Pushing Rodinal and D76

[MingMingPhoto]

Hey everyone. I'm just wondering...
so basically all my photos are shot at box speed and developed 1+50 in rodinal.

My friend was telling me to try processing in D76 if I want to push my film. He said for Trix Specifically I should shoot at @800 and develop for @1600 in stock dilution.

I tried it and the results are good, however I really like the acutance of Rodinal. It compliments my style of shooting very much.

I shot another roll and I think I got some photos that I really like, however I dont want to devlope in D76 if I don't have to

does anyone have examples and input on developing trix shot at 800 in rodinal as if it was shot at 1600 in 1+50? since I'm over devloping would that pull out more of the shadow detail and still give me that high acutance or will I be better off with D76?

 

[NB23]

Ilfosol-3 is for you

 

[albireo]

since I'm over devloping would that pull out more of the shadow detail and still give me that high acutance or will I be better off with D76?

Pushing does little to the shadows. Shadow detail is decided mostly by exposure, not development. Increasing development time will mostly result in an increase in highlight density. Remember that development time controls contrast.

There is no magic formula to get significantly increased shadow detail by developing more. You need to expose more, not develop more.

Rodinal in 1+50, correctly and regularly agitated, is great for a lot of stuff (and can give gorgeous results especially on medium and large format material, but also on 35mm if you like the gritty look).

However Rodinal is not a speed enhancing developer and is extremely unsuited to pushing film.

 

[relistan]

does anyone have examples and input on developing trix shot at 800 in rodinal as if it was shot at 1600 in 1+50? since I'm over devloping would that pull out more of the shadow detail and still give me that high acutance or will I be better off with D76?

Getting more shadow detail requires more exposure or more speed from the developer/film combination. Pushing is not getting more speed, it is changing the contrast. This shows up most in the highlights and has nearly no effect in the shadows.

When people push film in Rodinal they usually do it with very high dilution like 1+100 and use low agitation, semi-stand methods. I have seen good results from this. But Rodinal is a speed losing developer to start with for most films, so it's not really the best choice for improving shadow detail.

If you want a look that is more like Rodinal and is speed increasing, you might consider Acufine. You can see examples on Flickr.

 

[M-88]

Tell your friend that there are far better developers for pushing the film. Like Microphen, or DD-X. D-76 is a staple developer, good all-rounder. But jack of all trades is master of none.

Also, "pushing" only enhances contrast. It cannot create shadow details out of nowhere, if they weren't captured on the film. So pushing will take you only so far. It was an emergency measure back in the film days, when one had to utilize available light in difficult situations. But nowadays, it somehow became a "creative tool" for some of modern hobbyists, to get "more grain".

 

[JPD]

To get more shadow details when using Rodinal it's better to expose one stop more and cut the time in the developer by around 20%.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

...and there are far better films at push development than Tri-X...HP5, for example. But go ahead and give it a whirl. We have no clue what you are photographing, or the SBR.

 

[MingMingPhoto]

Pushing does little to the shadows. Shadow detail is decided mostly by exposure, not development. Increasing development time will mostly result in an increase in highlight density. Remember that development time controls contrast.

There is no magic formula to get significantly increased shadow detail by developing more. You need to expose more, not develop more.

Rodinal in 1+50, correctly and regularly agitated, is great for a lot of stuff (and can give gorgeous results especially on medium and large format material, but also on 35mm if you like the gritty look).

However Rodinal is not a speed enhancing developer and is extremely unsuited to pushing film.

What do you mean by speed enhancing? What makes it unsuited to push film? Also what do you think of these results? One is TX @800 dev for @1600 rodianl 1+50 and the other is Delta 400 @ 800 Dev in D76 Stock @1600

326 tx@800 Dev Rodinal @1600 1+50 Feb

Shared with Dropbox

www.dropbox.com

327 Delta400 @ 800 D76 @1600

Shared with Dropbox

www.dropbox.com

 

[MingMingPhoto]

Tell your friend that there are far better developers for pushing the film. Like Microphen, or DD-X. D-76 is a staple developer, good all-rounder. But jack of all trades is master of none.

Also, "pushing" only enhances contrast. It cannot create shadow details out of nowhere, if they weren't captured on the film. So pushing will take you only so far. It was an emergency measure back in the film days, when one had to utilize available light in difficult situations. But nowadays, it somehow became a "creative tool" for some of modern hobbyists, to get "more grain".

“a jack of all trades is a master of none, but oftentimes better than a master of one.” (I just like to complete that statement when I hear it) But I feel you. What are the qualities that make microphen or DD-x better for pushing? And if they are better for pushing does that mean that they are somehow pulling shadow detail out of nowhere?

 

[MingMingPhoto]

To get more shadow details when using Rodinal it's better to expose one stop more and cut the time in the developer by around 20%.

I did the opposite and shared my results above - What do you think

 

[MingMingPhoto]

...and there are far better films at push development than Tri-X...HP5, for example. But go ahead and give it a whirl. We have no clue what you are photographing, or the SBR.

idk what SBR is

 

[MattKing]

idk what SBR is

Scene Brightness Range, which is more properly referenced as Scene Luminance Range (but not many are comfortable with using "SLR" for the concept).

“a jack of all trades is a master of none, but oftentimes better than a master of one.” (I just like to complete that statement when I hear it) But I feel you. What are the qualities that make microphen or DD-x better for pushing? And if they are better for pushing does that mean that they are somehow pulling shadow detail out of nowhere?

Microphen and DD-X give you a slight amount more than average light sensitivity as a film and developer combination. They also give reasonable accutance, without enhancing grain.
Rodinal gives you a slight amount less than average light sensitivity as a film and developer combination. And Rodinal tends to enhance grain.

 

[Craig]

SBR is subject brightness range, i.e. how many stops of light are there in a scene from deepest shadow to highlight. A "normal" scene is considered to be 7 stops, and a film that can capture those will usually be developed to a contrast index of around 0.58. As you extend development, that builds the contrast of the film, so the range of light that it can capture is diminished. A 2 stop push might only be able to capture 3 or 4 stops, so anything brighter or darker than that range is lost.

Different developers have different chemicals in them, and they react with the film in different ways. The box speed (i.e. in the case of Delta 100, would be 100 iso) is achieved with a specific developer - usually ID-11 or D76 or similar. Other developers react differently with the film. Rodinal will not develop as much speed as D76 at the same specified contrast index, it's about 2/3 of a stop less. Ilford Microphen developer on the other hand, because it uses different chemicals as it's developing agent can obtain about 2/3 of a stop more effective speed than D76.

So for those reasons (and there are others) Rodinal is not a good developer to use when needing more film speed and Microphen is.

 

[Steven Lee]

Ilfosol-3 is for you

I was about to post the same thing. The speed of D76 + acutance of Rodinal + shelf life of avocado!

 

[Philippe-Georges]

Perhaps a two-bath developer, like Barry Thornton's, could be of some help?

Bath A
Metol 6.5g
Sodium Sulphite 80g (anhydricum)
Water to 1 litre

Bath B
Sodium Metaborate 12g
Water to 1 litre

Give 4.5 min in each bath as a staring point.
No pre-wet, no rinsing between the two baths.
Agitate "normally", the same for stopping and fixing.
Yield: about 15 rolls.
The interesting feature of this developer is that it is very tolerant to exposure or contrast problems.

But there are many other two-bath's that can do the (better-) job, like Diafine, but this one isn't that affordable...
So, home brewing is a option:

Bath A
Water to 800ml @ 40C
Sodium sulfite anhydricum 35g
Hydroquinone 8g
Phenidone 0.25g
Potassium bromide 1g
Citric acid 0.5g (to pH about 8 tested with paper strips)
Water to 1L

Bath B
Water to 800ml @ 40C
Sodium sulfite anhydricum 35g
Sodium carbonate anhydrous 20g (anhydricum)
Water to 1L

See above for using it.

And if you don't like Metol and Hydroquinine, for avoiding health risks, then try Chris Patton's E-76.

But if you do like the Rodinal look, then try to add some Rodinal to X-Tol 1+1 as Pat. Gainer suggested. X-Tol is a good 'pusher', and Rodinal is a nice 'looker'...

 

[koraks]

Perhaps a two-bath developer, like Barry Thornton's, could be of some help?

They're of more limited use with today's thin emulsion films that don't swell much than in the days when 2-bath approaches emerged. I doubt you'll get all that much from a 2-bath approach on a modern film that you can't simply get with an appropriately chosen regular developer.

I did the opposite and shared my results above - What do you think

I wouldn't want to be the guy that has to optically print those negatives as the shadows look eerily...absent. But what I or anyone else but you thinks isn't all that relevant. Does this work for you? In that case, job done...right?

 

[M-88]

“a jack of all trades is a master of none, but oftentimes better than a master of one.” (I just like to complete that statement when I hear it) But I feel you. What are the qualities that make microphen or DD-x better for pushing? And if they are better for pushing does that mean that they are somehow pulling shadow detail out of nowhere?

Thank you, I was unaware of the last bit. As for Microphen/DD-X properties, just what MattKing said.

They give more speed without increasing the grain. Rodinal gives large grain by default. D-76 gives fine grain only when used in stock solution. But with stock solution you get less "compensating effect" on negatives, your highlights may be blown while shadows remain, well, undeveloped and dark. And one more thing: D-76 gives soft edges when used in stock.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Perhaps a two-bath developer, like Barry Thornton's, could be of some help?

Bath A
Metol 6.5g
Sodium Sulphite 80g (anhydricum)
Water to 1 litre

Bath B
Sodium Metaborate 12g
Water to 1 litre

Give 4.5 min in each bath as a staring point.
No pre-wet, no rinsing between the two baths.
Agitate "normally", the same for stopping and fixing.
Yield: about 15 rolls.
The interesting feature of this developer is that it is very tolerant to exposure or contrast problems.

But there are many other two-bath's that can do the (better-) job, like Diafine, but his one isn't that affordable...
So, home brewing is a option:

Bath A
Water to 800ml @ 40C
Sodium sulfite anhydricum 35g
Hydroquinone 8g
Phenidone 0.25g
Potassium bromide 1g
Citric acid 0.5g (to pH about 8 tested with paper strips)
Water to 1L

Bath B
Water to 800ml @ 40C
Sodium sulfite anhydrous 35g
Sodium carbonate anhydrous 20g (anhydricum)
Water to 1L

See above for using it.

And if you don't like Metol and Hydroquinine, for avoiding health risks, then try Chris Patton's E-76.

But if you do like the Rodinal look, then try to madd some Rodinal to X-Tol 1+1 as Pat. Gainer suggested. X-Tol is a good 'pusher', and Rodinal is a nice 'looker'...

I recently started using Thornton's 2-Bath. Has been working well with TMY-2, HP5, Xray (green-latitude), and a couple of others.

 

[albireo]

Rodinal gives large grain by default.

Yes and no. True for 35mm I'm sure. But Rodinal 1+50 on 120 and above gives incredibly smooth, largely grainless negatives on low to medium speed film. Unless one overdevelops.

Those of you who haven't tried Rodinal 1+50 (agitated, not stand) on 120 Fomapan 100, Pan-F, Acros etc are missing out.

Let's remember that Rodinal predates the 35mm format.

 

[MingMingPhoto]

They're of more limited use with today's thin emulsion films that don't swell much than in the days when 2-bath approaches emerged. I doubt you'll get all that much from a 2-bath approach on a modern film that you can't simply get with an appropriately chosen regular developer.



I wouldn't want to be the guy that has to optically print those negatives as the shadows look eerily...absent. But what I or anyone else but you thinks isn't all that relevant. Does this work for you? In that case, job done...right?

can you comapre the delta and the TRIX since I used D76 on the Delta and Rodinal on the TriX. Do you think there's an actual way to get more shadow detail on the subway? I guess with microphen like peopel are saying. Or the DDX. I'lll try those and see what happens, but I'd like to see more shadow detail from anyone else if they have examples of subway photos or lowlight photos like this

 

[MingMingPhoto]

Perhaps a two-bath developer, like Barry Thornton's, could be of some help?

Bath A
Metol 6.5g
Sodium Sulphite 80g (anhydricum)
Water to 1 litre

Bath B
Sodium Metaborate 12g
Water to 1 litre

Give 4.5 min in each bath as a staring point.
No pre-wet, no rinsing between the two baths.
Agitate "normally", the same for stopping and fixing.
Yield: about 15 rolls.
The interesting feature of this developer is that it is very tolerant to exposure or contrast problems.

But there are many other two-bath's that can do the (better-) job, like Diafine, but his one isn't that affordable...
So, home brewing is a option:

Bath A
Water to 800ml @ 40C
Sodium sulfite anhydricum 35g
Hydroquinone 8g
Phenidone 0.25g
Potassium bromide 1g
Citric acid 0.5g (to pH about 8 tested with paper strips)
Water to 1L

Bath B
Water to 800ml @ 40C
Sodium sulfite anhydricum 35g
Sodium carbonate anhydrous 20g (anhydricum)
Water to 1L

See above for using it.

And if you don't like Metol and Hydroquinine, for avoiding health risks, then try Chris Patton's E-76.

But if you do like the Rodinal look, then try to madd some Rodinal to X-Tol 1+1 as Pat. Gainer suggested. X-Tol is a good 'pusher', and Rodinal is a nice 'looker'...

how did you learn about these chemcials? And do you understand these chemicals? If so would you mind explaining how they do what they do? also does the order matter?

 

[MingMingPhoto]

Thank you, I was unaware of the last bit. As for Microphen/DD-X properties, just what MattKing said.

They give more speed without increasing the grain. Rodinal gives large grain by default. D-76 gives fine grain only when used in stock solution. But with stock solution you get less "compensating effect" on negatives, your highlights may be blown while shadows remain, well, undeveloped and dark. And one more thing: D-76 gives soft edges when used in stock.

Yes I totally felt the edges of some trix shot at 800 dev for 1600 in stock D76 was way too soft. I heard the acutance of Rodinal is what makes it seem more sharp, so is that why D76 seems so soft?

Also what dilution would you recommend for d76 to give good acutance and shadow depth?

here are examples of D76 with tx@800 Dev for @1600 in stock:

oh wow actually nvm I don't have any D76 at those settings. looks like I only did it at 1600 when I shot the rol lat 1600 but didnt' like my resutls so isntead switched to rodinal and THEN tried doing 800 and devoping for 1600. only did that prior thing with delta 400

 

[MingMingPhoto]

SBR is subject brightness range, i.e. how many stops of light are there in a scene from deepest shadow to highlight. A "normal" scene is considered to be 7 stops, and a film that can capture those will usually be developed to a contrast index of around 0.58. As you extend development, that builds the contrast of the film, so the range of light that it can capture is diminished. A 2 stop push might only be able to capture 3 or 4 stops, so anything brighter or darker than that range is lost.

Different developers have different chemicals in them, and they react with the film in different ways. The box speed (i.e. in the case of Delta 100, would be 100 iso) is achieved with a specific developer - usually ID-11 or D76 or similar. Other developers react differently with the film. Rodinal will not develop as much speed as D76 at the same specified contrast index, it's about 2/3 of a stop less. Ilford Microphen developer on the other hand, because it uses different chemicals as it's developing agent can obtain about 2/3 of a stop more effective speed than D76.

So for those reasons (and there are others) Rodinal is not a good developer to use when needing more film speed and Microphen is.

I seeee thank you!

 

[koraks]

can you comapre the delta and the TRIX since I used D76 on the Delta and Rodinal on the TriX.

So different films and different developers. What would the comparison mean / tell us? I think the TriX looks a bit grainier and the Delta seems to have a bit straighter response with a bit more shadow detail. But again, what I see doesn't matter all that much - it's about what you like/need!

Do you think there's an actual way to get more shadow detail on the subway?

Expose longer
Or use fresh Delta 3200. It's a bit faster than Delta 400.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Hey everyone. I'm just wondering...
so basically all my photos are shot at box speed and developed 1+50 in rodinal.

My friend was telling me to try processing in D76 if I want to push my film. He said for Trix Specifically I should shoot at @800 and develop for @1600 in stock dilution.

I tried it and the results are good, however I really like the acutance of Rodinal. It compliments my style of shooting very much.

I shot another roll and I think I got some photos that I really like, however I dont want to devlope in D76 if I don't have to

does anyone have examples and input on developing trix shot at 800 in rodinal as if it was shot at 1600 in 1+50? since I'm over devloping would that pull out more of the shadow detail and still give me that high acutance or will I be better off with D76?

I'm the wrong guy to ask since I'm totally against compensating for underexposure with overdevelopment. Extra development cannot generate shadow detail that hasn't been caught by exposure.