OK what's in the camera: PXP exp. 1996

RobertV · Mar 24, 2010

After organizing all films of the fridge from a local lab (200 pcs. Kodak films) who stopped, I put a Kodak Plus X Pan iso 125 120 roll film in my Yashica Mat 124G.
Setting iso 100.

What would be a nice combination for this (expired) film.
I would like to make a choice of these developers, no other:

Rodinal
CG-512/RLS
AM74/RHS

Possible Xtol. (I do not like the 5ltr. packing)

Cheers,

Robert

Thomas Bertilsson · Mar 24, 2010

Xtol...

But Rodinal at 1:50 with Plus-X is fantastic also.

Both work well.

- Thomas

RobertV · Mar 24, 2010

Both work well.

Do you have for each an example picture available?

Thomas Bertilsson · Mar 24, 2010

Sample pictures

Xtol - 2009-09-16_002_btw-35.jpg
Rodinal - 2009-02-07-03_BTW22.jpg

Both are Plus-X in 120 format from a pinhole camera.

In the prints I can see a little bit more grain from the Rodinal negative and a bit more highlight intensity.

RobertV · Mar 24, 2010

Thanks.

Nice pics.

Christiaan Phleger · Mar 24, 2010

I got a stack (30+ rolls) of this film from a camera shops freezer, really not sure of how old it is, but PXP 120, from between the late 80's to at least the late 90's, and I found that it needed about 1/2 to 2/3 stop more in exposure, and I tended to prefer it in a 'stronger' developer such as Rodinal rather than Xtol, which no matter what dilution and time never seem to really pull out a solid density. Rodinal 1:25 and 1/2 stop made it look almost normal, quite nice, but I found I liked it better with a full stop more and using Microdol-X 1:0, now that made it look really thick and creamy.

Thomas Bertilsson · Mar 24, 2010

RidingWaves said:
...and I tended to prefer it in a 'stronger' developer such as Rodinal rather than Xtol, which no matter what dilution and time never seem to really pull out a solid density...

What does 'solid density' mean?

I understand that Rodinal is a very powerful developer, and is capable of really impressive contrast indexes. Is that what you mean? That Rodinal was able to eke out more contrast from the old Plus-X than Xtol?

RidingWaves said:
Rodinal 1:25 and 1/2 stop made it look almost normal, quite nice, but I found I liked it better with a full stop more and using Microdol-X 1:0, now that made it look really thick and creamy.

What does 'thick and creamy' mean? I have to ask, because I don't know of anything other than steamed milk from my espresso machine that I would like to describe that way...

Christiaan Phleger · Mar 25, 2010

Well, with the well-expired film, Xtol never seemed to give me a density that I could really like, and any roll that I did in it I always thought that it needed some developer that was 'stronger'. Going to Rodinal, and that, 1:25 really made the film look how I envisoned it should. I use thick and creamy like your coffee since often what I am going for is really strong dense highlights with just enough space between the grains to let a bit of light in, as opposed to thin and watery. Often these days negs are made thin and watery in order to scan easy, me I just let the neg bake under the cold light for a minute or two.

Thomas Bertilsson · Mar 25, 2010

Thank you for explaining.

From my experience, and the shots I posted above are from rolls of Plus-X that expired in 1996, Xtol did the job just fine. It didn't require any more work in the darkroom than the Rodinal negative. But we may well be after different things in our negatives.

I too prefer a negative of high contrast. Good shadow detail, well separated mid-tones, and nearly blocked up highlights. For me, both replenished Xtol and Rodinal have been easy to get to that point with.

Granted, my pinhole negatives are far from ideal, but I think they illustrate, under similar lighting conditions, that both can be used successfully with expired film. It took a bit of testing and adjustment before I got the results I wanted.

- Thomas

RobertV · Mar 26, 2010

OK I went for a Rodinal 1+50 13:00 minutes for this PXP film E.I. 100.
The biggest problem was a regular load in the reel because the 120 roll film was pretty curling after so many years in the package.

Good negatives.

Thomas Bertilsson · Mar 26, 2010

I am so happy Rodinal worked out for you, Robert! Can you show us some examples?

I had the same problems with the film curling after many years of storage. But after processing they straightened out nicely!

- Thomas

.

RobertV · Mar 26, 2010

It's drying now

RobertV · Mar 27, 2010

Kodak PXP 125 E.I. 100 Exp. 1996 put in Rodinal 1+50 for 13:00 minutes.
Yashica Mat 124-G.
River Maas, Ravenstein.

sandermarijn · Mar 27, 2010

Not too bad for a film that's almost as old as my cat (who is very old). If there is fog I don't see it- and if so it might have even helped the shadows.

In just a month's time all those trees and bushes will be happy & green again!

Trey · Mar 27, 2010

PX125 and X-Tol is the most awesome film-developer combination I know of. I really miss my darkroom. :-(

OK what's in the camera: PXP exp. 1996

Attachments

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency