Mixing rodinal and dd-x

[Rikard_L]

Read somewhere about people mixing xtol with rodinal in order to get a more accute and fine grained negative than when the developers are used by themselves.
Have anyone tried mixing rodinal with dd-x or have info/thoughts about doing so?

 

[Rikard_L]

Thanks for a very informative answer Michael. I'm pretty happy about using them as they are separatly

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

Try a little vermouth too. Helps me with my personal acutance.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

Mixing Rodinal with any developer may be a bad idea. The high pH of the Rodinal is sure to screw-up the other developer. This can lead to fog and higher than wanted contrast. Where do these bad ideas come from?

 

[Rikard_L]

Mixing Rodinal with any developer may be a bad idea. The high pH of the Rodinal is sure to screw-up the other developer. This can lead to fog and higher than wanted contrast. Where do these bad ideas come from?

Most of the different threads seem to refer to this article: http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/Rodinal/rodinal.html
I will probably not try this out myself. But I wouldn't classify an experiment as a bad idea.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

If Rodinal produces too much grain for your taste then try this modification. This was recommended many years ago in either a Popular or Modern Phhotography magazine article "Rodinal Rejiggered." Just dilute the Rodinal concentrate with 9% sodium sulfite solution instead of water. Developing times are about 20% less than with water. A 9% solution is easily made by dissolving 90 grams of sodium sulfite in enough water to make 1 liter. This reduces the pH of the Rodinal, creates a buffer, and the sulfite provides finer grain by increasing the halide solvency. The original article also mentioned using it as a replenished system by adding 1 ml of Rodinal for each 80 in2 of film developed.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

Most of the different threads seem to refer to this article: http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/Rodinal/rodinal.html
I will probably not try this out myself. But I wouldn't classify an experiment as a bad idea.

Thanks very much for the citation. Just read the Buffalo article and the reason for mixing the two developers appears to be that Xtol was producing too low a contrast negative. The reasonable change would be to increase the development time in the Xtol without any other tinkering. A easier and better solution in my opinion. Mixing developers is somewhat like "I like beer and I like martinis. The two together should be really great." Yetch!

The article does mention Dr Henry's excellent book. I would highly recommend that anyone who is serious about photography get a copy and study it thoroughly. Lots of good information and it also debunks several myths.

 

[StoneNYC]

I've mixed HC-110 with Rodinal, i used the HC-110 times plus 1 minute and didn't really see any noticeable difference in the grain/sharpness in any meaningful way.

 

[Snapshot]

If Rodinal produces too much grain for your taste then try this modification. This was recommended many years ago in either a Popular or Modern Photography magazine article "Rodinal Rejiggered." Just dilute the Rodinal concentrate with 9% sodium sulfite solution instead of water. Developing times are about 20% less than with water. A 9% solution is easily made by dissolving 90 grams of sodium sulfite in enough water to make 1 liter. This reduces the pH of the Rodinal, creates a buffer, and the sulfite provides finer grain by increasing the halide solvency. The original article also mentioned using it as a replenished system by adding 1 ml of Rodinal for each 80 in2 of film developed.

To confirm, you would add the desired Rodinal concentrate to your 9% solution of sodium sulfite. For example, if I add 20ml of Rodinal to a 1 litre sodium sulfite solution (1+50), I would use the 1+50 developments times minus 20% because of the sodium sulfite. I can then replenish this solution with 1ml of Rodinal everytime I develop a roll of film. Would that be correct? Furthermore, how many rolls of film would I be able to use this solution for if I replenish? Also, was not the original recommened sodium sulfite solution 7.5%?

 

[pentaxuser]

I've mixed HC-110 with Rodinal, i used the HC-110 times plus 1 minute and didn't really see any noticeable difference in the grain/sharpness in any meaningful way.

So was it a useful experiment and if so what improvements did the mixture bring about?

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[john_s]

Why not develop for a while in DDX and then tip it out and finish in Rodinal? Or maybe the other way around?

Just kidding.

 

[StoneNYC]

So was it a useful experiment and if so what improvements did the mixture bring about?

Thanks

pentaxuser

I think you should re-read my sentence... no noticeable changes, I learned nothing except it was a silly thing to try, but I learned that at least they didn't explode like one person told me they might, and I learned that I was still able to get usable images. But realistically the HC-110(B) being the faster developer (and I mean that the dev times are shorter by almost half with HC-110) the image tended to look more like HC-110 ... so I'm guessing that if you wanted any kind of meaningful difference you might want to try a dilution that would bring the dev times to the same timeframe, that might give something different? I've stopped playing around with all this, and now since I started rotary processing (which completely changes everything) I just use Rodinal with Delta100, PanF+, and Acros100. And I use DD-X with HP5+ (though I MAY pick up a bottle of ilfotec HC and try that out with HP5+ when I run out of my DD-X but since I'm mostly pushing my HP5+ to anywhere from 800-3200, that the HC will give the results I need but it's worth a try for the price compared to DD-X).

 

[Gerald C Koch]

To confirm, you would add the desired Rodinal concentrate to your 9% solution of sodium sulfite. For example, if I add 20ml of Rodinal to a 1 litre sodium sulfite solution (1+50), I would use the 1+50 developments times minus 20% because of the sodium sulfite. I can then replenish this solution with 1ml of Rodinal everytime I develop a roll of film. Would that be correct? Furthermore, how many rolls of film would I be able to use this solution for if I replenish? Also, was not the original recommened sodium sulfite solution 7.5%?

Yes you are correct. I should have dragged my notes our before I posted you are right the sulfite concentration is 7.5% and not 9% as I first said. The article appeared in Popular Photography, Sept 1966. The article said the developer keeps for a month but did not specify the number of rolls. IIRC it was FG-7 that was diluted with 9% sulfite.

I only used the developer as a one-shot because of the cheapness of sodium sulfite. The negatives produced are very clean and produced some very nice prints.

 

[removed account4]

Try a little vermouth too. Helps me with my personal acutance.

i mix siracha and ketchup its good stuff

there is no reason NOT to experiment and see what works for you and what doesn't.
the way new things are discovered is by experimentation ...

 

[Snapshot]

Yes you are correct. I should have dragged my notes our before I posted you are right the sulfite concentration is 7.5% and not 9% as I first said. The article appeared in Popular Photography, Sept 1966. The article said the developer keeps for a month but did not specify the number of rolls. IIRC it was FG-7 that was diluted with 9% sulfite.

I only used the developer as a one-shot because of the cheapness of sodium sulfite. The negatives produced are very clean and produced some very nice prints.

Thank-you Gerald for confirming the details. I will give it a try.

 

[Xmas]

To make it a useful experiment you need to be an organic chemist and have tools like a densitometer and microscope.

the developer makes little difference Rodinal v D 76 difficult to tell apart...

Wear rubber gloves the first question my chum was asked when he was confirmed with Parkinson's was have you developed photos. He needs to use a VR lens already...

 

[dorff]

I agree with Gerald that mixing different formulas that were finely tuned in terms of pH and additive properties makes no sense. It would be like mixing elephant and dolphin DNA and hoping for an elegant end result, just because both make just fine animals on their own.

I have asked before whether starting development in one developer, then washing and finishing in another, would produce a result that is arguably better than either on its own. Because they are not mixed, but used consecutively, they should not influence each other in terms of pH, super-additivity etc. The learned gentlemen here seem to think that a single well balanced developer will produce superior results, though. And logically working through it, I tend to believe them. I have tried it with TMax Dev and Rodinal, thinking that starting with TMD would give me better film speed through activating the shadows, while finishing in Rodinal would give the tonality and acutance that I like, since TMD negs just print ever so slightly "flat" for me when used for normal speed film. The results did not show any improvement over D-76 or Xtol negatives. I tried the reverse, Rodinal first followed by TMD, and same result (within error tolerances). I suspect the same will happen with DD-X and Rodinal. If you don't like DD-X for the particular set of circumstances, then maybe choose a different developer, or maybe a different film, or both. The choices are plentiful enough not to have to resort to alchemy.

 

[baachitraka]

Photo-chemistry is too complex even on considering a developer like D-23.

 

[pentaxuser]

I've stopped playing around with all this, and now since I started rotary processing (which completely changes everything) .

Thanks for the reply. With rotary processing I had always thought that only the quantity of developer and the development times change but "everything" seems to encompass much more. What are the other changes?

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[removed account4]

Read somewhere about people mixing xtol with rodinal in order to get a more accute and fine grained negative than when the developers are used by themselves.
Have anyone tried mixing rodinal with dd-x or have info/thoughts about doing so?

hi richard

a lot of people in this world, and on this or any other photography website
like quantifiable results, hard core data and science behind everything they do
so they can get repeatable results, or have some sort of end result that they can
hold up and say " see the data from my experiment / experience shows nothing good came of this"

mixing things together that don't usually go together, and going against the stream,
and loud chorus of " don't do it ! " might work for you and you will never know unless you do it.
(chances are no one has done what you want to, so there is no consensus that it did or didn't do anything or
enough of whatever it was supposed to do ( or not ) to write home about )

the whole perspective of don't fix it unless its broke doesn't make sense to me.
sprint chemistry made a metol free d76 clone that i use often and the founder made it
while other said " you can't improve on that, you are wasting your efforts" ...
that was 35-40 years ago, and the developer is still being made today ...
and it works great with every film you can find ( or was made ) ...

so, if you want to mix 2 different developers together and see what happens
there is no reason at all not to.

have fun, do your experiments and report back
how it worked or didn't work using whatever development scheme you want.
you might have to agitate differently at different intervals, or use different dilutions
or expose your film differently and you might have to rely on the additives in your tap water too

photography is only a foundation you can do whatever you want on it.

john

 

[MrBrowning]

hi richard

a lot of people in this world, and on this or any other photography website
like quantifiable results, hard core data and science behind everything they do
so they can get repeatable results, or have some sort of end result that they can
hold up and say " see the data from my experiment / experience shows nothing good came of this"

mixing things together that don't usually go together, and going against the stream,
and loud chorus of " don't do it ! " might work for you and you will never know unless you do it.
(chances are no one has done what you want to, so there is no consensus that it did or didn't do anything or
enough of whatever it was supposed to do ( or not ) to write home about )

the whole perspective of don't fix it unless its broke doesn't make sense to me.
sprint chemistry made a metol free d76 clone that i use often and the founder made it
while other said " you can't improve on that, you are wasting your efforts" ...
that was 35-40 years ago, and the developer is still being made today ...
and it works great with every film you can find ( or was made ) ...

so, if you want to mix 2 different developers together and see what happens
there is no reason at all not to.

have fun, do your experiments and report back
how it worked or didn't work using whatever development scheme you want.
you might have to agitate differently at different intervals, or use different dilutions
or expose your film differently and you might have to rely on the additives in your tap water too

photography is only a foundation you can do whatever you want on it.

john

+1

 

[pdeeh]

Apollo and Dionysus find it hard to share the space at APUG ...

 

[dwross]

Apollo and Dionysus find it hard to share the space at APUG ...

+1+

 

[StoneNYC]

Thanks for the reply. With rotary processing I had always thought that only the quantity of developer and the development times change but "everything" seems to encompass much more. What are the other changes?

Thanks

pentaxuser

Well the actual look of the grain changes with each developer as well, so at first (like in the shut down "sharpness" thread) I was having grain issues with TMY-2 and FP4+ using Rodinal, and HP5+ used to be fine in ilfosol 3 or even Rodinal, but once I went to rotary I was getting a different grain signature I didn't like. After lots of testing (still want to test Ilfotec HC with HP5+ actually but that's the last one)

I settled on Delta100 in Rodinal and HP5+ in DD-X mainly.

I have the first JOBO home processor ever made so it only has one speed, I have no idea if it's faster or slower than the other multi-speed JOBO's and I know this could also affect the image.

It also affects contrast to a certain extent because the developer exhausts differently.
And each developer will give different results, not just like, different results than other developers, but different results when processed various ways, like Rodinal is good for stand and for me gentile agitation only, but it's cheap so I found a way to use it got rotary too, although it performs worse for rotary in general than other films. So in a way "everything" does change.

I ran out of HC-110 before I started this whole thing and with Kodak's uncertainty I want to try ilfotec HC even though Kodak's is slightly cheaper and more proven it's still supposedly close enough that I'm sure it will perform similarly, plus I'll get to support ilford

 

[Alan Johnson]

An approximate formula for DD-X working solution is in this thread (pH~8.5):
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)
FX-37 working solution (1+3, pH ~9.5) is more dilute and more alkaline but has similar developing agents:
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)
At a guess, making DD-X more alkaline by adding Rodinal would provide something similar to FX-37.
pH paper would be needed to get a target pH around 10.

IIRC the chemist Michael Gudzinowicz remarked to the effect FX-37 was like a grainy version of Microphen.