Please Recommend a Developer

[Adam W]

Thanks for all the replies, folks.

I love grain, but too much is, well, too much. I shoot 120, 35mm, and a lot of half-frame 35mm (Olympus Pen FT.)

I was leaning towards HC-110 or DD-X, but Richard's lovely examples have me reconsidering Rodinal.

Keep up the suggestions!

(And Richard, I live in SF, but spent my first year in California in Albany!)

 

[Ian Grant]

hi ian

have you ever seen rodinal made negatives that were "fine grained"
last year someone told me rodinal could produce 35mm negatives
that were extremely fine grained .. when i called his bluff, he insisted
it was true .. any idea what he might have been talking about ?
i don't mean fine grained to optically enlarge 35mm to 8x10 or 11x14, but
very large prints and have the grain not very noticible ...
( i have never used rodinal and have alwasy read it was a "grainy" developer
and its forté was making beautiful grain, not the opposite )

Yes I've seen excellent fine grain results with Rodinal and AP25/APX25, AP100/APX100 and Tmax 100 as well as producing them myself. it was my developer of choice for slow films for nearly 20 years. I replaced it with Pyrocat HD which I dind slightly better and far better with fast films.

The muth that it gives grainy results is largely down to the free hydroxide and poor temperature controls.

Ian

 

[Ian Grant]

Some of us like a small amount of grain. It's why we shoot film. I think those flower shots show beautiful grain, not excessive at all (but its all in the eye of the beholder). For the non grain lovers, there's always digital I suppose. Look, there's room for all sorts of opinions, as long as we understand that's all they are....opinions. The op didn't ask for tiny grained developers, I gave him concrete examples of how Rodinal can produce great negs in even the miniature formats. But, some people clearly just like to argue for the sake of arguing. You go to your church, we'll go to ours.

It's not just the grain it's the lack of definition and sharpness that your loosing and you should get that with Rodinal. I'm not arguing a point just pointing out poor technique.

Ian

 

[zanxion72]

D-76. It gives great results with any film and one can hardly go wrong with that. Rodinal seconds to it, for its grainy results.

 

[RattyMouse]

Thanks for all the replies, folks.

I love grain, but too much is, well, too much. I shoot 120, 35mm, and a lot of half-frame 35mm (Olympus Pen FT.)

I was leaning towards HC-110 or DD-X, but Richard's lovely examples have me reconsidering Rodinal.

Keep up the suggestions!

(And Richard, I live in SF, but spent my first year in California in Albany!)

DD-X is much more expensive than HC-110. I used to use HC-110 as my general purpose developer and saved DD-X for special ISO 400 films as well as all my Delta 3200 film.

 

[Ian Grant]

D-76. It gives great results with any film and one can hardly go wrong with that. Rodinal seconds to it, for its grainy results.

Used properly Rodinal will give finer grain negatives (with some films) than D76 with better sharpness, that was why Agfa recommended it for APX100 etc. You get the same improvements over D76 with Xtol.

It was the late Peter Goldfield, who had assisted Minor White, that showed me what Rodinal was really capable of, he had some superb large 35mm prints and the grain was unobtrusive. Peter swore by Agfa materials and had in fact been the private importer when Agfa themselves withdrew from the B&W market for a few years in the UK in the 1980's - Peter was selling enough to make Agfa change their mind and begin importing again.

Tight temperature control throughout the process cycle including washing is critical with Rodinal, the free hydroxide it contains is known to cause issues with some films - Neopan 400 in particular if the temperatures vary to much.

Richard Sintchak has shown with his examples how capable Rodinal is when used properly.

Ian

 

[CropDusterMan]

PMK Pyro from Photographers Formulary

 

[Regular Rod]

Can you cope with two solutions (A and B) rather than just one?

Yes? Mix your own OBSIDIAN AQUA from raw chemicals. The resultant stock solutions have an enormous shelf life (neither stock solution goes off). In use you put 1ml of solution A into 300 ml of tap water, add 12.5ml of solution B and make up the volume to 500ml. It is cheap to make and dirt cheap to use due to this rate of dilution in the working solution. Now here's the clever bit... OBSIDIAN AQUA develops any type of normal B&W film all at the same time. Using a semi-stand agitation regime it acts as a compensating developer. This versatility allows you to develop different films in the same tank at the same time, for example, FOMAPAN 200 and HP5 Plus together. The protection it gives to highlights mean that you can use the exposure part of Zone System with roll film and making completely different photographs on each frame. This saves money because there is no need to bracket anymore. If you make 12 exposures you get 12 printable negatives.

No? Go for the slightly more expensive to make up 510-PYRO. This is a one shot but you use 5ml in 300ml of tap water made up to a final volume of 500ml so it doesn't go as far as OBSIDIAN AQUA. 510-PYRO stock solution keeps for ages. It can be used exactly as described above for OBSIDIAN AQUA.

RR

 

[MartinP]

I'd suggest DDX. Rodinal is too easy to "get wrong" - it is far more sensitive than DDX to processing changes and also loses a little film-speed, so for a relative beginner the DDX makes more sense. Buy a litre and split it in to two 500ml bottles (available from the pharmacist or online, even the same place that you got the developer) for confidence in storage, though it's pretty reasonable anyway.

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

Got any photos from negs developed in OBSIDIAN AQUA examples to share? Sounds interesting.

 

[removed account4]

Yes I've seen excellent fine grain results with Rodinal and AP25/APX25, AP100/APX100 and Tmax 100 as well as producing them myself. it was my developer of choice for slow films for nearly 20 years. I replaced it with Pyrocat HD which I dind slightly better and far better with fast films.

The muth that it gives grainy results is largely down to the free hydroxide and poor temperature controls.

Ian

thanks ian, I can see that with low ISO films but the conversation specifically
revolved around traditional grained films ( hp5+ & tri x ) and enormous enlargements ...
and I was told road-1n-all was a fined grained developer ... and would have done the job

I guess it was probably temperature controls and agitation techniques ...

it seemed sort of not quite right but what do I know,
I'm suggesting thr current OP use kitchen sink and high activity print developers to
develop his oeuvre ...

thanks
john

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

Got any photos from negs developed in OBSIDIAN AQUA examples to share? Sounds interesting.

Nevermind Rod! I just found this! Wow!

Bakewell - Coombs Road Spaghetti Junction by Regular Rod, on Flickr

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

Just how similar is this Obsidian Aqua to Thornton's DiXactol Ultra?

 

[Ian Grant]

thanks ian, I can see that with low ISO films but the conversation specifically
revolved around traditional grained films ( hp5+ & tri x ) and enormous enlargements ...
and I was told road-1n-all was a fined grained developer ... and would have done the job

I guess it was probably temperature controls and agitation techniques ...

it seemed sort of not quite right but what do I know,
I'm suggesting thr current OP use kitchen sink and high activity print developers to
develop his oeuvre ...

thanks
john

Rodinal with Tri-X or HP% will give slightly more grain compared to D76 nd Xtol will be the finest but it shouldn't give the mush grain and loss of definition in the posted examples, there's something very wrong there. I'd guess poor temperature control is the culprit it usually is with Rodinal.

Most people want to get the best out of a film (you need to at todays prices) and Rodinal gives excellent micro-contrast I've seen prints from 35mm Tri X & HP5 in Rodinal and while there is slightly more grain than I'd likethere's good edge effects.

Ian

 

[Regular Rod]

Nevermind Rod! I just found this! Wow!

Bakewell - Coombs Road Spaghetti Junction by Regular Rod, on Flickr

Aha! Well spotted. On Flickr just do a search for either OBSIDIAN AQUA or 510-PYRO and check out Steve Barnett's work...

RR

 

[Regular Rod]

Just how similar is this Obsidian Aqua to Thornton's DiXactol Ultra?

Very similar in use. The development times for me are 3 minutes 45 seconds shorter with DiXactol Ultra than OBSIDIAN AQUA. The cost of making up OBSIDIAN AQUA and its reputation of a seemingly endless shelf life, persuaded me to try it when my DiXactol was in need of more solution B. I used to use all sorts of developers from D76, HC110, Caffenol, and others but in recent years just work with 510-PYRO and OBSIDIAN AQUA. They both last ages, 510-PYRO works just as nicely when it is the colour of Indian Ink as it did when it was new and looked like dilute Rose Hip syrup. OBSIDIAN AQUA solution A goes an ivory colour and solution B stays clear (it is simply a solution of Sodium Carbonate after all).

RR

 

[cliveh]

Rodinal is too easy to "get wrong"

What can you get wrong? The simple maths of dilution ratio?

 

[Ian Grant]

What can you get wrong? The simple maths of dilution ratio?

Variations in temperature during the process cycle, they can cause a large effect on apparent graininess. That's why some get poor results and others get superb results.

In Germany many workers use Rodinal at 15-16ºC to get the finest grain and all steps are at that temperature. The problem is Rodinal contains free Hydroxide which softens emulsions and shifts in temperature cause surface artifacts on the gelatin layer of the film. There's no need to use low temperature you just need to be very consitent at all stages of the process +/- 1ºC including washing and you get superb results. It's that simple, deviate and you'll lose everything to excessive apparent graininess and very poor quality, no edge sharpness lower micro contrast etc.

Ian

 

[cliveh]

Variations in temperature during the process cycle, they can cause a large effect on apparent graininess. That's why some get poor results and others get superb results.

In Germany many workers use Rodinal at 15-16ºC to get the finest grain and all steps are at that temperature. The problem is Rodinal contains free Hydroxide which softens emulsions and shifts in temperature cause surface artifacts on the gelatin layer of the film. There's no need to use low temperature you just need to be very consitent at all stages of the process +/- 1ºC including washing and you get superb results. It's that simple, deviate and you'll lose everything to excessive apparent graininess and very poor quality, no edge sharpness lower micro contrast etc.

Ian

Ian, isn't this a bit of a contradiction to some of your previous posts? Temperature variation is important with all developers.

 

[Ian Grant]

Ian, isn't this a bit of a contradiction to some of your previous posts? Temperature variation is important with all developers.

I've always advocated very tight temperature control, yes it's important with all films & developers but it's even more so with Rodinal, or any other deveoper using Hydroxide.

Don't confuse me working at higher temperatures in Turkey in the Summer, I keep my process cycle within +/- 0.2ºC when processing at 26-27ºC, and it's very easy as that's the ambient water literature.

So it#s not what temperature you choose it's keeping to it accurately throughout the cycle. There's Kodak research that shows temperature choice doesn't affect grain size, as long as you keep to that temperature throughout the cycle and that matches my experience/

Ian

 

[cliveh]

I've always advocated very tight temperature control, yes it's important with all films & developers but it's even more so with Rodinal, or any other deveoper using Hydroxide.

Don't confuse me working at higher temperatures in Turkey in the Summer, I keep my process cycle within +/- 0.2ºC when processing at 26-27ºC, and it's very easy as that's the ambient water literature.

So it#s not what temperature you choose it's keeping to it accurately throughout the cycle. There's Kodak research that shows temperature choice doesn't affect grain size, as long as you keep to that temperature throughout the cycle and that matches my experience/

Ian

As long as you combine this with tight time control, particularly during development.

 

[Adam W]

I appreciate everyone's responses, and I like to hear more on this topic.

In the meantime, here's a free business idea for someone more entrepreneurial than me: someone should sell sampler sets of developers. Offer a set of 5 or 10 different developers, with enough of each to process five rolls of film. I'd buy one of those. Alternatively, you all can just send me little bit of your favorite to try out.

 

[Ian Grant]

As long as you combine this with tight time control, particularly during development.

Time will affect contrast and to certain extent grain but with Rodinal Dilution is a far better way to control contrast. It's not time that caused the excessive graininess and loss of detail in the examples posted here it's just very sloppy processing.

All aspects need to be under full control, exposure, development time, temperature, agitation, but it's actually very easy many of us have done it for years, you have to for colour work and B&W is no different.

Ian

 

[Ian Grant]

Basically another Rodinal thread, as I suspected it would be in the beginning.

It's not another Rodinal thread but so many recommend it and can't actually use it properly which is rather sad.

Ian

 

[Sirius Glass]

If Rodinal is that hard to use properly, why bother to use it?