• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Relearning and encountering issues

Train

A
Train

  • 1
  • 1
  • 21
Train Station 1

A
Train Station 1

  • 0
  • 0
  • 22

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
201,784
Messages
2,830,152
Members
100,946
Latest member
李添翼
Recent bookmarks
0

EthanFrank

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Sep 9, 2011
Messages
92
Location
Toronto, Can
Format
Multi Format
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

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
May 17, 2009
Messages
177
Format
35mm
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.
 
Last edited:

jeffreyg

Subscriber
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jun 12, 2008
Messages
2,766
Location
florida
Format
Medium Format
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

Subscriber
Allowing Ads
Joined
May 2, 2007
Messages
1,239
Location
San Diego CA
Format
Multi Format
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

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jan 17, 2011
Messages
2,059
Location
Maryland, USA
Format
Multi Format
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
 
  • Petraio Prime
  • Deleted
  • Reason: Abrasive tone and responses thereto.

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
55,156
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
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:smile:.
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.
 
OP
OP

EthanFrank

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Sep 9, 2011
Messages
92
Location
Toronto, Can
Format
Multi Format
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

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
55,156
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
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
  • Deleted
  • Reason: Abrasive tone and responses thereto.
  • Leigh B
  • Leigh B
  • Deleted
  • Reason: Abrasive tone and responses thereto.

Petraio Prime

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
May 17, 2009
Messages
177
Format
35mm
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.
 
OP
OP

EthanFrank

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Sep 9, 2011
Messages
92
Location
Toronto, Can
Format
Multi Format
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.
 
  • EthanFrank
  • Deleted
  • Reason: Response to delted post.

Gerald C Koch

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jul 12, 2010
Messages
8,131
Location
Southern USA
Format
Multi Format
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
 
Last edited:

Leigh B

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jan 17, 2011
Messages
2,059
Location
Maryland, USA
Format
Multi Format
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

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jul 12, 2010
Messages
8,131
Location
Southern USA
Format
Multi Format
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.
 
Last edited:

Harry Stevens

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Dec 18, 2014
Messages
424
Location
East Midland
Format
Multi Format
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

Subscriber
Allowing Ads
Joined
Dec 3, 2004
Messages
2,027
Location
Chicago, West Suburbs
Format
Multi Format
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

Subscriber
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jun 12, 2008
Messages
2,766
Location
florida
Format
Medium Format
When all else fails, follow the directions. :whistling: 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

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jul 12, 2010
Messages
8,131
Location
Southern USA
Format
Multi Format
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.
 
Last edited:

trendland

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Mar 16, 2012
Messages
3,398
Format
Medium Format
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

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Mar 16, 2012
Messages
3,398
Format
Medium Format
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 - :smile:...You stated you've been developed film to over 60th years :whistling:..
But you never used stand developing..

I will not belive it :smile:...
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 :D..
But I would never show the results to anybody.:cry::cry::cry:.
I defintivly will do it again but not at the
next time.
Rodinal is waiting so long....:cool::D.

with regards
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom