How much agitation?

[derek andrews]

I have just started developing film again after a loooong break. I am using 35 mm kentmere 100 ASA in Rodinal 1 - 50, but find the contrast is extremely high, with what I think is a lot of grain. What agitation would some of you recommend? I am developing at 68 for 15 minutes.

 

[Svenedin]

If you find the grain a problem why not use a fine grain developer?

 

[Sirius Glass]

If you want finer grain use XTOL or replenished XTOL.

 

[mshchem]

If you want finer grain use XTOL or replenished XTOL.
View attachment 188018

Absolutely XTOL.

 

[voceumana]

Excessive contrast and high grain is a symptom of overdevelopment. Either you're developing too long or agitation is excessive or both.

 

[aparat]

Yes, as others have said, excessive development, most likely.

You can try a fine-grain drveloper, such as D76, but if you'd rather use a liquid concentrate, then Clayton F76+ is a fantastic developer, very much beginner-friendly and economical.

As far as agitation, people typically arrive at their favorite scheme through testing. If you plan to scan your negatives, a 10 second agitation every minute will give you controlled contrast that your scanner will handle nicely.

 

[rrusso]

Must be your process - in the link below you'll find an example of Rodinal stand dev. I don't think the grain is too prominent.

Here's a couple of goof off test shots to compare if you'd like. The dog is Kentmere 100, the...

 

[M Carter]

I just love Rodinal too much to bypass it except for special cases. It just has a mojo (to me anyway) that nothing touches. (I do mostly lith printing so it's a match made in heaven).

In my tests, adjusting temp within reasonable bounds had no effect on grain. Stronger dilutions most definitely bring more grain. 1+25 shows much more grain than 1+50, and yes, that's with time compensated for tonality. And yes, 1+25 gives you deeper lower mids and risks some shadow detail, but can be a cool look. Good for faces, eyebrows and pupils pop, there's more "drama" to my eye. But more grain for sure, and yes, I tested still life setups with matched highlight tonality in the neg, and enlarged small crops with similar exposure times - very controlled, and yep, "that's more grain for sure". Not "seems like more grain".

With Rodinal, my agitation is very gentle - I don't flip the tank, I gently "swish" it like you'd swirl wine in a glass. 30 to start, 5 seconds every 60, last 20, pour for ten. With Acros I get very very minimal grain - I can hardly see it in the focus mag - but I get the legendary accutance. My times are tested to work with my agitation style. 6x7 Rodinal negs on a lightbox still make me gasp a bit, it's like Imax or something.

 

[wiltw]

Kodak recommendation for agitation:

• For inversion tanks: one cycle of 2-5 inversions in 5 seconds (each inversion = rotate tank upside-down, then upright), repeat after 30 seconds
• For non-inversion tanks: one cycle = slide tank back and forth over 10" distance

...and your results for contrast dictates if you do more or fewer inversions per cycle.

 

[juan]

Too much contrast is frequently the result of too much agitation for the contrast index of the scene photographed. I don’t know where “lancs” is, so I don’t know what your light is like. Where I live, there is heavy shade and very bright sunlight, so I have to use minimal agitation. You might look at what Minor White had to say in The New Zone Ystem Manual from the mid-70s.

 

[Pat Erson]

Semi-OT but TMAX-100 is grainless...

 

[derek andrews]

Thanks for all the advice. I think too much agitation is the answer. I've used Ilford products in the past and took their advice on agitation which always gave me lovely results. I like the idea of 'swirling' the tank. West Lancs is in the North West of the UK, near Liverpool so its not known for harsh sunlight!

 

[Gerald C Koch]

Kodak recommendation for agitation:

• For inversion tanks: one cycle of 2-5 inversions in 5 seconds (each inversion = rotate tank upside-down, then upright), repeat after 30 seconds
• For non-inversion tanks: one cycle = slide tank back and forth over 10" distance

...and your results for contrast dictates if you do more or fewer inversions per cycle.

+1000

 

[MattKing]

The Kodak recommendation (5 seconds every 30 seconds) and the Ilford recommendation (10 seconds every 60 seconds) are so similar in effect as to be essentially the same in almost all cases. Pick the one that is easiest for you, and stick with it.
Whatever you pick, the agitation needs to have a random component. The developer in particular needs to both swirl and tumble through the film.

 

[Rick Jones]

You describe your negatives as showing extreme contrast with a lot of grain. You ask about agitation but failure to control developer temperature throughout the process as well as the time of development can lead to the same contrast problems. I have always thought of agitation as the means of obtaining even development, therefore, once I found a routine that resulted in acceptably even development I never changed that regimen. Temperature in my process is controlled with a monitored water bath. With those two variables accounted for then time of development is used to increase or decrease contrast.

 

[mshchem]

The Kodak recommendation (5 seconds every 30 seconds) and the Ilford recommendation (10 seconds every 60 seconds) are so similar in effect as to be essentially the same in almost all cases. Pick the one that is easiest for you, and stick with it.
Whatever you pick, the agitation needs to have a random component. The developer in particular needs to both swirl and tumble through the film.

Matt, I agree with you. I was always a Kodak loyalist. Followed EKCo recommended procedures always got good results. Lately been shooting more Ilford. I'm a 20 year XTOL convert. For years 1:1 XTOL, in a Paterson tank.
I got a Jobo Processor 3 or so years back, I follow Kodak's instructions for rotary processing with XTOL. I was shocked that the Jobo results look the same as manual agitation.
For me in my younger years, harder negatives tended to be from my tendency to over develop with Microdol-X.

ONE OTHER THING, TO THE OP, MAKE SURE YOU HAVE AN ACCURATE THERMOMETER, BETTER TO HAVE TWO OR THREE .... DAMN ADJUSTABLE DIAL THERMOMETERS ARE NOTORIOUS FOR BEING OUT OF ADJUSTMENT.
Best Regards Mike

 

[Doremus Scudder]

If your negatives are overdeveloped, shorten the developing time. Don't change agitation unless you have problems with evenness or want to experiment with/optimize edge effects.

Agitation schemes are for ensuring even development first and foremost. Minimal agitation techniques are for maximizing edge effects and more risky; they need to be tested and worked out so that development is even.

The easiest and most reliable method for controlling how much development is given is changing the time. Changing dilution if times become too short is next on the list.

Bottom line: if unevenness isn't a problem, keep your agitation technique and adjust developer time. As Matt mentions above, agitations every 30 or 60 seconds is not a big difference.

Doremus

 

[M Carter]

I've bought a Paterson system 4 tank and some D-76 to learn developing, but the lid is kinda fiddly, it takes me about 10-15s to put it on securely after pouring in the developer, and then l can start the inversion. Will those 10-15s of standing affect the film significantly?

No, but just consider that part of your process. The key to consistent B&W development is to keep variables to a minimum. Temperature and agitation style and developer dilution stay the same, and you control highlight development by developer time. It doesn't matter if you pour out the developer when the timer dings or if you pour for th last 10 seconds - as long as you do that with every roll.

When using Rodinal, I can control midrange rendering with dilution, but my times need to be adjusted for the change in developer strength. But I didn't start experimenting with that until I had my regular process well worked out. Once I had consistent results, I could then change the dilution factor and see how that worked.

 

[Arvee]

If your negatives are overdeveloped, shorten the developing time. Don't change agitation unless you have problems with evenness or want to experiment with/optimize edge effects.

Agitation schemes are for ensuring even development first and foremost. Minimal agitation techniques are for maximizing edge effects and more risky; they need to be tested and worked out so that development is even.

The easiest and most reliable method for controlling how much development is given is changing the time. Changing dilution if times become too short is next on the list.

Bottom line: if unevenness isn't a problem, keep your agitation technique and adjust developer time. As Matt mentions above, agitations every 30 or 60 seconds is not a big difference.

Doremus

+1

I struggled with the same problem and after taking control of the process and changing one variable at a time I arrived at this same conclusion. Agitation affects evenness of development (spiral tanks are considered poor for evenness of development so you want to use the most effective agitation scheme); changing time of development is the correct parameter for controlling contrast. Once I reached this conclusion, I had no more development difficulties and had complete confidence in controlling the process.

When you vary your agitation scheme, you are compromising the evenness of development. DS is right on!

 

[MattKing]

I've bought a Paterson system 4 tank and some D-76 to learn developing, but the lid is kinda fiddly, it takes me about 10-15s to put it on securely after pouring in the developer, and then l can start the inversion. Will those 10-15s of standing affect the film significantly?

Is your tank an old System 4 tank (grey cap) or is it a current Super System 4 tank (large, black flat lid)?
If it is the latter, put the lid on and then "burp" it to improve the seal.

 

[MattKing]

How do you burp the tank?

Put the heal of your hand on to the lid and grab the edge of the lid with your fingers.
Pull up the edge slightly while you push down gently with the heal of your hand. You should hear some air leave the tank - push the edge back on with your fingers.
This improves the seal.

 

[Doremus Scudder]

Put the heal of your hand on to the lid and grab the edge of the lid with your fingers.
Pull up the edge slightly while you push down gently with the heal of your hand. You should hear some air leave the tank - push the edge back on with your fingers.
This improves the seal.

The Oral Roberts school of film developing!

 

[derek andrews]

Thanks, I've been reading all the replies to my question on developing kentmere 100 in Rodinal. I think my agitation is OK ( if anything I'm agitating less than advised) so it is probably my dev time. I'm giving 15 mins at 20 degrees. What should I reduce to?

 

[Arvee]

Thanks, I've been reading all the replies to my question on developing kentmere 100 in Rodinal. I think my agitation is OK ( if anything I'm agitating less than advised) so it is probably my dev time. I'm giving 15 mins at 20 degrees. What should I reduce to?

Not being able to see the negs to see what you mean by extreme contrast, I would reduce by 20% bringing you down to 12 minutes. I usually come down 15% but I suggested 20% because you indicated 'extreme' contrast. Examine the new negs and make adjustments from there to find the contrast that best suits you.

 

[pentaxuser]

I would have thought that the key test for extremely high contrast in a negative is : At what grade of paper does the print look best? If this is grade 1 or 1.5 then the negative may have extreme contrast. If the print look OK at 2 the negative may have a little too much contrast. If the print looks OK at grades 2.5 to 3.5 then there may be nothing wrong with the negative's contrast

Do you print your negatives? Unless you are are an experienced darkroom worker who can tell what the best paper grade is for the negative by simply looking at the negative then it might be unwise to base any decision on a change in processing based on what you think is the look of the negative. If you can show us the extreme contrast negatives this might help

pentaxuser