Fp4 and Rodinal

[MarcoGiardini]

i took some pictures of my daughter using a FP4+ (used at 100 ISO) and developed in Rodinal 1+50 for 13 minutes. The subject was overexposed by 2 stops (I expect to make some High Key) but the result is far from what i expected. Huge grain and very low contrast. Does anybody have experience with FP4 and Rodinal to give me some suggestions?
Thanks

marco

 

[Uncle Goose]

I would rather use Ilfosol S than Rodinal for FP4, might solve the problem of the grain. Don't know about that contrast.

 

[haryanto]

i used semistand with fp4+rodinal, 1:50, 27minutes, 1minutes for initial agitations, and 20s at 9 minutes, 18minutes, fine grain an better tonality

 

[df cardwell]

i took some pictures of my daughter using a FP4+ (used at 100 ISO) and developed in Rodinal 1+50 for 13 minutes. The subject was overexposed by 2 stops (I expect to make some High Key) but the result is far from what i expected. Huge grain and very low contrast. Does anybody have experience with FP4 and Rodinal to give me some suggestions?
Thanks

marco

You under-developed the film. Without knowing exactly how you based your exposure, I have to presume the brights which you hoped to fall at highlight densities are all compressed into Zone V or Vi.

Rodinal and FP4 usually make fine grain and holds 13 to 14 stops in a straight line. It is a remarkably linear combination.

With normal development ( 18 to 20 minutes with agitation every minute, or with minimal agitation, for 27 minutes or so ) you should expect the results you hoped for.

 

[MarcoGiardini]

You under-developed the film. Without knowing exactly how you based your exposure, I have to presume the brights which you hoped to fall at highlight densities are all compressed into Zone V or Vi.

Rodinal and FP4 usually make fine grain and holds 13 to 14 stops in a straight line. It is a remarkably linear combination.

With normal development ( 18 to 20 minutes with agitation every minute, or with minimal agitation, for 27 minutes or so ) you should expect the results you hoped for.

i measured the incident light of the scene on the face and than the reflected light (always on the face) using a spot light meter. Than i decided to overexpose 2 stops. I expected the face almost white and the background (that was really light) totally in the high light zone. But it was not so. Looking at the negative once developed i assume that 13 minutes are really less than necessary. But 18-20 seems me too much. I guess i need one more test..... soon.
Thanks df cardwell!

marco

 

[df cardwell]

Here is a curve from Foto Import for 1+24/ei 100 (6% shorter time, 4 % more developer).

There won't be much difference from 1+50, other than ei 125. It is similar to my results.

Two sources only demonstrate coincidence, but it IS a nice looking curve !

 

[MarcoGiardini]

df, thanks but i do not even know how to read it!!!!


marco

 

[df cardwell]

df, thanks but i do not even know how to read it!!!!


marco

Read it ? .......... I put it in my iPod and listen to it !

Seriously, it isn't necessary to be looking at graphs, and I'm sorry to confuse the issue.

Try a test roll that will be developed for 18 minutes (however you like to agitate your film) and shoot it at 64 / 125 / 250. Pick the best.

The film and developer will behave very much like the TMY/Tmax combination you use so well in you APUG gallery pictures.