more I'm fairly sure you're supposed to over expose by like 1 or 2 stops, also what ratio of Rodinal to use to stand rather than worry about over developing, though I assume it's different than with regular B&W because of the difference in silver content in the C-41 film?

So... that kind of info would help, but it's good to know the images would be blue, I did SOME x-process in Ilfsol 3 with C-41 it was HUGE grain and very dark, I didn't over expose long enough, but again I want to try stand development rather than just normal development.

I think you sent the cafinol recipe but I haven't tried it yet. I will, but working on other things first. Thanks for the info so far.

removed account4 · Jan 31, 2013

hi stone

i haven't done this yet but check out jim noel's post ( #29 )
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

25mins soaked in the coffee nothing but the coffee ( no vit c, no soda ) ..

so ... if you make a pot of instant coffee, and don't add any of the other ingredients, it will process your color film too.
jsut bracket your film, and have about 1/2 to burn ... it might work for your color in b/w xperiment.

have fun !

john

Terry Christian · Jan 31, 2013

A good ballpark to use when stand developing with Rodinal is 1:100 for 1 hr. at normal 20C/68F. Agitate normally at the beginning, and then a few slow agitations in the middle of the dev time. I haven't tried this with C-41 films, though, only B&W.

StoneNYC · Jan 31, 2013

Terry Christian said:
A good ballpark to use when stand developing with Rodinal is 1:100 for 1 hr. at normal 20C/68F. Agitate normally at the beginning, and then a few slow agitations in the middle of the dev time. I haven't tried this with C-41 films, though, only B&W.

Thanks! I'll try

~Stone

Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

StoneNYC · Jan 31, 2013

we have results!!!!

The most interesting are the last 4. I decided after seeing (there was a url link here which no longer exists)'s purple images he scanned in color, that I would scan two in color to see what came out. I didn't get ANYTHING close to the purple he did, however, what's REALLY interesting is that... and tell me if I'm wrong... the RED ribbon in the image looks .... RED... not super red, but it certainly seems to have a pinker/redder hue than the sled or the surrounding scenery. Is it possible that somehow the Rodinal I used had some kind of actual dye in it... I mean the rodinal itself is slightly pink... or some other way that the film though developed in B&W somehow still has a slight color tone to it?

Anyway, Film is Kodak Gold 200 shot at EI50 (Because after research I read that it's a good idea to over expose by two stops, probably partially because of the dark base) and stand developed in Rodinal 1+100 for 1 hour as suggested by (there was a url link here which no longer exists) (Thanks Terry!!!)

I was using a Zeiss Ikon Contina III so focus was done by eyeballing distance so only a few are spot on since I was shooting at about ... well I THINK it was 5.6, honestly I can't be sure as there's no arrow to where the correct aperture is supposed to be but I would assume center would be where it is (I really need to look up the manual haha) so the shutter was about 1/30 almost the whole time so between the hand held, small aperture, and slow speed, I'm shocked at what I got, but happy.

What do you think?

newcan1 · Feb 1, 2013

Very nice results. I wonder how they would print on an enlarger?

Terry Christian · Feb 1, 2013

They look great, Stone! In fact, the tonality reminds me of chromogenic films like BW400CN and Ilford XP2 Super; now you know why we're always crowing about those films.
They also look a tad bit overexposed, as if you could have used an EI of 50 instead if 100. Still, they should print nicely -- you certainly captured all the shadow detail.
Great stuff!

StoneNYC · Feb 1, 2013

Terry Christian said:
They look great, Stone! In fact, the tonality reminds me of chromogenic films like BW400CN and Ilford XP2 Super; now you know why we're always crowing about those films.
They also look a tad bit overexposed, as if you could have used an EI of 50 instead if 100. Still, they should print nicely -- you certainly captured all the shadow detail.
Great stuff!

I think you mean 100 instead of 50? Lol and I don't think they are under exposed at all. Not for this process, I think that any less exposure and they would all look dark, the orange mask messes with the exposure level I think, not sure but I'm happy with the results. There were some lesser exposed from the lot but these seemed the best to me.

Anyone have any thoughts on the red color?

~Stone

Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

Terry Christian · Feb 1, 2013

Yep, I indeed meant 100 instead of 50. I was typing that comment on my phone and got a little turned around!

StoneNYC · Feb 1, 2013

Terry Christian said:
Yep, I indeed meant 100 instead of 50. I was typing that comment on my phone and got a little turned around!

No worries I got it, I could try it, I have lots of kodak Gold left that I won't ever use for anything but testing, this was a fun experiment for sure. It also helps to have figured out that using the provided 35mm holder's for my scanner is NOT the way to go and just putting some ANR glass on top of them makes a huge difference in clarity and overall flatness of the image, 35mm film is SO curly... evil... haha

StoneNYC · Feb 1, 2013

while looking for the manual for the camera, I've discovered the version I have is slightly incorrect as listed above, it's the ...

Zeiss Ikon
CONTINA Matic II and III

However it seems the site for the PDF's is suspended so... wish me luck... I would really like to know if I was correct in my aperture settings as that's what I'm still not sure was completely correct.

http://www.butkus.org/chinon/zeiss_...ic_ii_iii/zeiss_ikon_contina_matic_ii_iii.htm

removed account4 · Feb 1, 2013

hi stone

i never scan anything i have in b+w, ALWAYS in color. the developer does funky stuff to the grains and
film which gives the colors in the scan. i have some coffee processed b+w that when scanned look like
autochromes ... not sure why but i don't questions electronics i just use them
and enjoy the results.

nice work by the way !
john

StoneNYC · Feb 1, 2013

jnanian said:
hi stone

i never scan anything i have in b+w, ALWAYS in color. the developer does funky stuff to the grains and
film which gives the colors in the scan. i have some coffee processed b+w that when scanned look like
autochromes ... not sure why but i don't questions electronics i just use them
and enjoy the results.

nice work by the way !
john

Thanks John.

~Stone

Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

StoneNYC · Feb 5, 2013

New Question ... these are 4 un-cropped images, scanned, does anyone know if the sprocket shadow is due to the old camera I'm using, or is this an effect of stand developing? (I've never used the Zeiss Ikon Contina Matic II before this test and never stand developed either).

Thanks...

Terry Christian · Feb 5, 2013

It wouldn't be a result of your developing.

Hold those negatives up to the light. Does each frame stop short of the sprocket holes, or are the frames so off-center that the sprockets are being intruded upon? Your negatives look as if the film is being loaded so off-center into the camera that it's not aligning correctly and making some of the image "overflow" to the sprockets. If so, check the alignment of the film gate in the camera and whether those film gates aren't bent somehow.

StoneNYC · Feb 5, 2013

Terry Christian said:
It wouldn't be a result of your developing.

Hold those negatives up to the light. Does each frame stop short of the sprocket holes, or are the frames so off-center that the sprockets are being intruded upon? Your negatives look as if the film is being loaded so off-center into the camera that it's not aligning correctly and making some of the image "overflow" to the sprockets. If so, check the alignment of the film gate in the camera and whether those film gates aren't bent somehow.

I don't think there are film gates... haha, it's just an open hole, I guess it's just the camera haha

removed account4 · Feb 5, 2013

StoneNYC said:
New Question ... these are 4 un-cropped images, scanned, does anyone know if the sprocket shadow is due to the old camera I'm using, or is this an effect of stand developing? (I've never used the Zeiss Ikon Contina Matic II before this test and never stand developed either).

Thanks...

hi stone

i get that sometimes too .... sometimes
i think it is called bromide drag, maybe i am wrong, i don't know to be honest ..
stand developing does weird stuff to film because the developer exhausts on the film
and doesn't get agitated to wash off and replenish with new ...

try processing your color-stuff with agitation and see if it still happens

good to see you having fun!

StoneNYC · Feb 5, 2013

jnanian said:
hi stone

i get that sometimes too .... sometimes
i think it is called bromide drag, maybe i am wrong, i don't know to be honest ..
stand developing does weird stuff to film because the developer exhausts on the film
and doesn't get agitated to wash off and replenish with new ...

try processing your color-stuff with agitation and see if it still happens

good to see you having fun!

Yea I was wondering if it was bromide drag or if it was just the camera without having to shoot another roll and process it in C-41 since I will be doing my C-41 soon but not yet, and a HUGE batch of it that will take me 18 hours to get through, I want to basically exhaust the film chemistry in one shot to get my monies worth... this is why I dislike C-41, such a waste ... just like E-6 ... there's GOT to be a way to make it cheaper... it doesn't seem like the chemicals are THAT different from B&W that it should be so costly.... well ... I digress... thanks for the thought, I guess I'll just have to shoot a normal roll and develop it normally to find out for sure.

case-ie · Apr 11, 2013

I,m going to throw a portra 160 asa in the tank with rodinal right now. Thank you.

Kees.

StoneNYC · Apr 11, 2013

case-ie said:
I,m going to throw a portra 160 asa in the tank with rodinal right now. Thank you.

Kees.

Cool, just remember, you need to have exposed it at 2 stops lower... so if it's 160, you should have shot it at EI 40 ... if you didn't, then you better leave it in longer than an hour....

I have one sitting right now actually a gold 200 shot at EI 50 ... It's just about done! yay! I'll post my results if you post yours... remember scan as if it's B&W not color film...

case-ie · Apr 11, 2013

To late, but they came out OK, The film came out of a baby rollei that refuses to function the shutter worked two times and than it stopped again, so I have two pictures, asa was set on 125 , The whole film still looks brown and I couldn't get it straight in the scanner -127 film- but this is it and I like it. No post proces

NedL · Apr 11, 2013

I've got a bunch of gold 200 and superia in the fridge that probably will never get used... anyone ever tried to print through the orange with an enlarger? Hmm I wonder what different filters on the lens would do?

Edit... actually now that I think about it, I wonder what the orange would do! I usually print on VC paper and the orange might block virtually all of the blue light. Probably end up with grade 00 prints....??

Cross process C-41 film stand developed in Rodinal (B&W chemistry)

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency