Relearning and encountering issues

EthanFrank · Jun 21, 2017

Hi there. I'm developing black and white again at home after a long hiatus. I'm using Neopan 400, semi-stand developing in Rodinol for an hour, stopping for 5 minutes in water, and fixing in Kodafix. Washing using the Ilford method. All of this is the same as I used to do, with the exception of Rodinol (used to use HC110).

All my resulting negatives have had a strong silver sheen on the emulation side. As a result they are hard to scan and overall of quite low contrast and overall quality. Huge grain, fairly foggy.

Does my issue suggest one particular mistake I might be making? I suspected that I was under-fixing, but increasing the fixing time didn't solve the issue.

Petraio Prime · Jun 21, 2017

EthanFrank said:
Hi there. I'm developing black and white again at home after a long hiatus. I'm using Neopan 400, semi-stand developing in Rodinol for an hour, stopping for 5 minutes in water, and fixing in Kodafix. Washing using the Ilford method. All of this is the same as I used to do, with the exception of Rodinol (used to use HC110).

All my resulting negatives have had a strong silver sheen on the emulation side. As a result they are hard to scan and overall of quite low contrast and overall quality. Huge grain, fairly foggy.

Does my issue suggest one particular mistake I might be making?

Well, basically, everything.

1. Scanning will not produce good images with conventional B&W film (contrasty, grainy). Use an enlarger or XP2.
2. Rodinal is a poor developer that produces a loss of film speed and excessive grain. Use a developer like D-76 for example.
3. 'Stand' development was used with glass plates in the old days (pre 1940) with glycin developers (which tend to streak less). Don't use it with roll film. It is not recommended by film manufacturers. Now you know why.
4. Use a stop bath.

jeffreyg · Jun 21, 2017

I use Delta 100 and Delta 400 in 120 and HP5 in 4x5 developed in either ID11, Ilfotec DDX or PMK Pyro. All at box speed and developed at mfg time/temp unless I need a contrast change. Stop with water and fix with Ilford Rapid Fix. I have no problems (unless I made an error with metering) with either printing or scanning. My scanner is an "ancient" Epson 4870. This has worked for me for a long time. I am not prone to experimenting, if it's not broken I don't fix it.

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/

jimjm · Jun 21, 2017

Rather than stand developing, try using Rodinal 1+50 with intermittent agitation. I haven't used Neopan 400, but I've developed Tri-X, TMax400 and HP5+ this way, agitating for the first 30 sec and for 5 sec each min thereafter. Development times vary between 10 and 18 mins, depending on the film and temp. Also, why the 5 min stop time? You don't need to immerse in the stop (continuous agitation) for more than 30 sec or 1 min, whether you're using water or stop bath.
- I usually prefer HC110 or D-76 for most films, though.
- Also, is your KodaFix fresh? Do a clip test just to make sure it's good. The film should clear within a few mins, then just double that time when you fix your roll.

Leigh B · Jun 21, 2017

Petraio Prime said:
2. Rodinal is a poor developer that produces a loss of film speed and excessive grain.

Sorry to disagree, but...

I've used Rodinal for over 6 decades, yielding excellent negative with slow films.
it's really not designed for 400-speed and faster, as it will enhance grain effects.

I've never experienced any loss of film speed with any film I shoot (100-speed and slower box speeds).

- Leigh

MattKing · Jun 21, 2017

EthanFrank said:
Hi there. I'm developing black and white again at home after a long hiatus. I'm using Neopan 400, semi-stand developing in Rodinol for an hour, stopping for 5 minutes in water, and fixing in Kodafix. Washing using the Ilford method. All of this is the same as I used to do, with the exception of Rodinol (used to use HC110).

All my resulting negatives have had a strong silver sheen on the emulation side. As a result they are hard to scan and overall of quite low contrast and overall quality. Huge grain, fairly foggy.

Does my issue suggest one particular mistake I might be making? I suspected that I was under-fixing, but increasing the fixing time didn't solve the issue.

Welcome back.
I'd suggest a clip test for the fixer first. Which type is it - the liquid version or the powder?
I'm not a fan of stand or semi-stand developing, nor am I a fan of a water stop rather than stop bath, nor do I use Rodinol, so you may not like my opinions.
I would suggest though that "standard" development in Rodinal would take away one of the variables.
Is the water stop using continuously flowing water? If so, it is much longer than necessary. If not, it may not be effectively stopping development.

Patrick Robert James · Jun 21, 2017

There could be an issue with your fix. Unless you post an image of the neg it is hard to guess.... Try using fresh fix to see if it clears the film.

There is nothing wrong with Rodinal.

EthanFrank · Jun 21, 2017

Thank you for the range of opinions. I will take much of the advice here. I understand that stand development in Rodinol is not to everyone's preference but it seems like a well respected technique and I like the results I have seen. Furthermore it seems like there aren't too many possibilities in messing the development up. Still, I will try using Rodinol more traditionally and see if there are changes.

Of the issues I mentioned, I'm most concerned about the metallic silver sheen on the emulsion side of the negatives. The issues surrounding grain will likely improve as I figure out my developing technique, but the silver sheen strikes me as an unrelated issue.

I've reviewed my negatives from years past and not one had this silver sheen issue. Even the ones I did as I was learning the first time around.

MattKing · Jun 21, 2017

It sounds like a problem with the fixer to me. Here is a link to an "Article" I posted about fixer clip tests - be sure to reference the Discussion as well: (there was a url link here which no longer exists)
Dichroic fog is another relatively unlikely source of the problem - but I would check the fixer first.

Petraio Prime · Jun 21, 2017

Negatives are only the means to an end, namely a good print. Start with the manufacturer's recommended procedures (tank development, intermittent inversion agitation), print the negatives in an enlarger, and go from there.

EthanFrank · Jun 21, 2017

MattKing said:
It sounds like a problem with the fixer to me. Here is a link to an "Article" I posted about fixer clip tests - be sure to reference the Discussion as well: (there was a url link here which no longer exists)
Dichroic fog is another relatively unlikely source of the problem - but I would check the fixer first.

Thanks very much. I'll do a clip test. I am not sure how I might have messed up the fixer (it's reasonably new KodaFix from liquid) but I'll certainly check it and make a new batch if needed.

I should mention that all rolls I've developed since I've decided to start doing this again have had the same issue, even from when the fixer was new.

Gerald C Koch · Jun 21, 2017

I also use Rodinal 1+49 with excellent results. BUT I also use conventional agitation, inversions with a swirling motion every 30 seconds. For some reason some people on APUG are adverse to conventional methods and immediately jump in with some nonstandard method. They never consider whether the standard method gives good results. Page 2 in the cited article describe the agitation method I use.

http://imaging.kodakalaris.com/sites/prod/files/files/products/f4017_TriX.pdf

Leigh B · Jun 21, 2017

Gerald C Koch said:
For some reason some people on APUG are adverse to conventional methods and immediately jump in with some nonstandard method. They never consider whether the standard method gives good results.

Absolutely true, and not limited to photography.

In any discipline, newbies don't make a name for themselves by advocating standard procedures.

They come up with something new,proclaim their "discovery" to the heavens, and gather a following.
That doesn't make them right. It just makes them famous.

And there are many folks who will claim to be disciples of whatever is new.
Not because it's "better" than what's gone before, but because they want to be part of the "in" crowd.

You can find this in every aspect of the human experience, from music to fashion.

- Leigh

Gerald C Koch · Jun 21, 2017

Leigh B said:
Absolutely true, and not limited to photography.

In any discipline, newbies don't make a name for themselves by advocating standard procedures.

They come up with something new,proclaim their "discovery" to the heavens, and gather a following.
That doesn't make them right. It just makes them famous.

- Leigh

+1000

Or they fail utterly and wonder why.

eddie · Jun 21, 2017

Gerald C Koch said:
They never consider whether the standard method gives good results.

There's a reason they've become "standard" methods.

RauschenOderKorn · Jun 22, 2017

Maybe Fuji has some recommendations?

http://www.fujifilmusa.com/shared/bin/Neopan400.pdf

Harry Stevens · Jun 22, 2017

Petraio Prime said:
Well, basically, everything.

1. Scanning will not produce good images with conventional B&W film (contrasty, grainy). Use an enlarger or XP2.
2. Rodinal is a poor developer that produces a loss of film speed and excessive grain. Use a developer like D-76 for example.
3. 'Stand' development was used with glass plates in the old days (pre 1940) with glycin developers (which tend to streak less). Don't use it with roll film. It is not recommended by film manufacturers. Now you know why.
4. Use a stop bath.

If you take out all the misinformation from that post that they would be nothing left but a blank space.....

Neal · Jun 22, 2017

Dear Ethan,

Water quality can be an issue. Distilled might help. The time in the developer might be too long for the concentration you are using.

Good luck,

Neal Wydra

jeffreyg · Jun 22, 2017

When all else fails, follow the directions. IMOP the film companies want you to get good results so you will continue to buy their products. I have found their instructions to give consistently good results. Sometimes for one's personal tastes or for a particular look some tweaking helps but most of the time following mfg's recommendations works.

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/

Gerald C Koch · Jun 22, 2017

EthanFrank said:
Thank you for the range of opinions. I will take much of the advice here. I understand that stand development in Rodinol is not to everyone's preference but it seems like a well respected technique and I like the results I have seen. Furthermore it seems like there aren't too many possibilities in messing the development up. Still, I will try using Rodinol more traditionally and see if there are changes.

Of the issues I mentioned, I'm most concerned about the metallic silver sheen on the emulsion side of the negatives. The issues surrounding grain will likely improve as I figure out my developing technique, but the silver sheen strikes me as an unrelated issue.

I've reviewed my negatives from years past and not one had this silver sheen issue. Even the ones I did as I was learning the first time around.

First let me say that stand development is not a well respected developing method except in certain very limited circumstances where tonal compression is required. You will find the method described for this purpose in books on the Zone System. You will not see it recommended by any film manufacturers that I am aware of. Even among those who use this method I have yet to see ANY cogent rationale for its use. It is popular with those who quite frankly are just too lazy to invert a tank. Anyway you will not get optimal results from this method.

I have been developing film to over sixty years and never used this method. In fact I never missed it.

I suspect that your problem may be associated with exhausted fixer. From the description it seems like metallic silver has come out of the bath and deposited on the surface of the emulsion. Unless it interferes with printing making it is best to leave it alone. Otherwise try using a weak ferricyanide bleach and refixing. The idea here is to remove the surface silver and not the image silver. Be careful not to over bleach.

Petraio Prime · Jun 22, 2017

Harry Stevens said:
If you take out all the misinformation from that post that they would be nothing left but a blank space.....

Uh, everything is true.

trendland · Jun 22, 2017

EthanFrank said:
Hi there. I'm developing black and white again at home after a long hiatus. I'm using Neopan 400, semi-stand developing in Rodinol for an hour, stopping for 5 minutes in water, and fixing in Kodafix. Washing using the Ilford method. All of this is the same as I used to do, with the exception of Rodinol (used to use HC110).

All my resulting negatives have had a strong silver sheen on the emulation side. As a result they are hard to scan and overall of quite low contrast and overall quality. Huge grain, fairly foggy.

Does my issue suggest one particular mistake I might be making? I suspected that I was under-fixing, but increasing the fixing time didn't solve the issue.

As you said : " increasing the fixing time ......." - you have found the problem itself.
Now just following your own unerring instinct.
Change the fixer and ceep going with your rodinal developer.
If all results from your oppinion are much
to grainy - change developer and go forward.
It is a process in several respects to develope films in darkroom.
Never forget this!

with regards

trendland · Jun 22, 2017

Gerald C Koch said:
First let me say that stand development is not a well respected developing method except in certain very limited circumstances where tonal compression is required. You will find the method described for this purpose in books on the Zone System. You will not see it recommended by any film manufacturers that I am aware of. Even among those who use this method I have yet to see ANY cogent rational for its use. It is popular with those who quite frankly are just too lazy to invert a tank. Anyway you will not get optimal results from this method.

I have been developing film to over sixty years and never used this method. In fact I never missed it.

I suspect that your problem may be associated with exhausted fixer. From the description it seems like metallic silver has come out of the bath and deposited on the surface of the emulsion. Unless it interferes with printing making it is best to leave it alone. Otherwise try using a weak ferricyanide bleach and refixing. The idea here is to remove the surface silver and not the image silver. Be careful not to over bleach.

Gerald - ...You stated you've been developed film to over 60th years ..
But you never used stand developing..

I will not belive it ...
Try to remember it - perhaps you didn't
like the results in comparison to other
methods.
But let this guy the chance to find out.
I used it with very much fun (stand developing with rodinal 1 :200/4hours)
I guess the last 2 hours happened nothing ..
But I would never show the results to anybody.

.
I defintivly will do it again but not at the
next time.
Rodinal is waiting so long.....

with regards

Relearning and encountering issues

EthanFrank

Petraio Prime

jeffreyg

jimjm

Leigh B

MattKing

Moderator

Patrick Robert James

EthanFrank

MattKing

Moderator

Petraio Prime

EthanFrank

Gerald C Koch

Leigh B

Gerald C Koch

eddie

RauschenOderKorn

Harry Stevens

Neal

jeffreyg

Gerald C Koch

Petraio Prime

trendland

trendland

Relearning and encountering issues

Moderator

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency