• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Fomadon R09 longevity

Latest Gallery

Somewhere...

D
Somewhere...

  • 5
  • 2
  • 112
Iriana

H
Iriana

  • 8
  • 2
  • 179

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
202,754
Messages
2,845,149
Members
101,506
Latest member
AlexKuzin
Recent bookmarks
0

Jojje

Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2006
Messages
256
Location
Finland
Format
Multi Format
It's commonly accepted Fomadon R09 is the same as Rodinal - right? After using half of my a 2-3 years old 250ml bottle of Fomadon R09 the result after development was a completely blank roll (120) of Tmax 400 film, not even frame numbers showing. Has anyone experienced this? Fix was freshly made Fomafix.
 
About a year after first opening a bottle, my negatives started coming out noticably thinner. This is not what one expects from Rodinal.
 
afriman said:
About a year after first opening a bottle, my negatives started coming out noticably thinner. This is not what one expects from Rodinal.
Click to expand...
I was beginning to suspect my methods... Too bad, Rodinal was a trusted companion for decades. Maybe better start mixing my own.
 
The history of Rodinal is a complex thing indeed.
R09 is equivalent to just one of several (relatively similar) versions of developer that have been given the name Rodinal over the decades.
Some of those versions have shown extremely long life, although the nature and quality of the bottle may have played a part in that.
 
MattKing said:
The history of Rodinal is a complex thing indeed.
R09 is equivalent to just one of several (relatively similar) versions of developer that have been given the name Rodinal over the decades.
Some of those versions have shown extremely long life, although the nature and quality of the bottle may have played a part in that.
Click to expand...

I believe bottle material matters a lot. Also, if youre not using a lot then Adox sells Rodinal in a 100ml bottle as well.

These are very affordable developers, and personally I dont see the point in trying to milk more than 2 years out of a bottle of anything.
It's simply not worth the risk of ruined film to me personally.
 
Auer said:
I believe bottle material matters a lot. Also, if youre not using a lot then Adox sells Rodinal in a 100ml bottle as well.

These are very affordable developers, and personally I dont see the point in trying to milk more than 2 years out of a bottle of anything.
It's simply not worth the risk of ruined film to me personally.
Click to expand...
You're right, of course, I always considered Rodinal being an exception. Fomadon bottle in question was bought 2-3 years ago and been open a bit over a year. In the past I've used over five years old Rodinal with perfect results. Luckily, this was a test film.
In German Fotoimpex site they say Adox Rodinal being "absolutely identical" to original recipe. Dieser Entwickler wird nach der letzen bekannten Agfa RODINAL original Rezeptur hergestellt. Er verwendet ausgesuchte, nachbehandelte Rohstoffe und ist in der Rezeptur absolut Identisch.
https://www.fotoimpex.de/shop/fotochemie/adox-rodinal-500-ml-konzentrat.html
 
origianl Rodinal was in a glass bottle, with a rubber stopper. I never trust Plastic bottles.
 
cmacd123 said:
origianl Rodinal was in a glass bottle, with a rubber stopper. I never trust Plastic bottles.
Click to expand...
My first bottle, inherited from someone else, was one like that. I used it for several years without any sign of loss of activity. I have also seen many claims from people who say they've had Rodinal sitting for decades in almost empty bottles, where it's turned almost pitch black but is still working perfectly. Which seems to suggest it's not affected by oxidation. R09 clearly seems to be different in that respect, and I wonder what it is in the formulation that causes the difference.
 
I had sudden failure w/ that developer too, so the real Rodinal is all I use now (along w/ other developers).
 
I haven't had any experience with anything other than the Adox product. Adox uses a flow restriction on the bottle. This does a couple things. It helps in dispensing small volumes, it restricts air from entering the bottle, and stops users from returning excess back to the bottle.
Rodinal is a strong base, glass is great, but not practical for shipping and handling by the consumer.
 
This may be slightly off topic, but does anybody here have any experience or opinion regarding the keeping properties of parodinal? I'm strongly considering brewing my own as Rodinal is totally unobtainable where I am and cannot be shipped internationally. I've read various claims about parodinal's shelf life, and I guess it's unrealistic to expect a definitive answer, but any informed opinion would be welcome.
 
https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/parodinal-5-years-later.72763/
I think it lasts as long as there is still sufite present to absorb air. The more air gets in the sooner it stops working.
My present bottle of PaRodinal is about 5 years old, rarely used, has deposited crystals.
It's in a glass bottle, half full, still blackens a film leader.
 
Last edited:
Just curious. If you're going to brew and use PaRodinal, why should you worry about a shelf-life longer than, say, six months? Its ingredients are always available and you can brew, whenever you want, the volume you're going to use in the next six months.
 
afriman said:
This may be slightly off topic, but does anybody here have any experience or opinion regarding the keeping properties of parodinal?
Click to expand...
In my experience: poor. Maybe in entirely full, glass and well-stopped bottles it'll last. I don't know, and I don't see reason to risk it.
 
Raghu Kuvempunagar said:
Just curious. If you're going to brew and use PaRodinal, why should you worry about a shelf-life longer than, say, six months? Its ingredients are always available and you can brew, whenever you want, the volume you're going to use in the next six months.
Click to expand...
You're right, of course. My question has more to do with curiosity about differences in formulation that could affect longevtiy, than about practical use. Still, it's less convenient to brew small quantities (less than say 100ml) at a time. That amount is enough to develop 20 rolls of 35mm, which I seldom reach in six months, so I won't be using it optimally. I know this sounds cheap of me, but it's not so much about the cost — I'm just anal about efficiency and optimal utilisation!
 
koraks said:
In my experience: poor. Maybe in entirely full, glass and well-stopped bottles it'll last. I don't know, and I don't see reason to risk it.
Click to expand...
As I said, Rodinal is unobtainable over here and impossible to order from overseas, so I have to look for a viable alternative.
 
Mix small batches of rodinal to circumvent the storage problem? Personally I prefer other developers though. I'm fond of mytol at the moment.
 
Unfortunately, I'm a bit of a frustrated alchemist, so I'm bent on trying every developer formula I can get hold of. I've already mixed D-23, D-76 and PC-TEA. After (pa)Rodinal, It'll probaly be Mytol and DS-10. I know it's the worst thing you can do, but I can't help myself — curiosity has gotten the better of me.:smile:
 
Last edited:
Tom Kershaw said:
The 'DS' series of developers are worth looking at. I have been using DS-10 and DS-2/12 with success recently. Alongside DS-14 for prints.

Link: https://web.archive.org/web/2008093...er_Recommendations#DS-10_Fine_grain_developer
Click to expand...
Yes, I know that page and I'm just waiting for my Dimezone to arrive before trying DS-10 — would rather not use Phenidone because of the possible problems he mentions. Again taking Xtol as a benchmark, how well do you think DS-10 holds up to it?
 
afriman said:
Are you using the original Mytol recipe or one of the Instant Mytols? And how do you find it compares to Xtol?
Click to expand...
Instant, with a minor modification so I can use ascorbic acid instead of ascorbate. As to how it compares, all I know is that development times listed for xtol give me good negatives that print easily, with fine grain and good tonality. I haven't done any side by side comparisons.
 
afriman said:
Again taking Xtol as a benchmark, how well do you think DS-10 holds up to it?
Click to expand...

I have been making DS-10 with Phenidone because I have a good supply, and haven't noticed any problems, although I don't have Dimezone to compare. In terms of holding up to XTOL, my main use has been with Kodak TMY-2, and results have been very good.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:
Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom