Ilford Pan F and Rodinal 1+100

kq6up · Mar 14, 2011

I tried Mr. Cardwell's 18' with agitation for the first 30 seconds (slow toroidal inversions) followed by 10 second (3 inversions) every 5 minutes. The concentration was 1+50. Eyballing these negs they look very nice indeed. Much better than anything I have seen yet. I can't wait to take a look at the microscopic performance too. I hope the negs are not too curly, so I can start printing tonight. Thanks for all of the help.

Chris Maness

Shawn Dougherty · Mar 14, 2011

Thomas Bertilsson said:
So develop for 15m and see what happens!

You control contrast. Try agitating every three minutes while you're at it.

Exactly. I see so many state that they've tried such and such film/developer combo once and it was too "_______". Evaluating a film/developer combo after one use, even with expert recommendations, is impossible. Whatever "_______" is simply lets you know what (and in what direction) you need to change - time / temp / dilution / agitation - and preferably one at a time. ALMOST any film/developer combo can be altered to give a wide range of results in terms of contrast, sharpness and grain.

I use highly dilute Rodinal (say 1:150 or 1:200) along with increased exposure and extended development times to tame SEVERELY contrasty scenes. So to claim Rodinal is too contrasty after 1 roll is not fair.

Now I'm not saying Pan F+ and Rodinal are right or wrong, just that a little bit of testing goes a LONG way. Without it one might, after only one or two attempts, pass on what could be their ideal film and developer combo.

Gerald C Koch · Mar 14, 2011

Each film manufacturer optimizes their films toward their own developers. For best results I would suggest an lford developer such as Perceptol. Regardless of the mutterings of the church of Rodinal this developer is not the best choice for all films. Pan F builds contrast very rapidly and is hard to develop.

kq6up · Mar 14, 2011

Gerald C Koch said:
Each film manufacturer optimizes their films toward their own developers. For best results I would suggest an lford developer such as Perceptol. Regardless of the mutterings of the church of Rodinal this developer is not the best choice for all films. Pan F builds contrast very rapidly and is hard to develop.

If you use Rodinal with very sparing agitation it starts behaving as a compensating developer. My last roll looks great. I bracketed whole stops and the over exposed frames don't look too much different than the box speed frames. I would imagine there was some compensation going only agitating once every 5 minutes, so it is doable. It definitely looked better than my last roll of Pan F+ souped in stock D-76 which was Ilford's recommendation for best results. It had a very short tonal scale, but VERY high resolution. I don't like the short scale of the D-76. The highlights were in the mud, and there was no forgiveness on exposure (I let my son shoot the roll for me, and he is not exactly scientific about his exposure). However, when it came together it looked ok. However, in the Rodinal -- every single frame looks good w/o the muddiness in the hot frames like the D-76. I am really working hard to tame this film, and thanks to some recommendations here I am getting it dialed in.

I have not tried perceptol. However, I am trying to focus on a few developers, and really get the feel for them. I have been using D-76 forever, I am learning HC-110 and Rodinal because I like the mix as you go method. I am going to try diafine too, but I think that is it for a while. It is a lot of work getting used to these combos.

Thanks,
Chris Maness

Shawn Dougherty · Mar 14, 2011

Gerald C Koch said:
Regardless of the mutterings of the church of Rodinal this developer is not the best choice for all films.

???

I've read the entirety of this thread, I don't believe anyone claimed it was...

Thomas Bertilsson · Mar 14, 2011

kq6up said:
I tried Mr. Cardwell's 18' with agitation for the first 30 seconds (slow toroidal inversions) followed by 10 second (3 inversions) every 5 minutes. The concentration was 1+50. Eyballing these negs they look very nice indeed. Much better than anything I have seen yet. I can't wait to take a look at the microscopic performance too. I hope the negs are not too curly, so I can start printing tonight. Thanks for all of the help.

Chris Maness

I'm slightly biased, because Cardwell is a friend. But Cardwell's advice is good. Don't ever take it as a final solution, but a really good nod in the right direction.

Gerald C Koch · Mar 15, 2011

Shawn Dougherty said:
???

I've read the entirety of this thread, I don't believe anyone claimed it was...

Didn't mention this thread specifically but if you have read as many APUG threads as I have you know that the Creed of the Church of Rodinal is

1. Rodinal is the greatest developer ever made.
2. Rodinal can be used with any film and any situtation.
3. Rodinal also cures warts.

kq6up · Mar 15, 2011

I soak my elbow in it to cure my rumitoid ;o)

Chris

Thomas Bertilsson · Mar 15, 2011

kq6up said:
I soak my elbow in it to cure my rumitoid ;o)

Chris

That's it - I'm declaring Rodinal the undisputed King of developers... LOL

Jokes aside, it is a versatile developer with many appearances. I have lately used it with TMax 400 and loved it. Diluted to 1+100 I get this super smooth tonal scale, even in harsh lighting, by holding back agitation. Nice tight grain; very sharp. I can also use it at 1+25 in fairly flat lighting, underexpose 1/2 a stop, and agitate every 30s for glorious intense highlights with a film like Acros. For beautiful texture in portraits, try it with 35mm Tri-X or HP5... Dilute Rodinal and long development times reduces the grain significantly.
Push process severely underexposed film by diluting it and standing development. 3-4 stops no problem to recover to fairly normal negatives.
I have seen 35mm Delta 3200 / Rodinal negs printed to mural size with wonderful results. So it is very versatile, but so are other developers. Rodinal certainly isn't the only one out there with great qualities.

Shawn Dougherty · Mar 15, 2011

Gerald C Koch said:
3. Rodinal also cures warts.

Wow! =)

MaximusM3 · Mar 15, 2011

Legend has it that, when rubbed daily on one's private parts, it leads to massive over-development, which could be viewed as a good thing for certain individuals and situations.

Thomas Bertilsson · Mar 15, 2011

MaximusM3 said:
Legend has it that, when rubbed daily on one's private parts, it leads to massive over-development, which could be viewed as a good thing for certain individuals and situations.

Can you rub it on your ego and cause a similar sensation?

MaximusM3 · Mar 15, 2011

Thomas Bertilsson said:
Can you rub it on your ego and cause a similar sensation?

I wouldn't be surprised, Thomas.

naeroscatu · Mar 15, 2011

Legend has it that, when rubbed daily on one's private parts, it leads to massive over-development, which could be viewed as a good thing for certain individuals and situations.

Photographers Viagra

kq6up · Mar 18, 2011

Gerald C Koch said:
Each film manufacturer optimizes their films toward their own developers. For best results I would suggest an lford developer such as Perceptol. Regardless of the mutterings of the church of Rodinal this developer is not the best choice for all films. Pan F builds contrast very rapidly and is hard to develop.

Jerry, I purchased some perceptol to try it myself with Pan F+. You peaked my curiosity.

Chris

marcmarc · Mar 18, 2011

Perceptol is a fine grain developer so using this on a film that is so fine grain to begin with strikes me as unusual but hey, you may like the results you get. I've been a long time Pan F+/Rodinal user. I've discovered that time has a greater effect on the highlight buildup then agitation. So I've settled on a iso of 25 with a dilution of 1+100 for 9 minutes. I agitate a full minute and then 5 inversions every 30 seconds. This might seem excessive but for the bright LA sun I shoot in (6x7 size) I get adequate shadow detail and sparkling highlights. Now that I've stopped filling the tank to the brim, my tonality has improved immensely.

totalamateur · Mar 18, 2011

I shot some pan F+ a while back, ISO 25, and dev'd in Rodinal 1+50, 11 minutes, 5 seconds of inversions every minute, IIRC - I thought it was a little low in contrast. I'm relatively confused about everyone's comments that it "build contrast" rapidly.

I absolutely loved it, though. The grain was certainly fine, but not cold or harsh like tmax. It has I haven't shot my TLR in a while, but I've got six rolls ready to go. I need to expreiment more, but I'm fairly sure it will be my favorite daylight 120 film.

I don't use Rodinal because it's the best developer ever; I use it because it's the cheapest ever (when you dev one-shot in small batches like I do)

kq6up · Mar 18, 2011

I am shooting 35mm right now, and I am trying to get every bleeding drop of resolution I can from Pan F+. I have worked out Rodinal and Pan F as well. I soup for 18' agitating every five minutes for 10 seconds 1+50 concentration. I looks GREAT for people shots. However, it does not have the look I am after for landscape/architecture work. I am trying to push the film to it's limit then back off to get the results I like.

I just finished the roll, and the negs look thin to me, but that might be the solvent action of the developer. Can't wait till the dry to have a closer look.

Chris

kq6up · Mar 18, 2011

The contrast of the negatives are fine. I guess it is the solvent action of the perceptol that makes the negs look thin. No grain WHATSOEVER, and very high resolution. The tones are not bad. The Rodinal has a little more soul to it (I little more interesting tonal rendition). This combo almost looks like digital converted to B&W.

Chris

Gerald C Koch · Mar 18, 2011

marcmarc said:
Perceptol is a fine grain developer so using this on a film that is so fine grain to begin with strikes me as unusual but hey, you may like the results you get. I've been a long time Pan F+/Rodinal user. I've discovered that time has a greater effect on the highlight buildup then agitation. So I've settled on a iso of 25 with a dilution of 1+100 for 9 minutes. I agitate a full minute and then 5 inversions every 30 seconds. This might seem excessive but for the bright LA sun I shoot in (6x7 size) I get adequate shadow detail and sparkling highlights. Now that I've stopped filling the tank to the brim, my tonality has improved immensely.

The purpose in using Perceptol is not that it is a fine grain developer but rather that it is a soft working developer capable of taming Pan F's contrast. D-23 also works well with this film. I am not fond of Rodinal with this film even in higher dilutions.

michaelbsc · Mar 18, 2011

Gerald C Koch said:
Shawn Dougherty said:

???

I've read the entirety of this thread, I don't believe anyone claimed it was...

Click to expand...

Didn't mention this thread specifically but if you have read as many APUG threads as I have you know that the Creed of the Church of Rodinal is

1. Rodinal is the greatest developer ever made.
2. Rodinal can be used with any film and any situtation.
3. Rodinal also cures warts.

You forgot that it also lasts for thousands of years spilled on the floor.

2F/2F · Mar 18, 2011

If it were me, I'd probably do my first test at 20 minutes at 20 C, following Ilford's agitation routine. I have not used Rodinal at this dilution with Pan F, though, so it would just be a guess based on the 1:25 time that I use. I think 20 minutes to start will be close enough that you can pretty much nail it your second time, if you are shooting in controlled lighting.

kq6up · Mar 19, 2011

Well through this thread and doing my own tests I have found that Perceptol controls the contrast, and Rodinal with very sparing agitation also controls contrast. The two have VERY different looks. Perceptol has no perceivable grain and very smooth modern look to it. Rodinal (with limited agitation) has a vintage look with nice tones and nice grain. Two different looks for two different visions. However, both do well in high contrast ratio scenes. Here is the 10 million dollar question. What do you do when the lighting is very flat and you want things to pop? I would imagine that souping perceptol 30% longer might do the trick, but I am afraid of the grain in Rodinal 35mm would start to get harsh and distracting to me if I agitate more or reduce dilution to 1:25 in Rodinal. Maybe Rodinal is just out for 35mm if I shoot a roll in flat light. I am sure it would be fine for medium format as the grain is not very perceptible in the larger formats, but it is an issue for me. The reason I am shooting such a slow film in the first place is to achieve a very tight smooth grain. If I want to see more grain I could just shoot a higher speed film. I like to have the control (or choice) of allowing grain when I need it, or pick a film that has no grain when I don't want it. Does this rambling statement make since?

Chris

bwrules · Mar 19, 2011

I only used this film once or twice, and I got great results with PanF+ by simply developing it one minute less than recommended time to reduce highlight density.

Rodinal and fine grained developers are speed reducing. PanF+ is already slow. Rodinal might make it grainier than others though, which could increase perceived sharpness.

Thomas Bertilsson · Mar 21, 2011

kq6up said:
What do you do when the lighting is very flat and you want things to pop? I would imagine that souping perceptol 30% longer might do the trick, but I am afraid of the grain in Rodinal 35mm would start to get harsh and distracting to me if I agitate more or reduce dilution to 1:25 in Rodinal.

If you don't have any true shadows you rate the film differently. Do your testing, but I would start by using the film at EI 100, Rodinal 1+50, agitate every minute until you have highlight contrast to match your vision.
In order to get the most from any film, changing not just how you develop it, but also how you expose it, is vital. Make sure the resulting negative prints well.

How big do you print from 35mm? I printed a 35mm TMax 400 negative processed in Rodinal the other day to 9x12" size, and the grain wasn't exactly the first thing that struck me, but rather the sharpness and the beautiful texture.
If you're scanning you'll never really see the true grain of Rodinal negatives, which can be surprisingly fine grained, but with some of the aliasing that scanners like to add it'll look grainier than it is.

Ilford Pan F and Rodinal 1+100

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency