Found the infamous Rodinal grain today

[Horatio]

 

[Horatio]

Also from the same roll, not nearly as bad.

 

[darkroommike]

Congratulations! Though I didn't know the graininess was missing, what dilution and what film? I like the grain I get with Tri-X but not so much with Kentmere 400.

 

[Horatio]

Congratulations! Though I didn't know the graininess was missing, what dilution and what film? I like the grain I get with Tri-X but not so much with Kentmere 400.

Film was Arista Edu 400 35mm, expired 2014, which I rated at 320. Processed in Rodinal 1:100 for 15 minutes. I’m sure I overdeveloped this roll and blew a few exposures as well. It was mainly to verify my “new” Nikkormat FTn is functional (it is!)

I’ve processed a couple of rolls of 100 ISO film (same 1:100 ratio) with less apparent grain, but this is the first roll of 35mm I’ve tried. I bought the Rodinal because it’s cheap! Lol. I’m planning to make some D-23 soon.

 

[Horatio]

One more, really gritty.

 

[mshchem]

Reminds me of Tri-X in Microdol-X circa 1968. I think they look great! The Foma films may be the closest thing we have to the films like Super-XX, Ektapan, etc. Look at the sharpness!
Nikkormat and lens AOK.

 

[removedacct1]

The Arista 400 is inherently very grainy anyway. Rodinal only accentuated it. It wouldn't look that different in another developer.

 

[Horatio]

The Arista 400 is inherently very grainy anyway. Rodinal only accentuated it. It wouldn't look that different in another developer.

Thanks, that's good to know. This was leftover film from my daughter's high school days. Don't think I'll be ordering more.

 

[Horatio]

Reminds me of Tri-X in Microdol-X circa 1968. I think they look great! The Foma films may be the closest thing we have to the films like Super-XX, Ektapan, etc. Look at the sharpness!
Nikkormat and lens AOK.

Thanks. I shot a lot of Tri-X and Plus-X in high school, 40-something years ago! Some of my RC prints from those days are still around my folks' house.

 

[mshchem]

Thanks. I shot a lot of Tri-X and Plus-X in high school, 40-something years ago! Some of my RC prints from those days are still around my folks' house.

This makes me want a bottle of Rodinal, get out one of my old Nikons. Nice.

 

[Horatio]

This makes me want a bottle of Rodinal, get out one of my old Nikons. Nice.

So, what’s stopping you?

It’s now sold as Adonol. Got mine from Freestyle. 500 ml for $13, plus shipping.

 

[MattKing]

It’s now sold as Adonol.

Or in Canada, as Blazinal.
And from other sources, and in slightly different versions, as Rodinal, and under other name as as well.

 

[blockend]

Film was Arista Edu 400 35mm, expired 2014, which I rated at 320. Processed in Rodinal 1:100 for 15 minutes. I’m sure I overdeveloped this roll and blew a few exposures as well. It was mainly to verify my “new” Nikkormat FTn is functional (it is!)

I’ve processed a couple of rolls of 100 ISO film (same 1:100 ratio) with less apparent grain, but this is the first roll of 35mm I’ve tried. I bought the Rodinal because it’s cheap! Lol. I’m planning to make some D-23 soon.

I'm not a fan of fast film in Rodinal, but that looks very grainy even so. Also, your time of 15 mins at 1:100 seems short. Hard to say after the fact, if I was guessing I'd say hard agitation and/or warm developer is the cause.

An acutance developer like Rodinal does emphasise edge sharpness and grain. It can be controlled by increasing dilution and gentle agitation. I use it all the time with 100/125 ASA films rated at box speed or 64 ASA, and they're full of tonality and small grain. Of course appearance is always a matter of taste, so take my comments in that context.

 

[Horatio]

I'm not a fan of fast film in Rodinal, but that looks very grainy even so. Also, your time of 15 mins at 1:100 seems short. Hard to say after the fact, if I was guessing I'd say hard agitation and/or warm developer is the cause.

An acutance developer like Rodinal does emphasise edge sharpness and grain. It can be controlled by increasing dilution and gentle agitation. I use it all the time with 100/125 ASA films rated at box speed or 64 ASA, and they're full of tonality and small grain. Of course appearance is always a matter of taste, so take my comments in that context.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I'm unable to pinpoint the exact cause, mainly because it's been MANY years since I processed my own film, and there are several variables at play. The solution was room temperature, no more than 70 degrees, but it could have been higher I suppose. (One day I'll get a thermometer!) I agitated 10 seconds every two minutes. Perhaps that's too much. 15 minutes at 1:100 has been fine for 100 ISO film (so far), but I'm pretty sure I used less frequent agitation.

I did not consult the mass dev chart for this roll until after the fact, and it recommended a full 60 minutes! I thought that was extreme, but it may be more accurate than I imagined. I'm in the middle of another Edu 400 roll, so I'll have to reconsider my approach for it. Both rolls expired in 2014, FWIW. As mentioned, the roll was mainly used to test the functionality of my FTn. Clearly I need more preparation and practice.

 

[blockend]

The solution was room temperature, no more than 70 degrees

That's likely to be the problem!

I agitated 10 seconds every two minutes

I do 2 gentle inversions every 30 seconds. You're unlikely to be over-agitating.

15 minutes at 1:100 has been fine for 100 ISO film

12min 30 sec for me, so you're in the ballpark depending on exposure.

I did not consult the mass dev chart for this roll until after the fact, and it recommended a full 60 minutes!

That would be stand or semi-stand development at 1:100 or 1:150. Basically you leave the film in the developer without agitation, except for a turn after half an hour to limit bromide drag. This gives a compensating effect, bringing out shadow and highlight detail to the max. It can give flatish tonality but is good with slow high contrast films, or for development on harder grades of paper.

Clearly I need more preparation and practice.

Limit your variables and you'll soon nail exposure and development. Without a thermometer you could easily be 100% out on dev times, and introduce bags of grain and contrast. Keep it at 20oC/68f. Good luck!

 

[Horatio]

I made an error recalling the Mass Dev Chart recommendations for Edu 400: it was 120 minutes at 1:100! It's semi-stand development. I may try this on the second roll. Nothing to lose, right?

 

[Lachlan Young]

I made an error recalling the Mass Dev Chart recommendations for Edu 400: it was 120 minutes at 1:100! It's semi-stand development. I may try this on the second roll. Nothing to lose, right?

Given that no more density is likely to be gained after 20 minutes or so, it's rather a waste of time. Rodinal offers no sharpness benefit over D-76, instead it just produces detail-eliminating coarser grain which some scanning systems seem to really struggle with.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Hi Horatio,
Rodinal is an interesting developer...
Foma400 is slower than 320 in rodinal, so one thing you could try if you use the same film again, is doing two more shots of every scene after the normal one, for instance, opening half a stop and a stop... Then you'll see, after comparing, what exposure defines about grain and tone...
By the way, the tone you got is beautiful...
Another thing is, wet printed, rodinal grain looks much better than scanned...
If you haven't done it yet, here's what I liked the most with rodinal:
Use it at 17 Celsius, and at the same time, reduce agitation to a couple very gentle inversions every third minute, four in the beginning... That makes a grain that, if some people don't find it smaller (and I do) shows more evenness and tightness, and helps acutance without being invasive.
Rodinal is better for slower films in general, but it's very nice with TRI-X... HP5+ can be awful... Among modern emulsions, Delta100 is great in it.

 

[Lachlan Young]

There is no evidence whatsoever for lower temperatures 'improving' the grain with Rodinal that cannot be had by simply reducing the development time.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

I recommend all forum members: don't believe every word by any of us forum members! Just test! Your own opinion after testing should be your only guide!

 

[subsole]

Rodinal at lower temperatures (in german) : http://fg-kometen.vdsastro.de//piu/f/Rodinal.pdf

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

By the way, is there evidence about all films in history behaving identically in Rodinal at 17 degrees Celsius?
This is not irony, and not personal either, Lachlan... Years ago I've been thinking, after divided opinions on the subject, it could be not all films behave exactly the same way in low temperature rodinal, and rotary development or not, can also be very different games: what I liked implied as I said before both 17C and minimal agitation together... Anyway, even though I used rodinal for 20 years, I prefer ID-11 for better midtones, Microphen for decent pushing, and FX-39 for modern films. So, rodinal is OK for slow films and larger formats in general... Strangely, sometimes we see wonderful 35mm frames developed in rodinal too... I guess that's why that developer came to stay.

 

[takilmaboxer]

While there are a few experts on this forum who can back up their opinions with real data, there are far more who have strong opinions based on....their personal experience. So, do your own testing and make your own conclusions.
Rodinal is grainy. Period. Don't like it, try another developer. Have fun doing it!

 

[Lachlan Young]

Here's the thing for those who want to try and convince everyone that they know more than the research efforts of Agfa etc: in old technical manuals, there are 16oC process times for Rodinal given (I understand it was because German houses often averaged about that sort of temperature in the pre centrally heated era). If what the various defenders of low temperature development claim had any actual merit over & above an adjustment to gross overall contrast through what amounts effectively to an alteration of development time, Agfa, Kodak etc would have found it and exploited it. These supposed effects would have been clearly visible on the microdensitometric studies done to determine RMS grain and MTF etc. Instead, it was found that better grain growth techniques etc were far more efficient and effective. Richard Henry's microdensitometric study of Rodinal against D-76 is something which no other amateur researcher has ever bothered to come close to in terms of technical ability or scientific precision. I can however say that it is striking that in 6000ppi+ scans, I have never found any evidence to disprove Henry's effective conclusions that D-76 at 1+1 offers a better balance of useful edge sharpness, resolution and granularity than Rodinal, which only outperforms more solvent developers in the quantity of granularity it produces. That higher granularity can be seen to translate into worse information capacity in the film because it destroys fine detail. Nevertheless, Rodinal does deliver a distinct 'look' which some find attractive - and its low fog & extreme life span are also welcome characteristics.

 

[Ian Grant]

Rodinal is grainy. Period. Don't like it, try another developer. Have fun doing it!

No with the right films Rodinal gives very fine grain, but it does need tight temperature control across all stages of film processing including washing.

I use Rodinal with Agfa AP/APX100 and Tmax100 for neraly 20 years and even with 35mm had very fine grained results, it was Agfa's recommended developer.

Poor temperature control will increase apparent graininess with some films due to micro-reticulation, also called incipient reticulation, or by Eastman Kodak surface artefacts It's not the same as full blown reticulation and usually affects the gelatin supercoat (which is both sides on 120 films as the anti-curl layer).

It's worth adding Modern Rodinal has free Hydroxide and that softens emulsions, taht's rarely an issue except when emulsions are less well hardened, EFKE films were the worst but Foma films are somewhere inbetween Ilford, Kodak, Fuji (except Acros 100) and EFKE, just slightly less hardened emulsions but usually not any issues.

Ian