Quick Rodinal Question

[Uncle Bill]

I am planning to develop a roll of Agfa APX100 in Rodinal 1:50 dilution at 20 c. I am however not getting a consensus on the developing time. Some sources say 13 minutes and others 17 minutes. The film was rated at 100 asa. So which is the right time?

Bill

 

[SteveH]

Bill,
I used this combo exclusively when it was available, but I used it 1:25. In doing so, my development times were 8:30, shooting @ 100asa. I know what you mean however: Mass Dev chart says 13mins, AGFA documentation says 17mins. Looking over my negs, Im pretty sure that 17mins might be the best starting point. Hopefully someone will chime in with a more definitive answer.

Regards,

 

[Travis Nunn]

I've not dev'd this combo, but personally, I'd start out with what Agfa says and then tweak it from there, if necessary.

 

[Uncle Bill]

Well, I am following the manufacturers instructions and see what happens.

Bill

 

[Dinesh]

I do all my APX 100 at 1:50 for 13 min. (for a condensor enlarger)

 

[Uncle Bill]

Hi Dinesh,

Right now I am just scanning negs, I do plan to enlarge prints but I farm that out to guys like Bob Carnie. I have no idea what kind of enlargers they use in commercial labs.

Bill

 

[Dinesh]

Hi Dinesh,

Right now I am just scanning negs, I do plan to enlarge prints but I farm that out to guys like Bob Carnie. I have no idea what kind of enlargers they use in commercial labs.

Bill

He has both.

 

[Markok765]

better to over develop than to under develop

 

[Uncle Bill]

The roll of APX 100 turned out, I am tired now. I letting it dry overnight and I'll scan some shots to the gallery tomorrow or Friday night.

Bill

 

[SteveH]

Glad to hear it Bill.

 

[Curt]

better to over develop than to under develop
__________________
Marko Kovacevic


better to listen than to run off your mouth

 

[L Gebhardt]

better to over develop than to under develop

Actually I have always gotten better results under developing. Correct development is better still. Over development increases grain. Plus it seems to me that I get worse tonality out of the lower grades of paper, but that may just be my working conditions.

 

[Zathras]

better to over develop than to under develop

Not really, if you develop too much, contrast can get out of control very quickly. You don't want a neg with nice dark blacks, these are your highlights in the print,and you don't want them to be blasted out by over development. In many cases, the manufacturer's recommended times are too long, especially when you expose the film at box speed. The best thing to do, as David Vestal once said, is to "expose just enough and don't develop too much"

 

[Markok765]

Not really, if you develop too much, contrast can get out of control very quickly. You don't want a neg with nice dark blacks, these are your highlights in the print,and you don't want them to be blasted out by over development. In many cases, the manufacturer's recommended times are too long, especially when you expose the film at box speed. The best thing to do, as David Vestal once said, is to "expose just enough and don't develop too much"

Its too un contrasty for me as i dont have multigrade filters, and i prefer the contrast of an over developed print vs under developed

 

[Gerald Koch]

From my experience on APUG, there are no quick Rodinal questions.

 

[L Gebhardt]

Its too un contrasty for me as i dont have multigrade filters, and i prefer the contrast of an over developed print vs under developed

If the print is flat then the film it isn't overdeveloped. Develop more, get some filters, or move to graded papers. Those are your only choices. If you want to salvage you negs then to an intensifier like selenium toning, get some multigrade filters, or get a harder grade of paper.