Rodinal Agitation - The Definitive Thread

Well, MH, I don't use Rodinal although I have mixed up several batches experimentally to look at it chemically. I understood your intent from the OP though. I was just chiming in.

BTW, the last line of the book is quite chilling and is the reason for the title "Farewell to the Master". The woman walks over to the robot and says "Tell your master I said goodbye" and the robot, for the first time, turns and speaks. He says "You misunderstand, I am the master!" Only showing that if you create someone to have power over you, he will use it and become the master. So, the novelette had a double entendre and is appropriate here.

Don't let another's techniques become your master. Do what works and become your own master! That is the thought that ran through my mind as I read these posts.

PE

How did you meter?

Thomas Bertilsson said:

Colin, it is one of the best ways to deal with such range of brightness in a scene. Try it. If you look in my gallery you'll see some neg scans from inside the St Paul Cathedral. Sharp window light and dark indoor illumination in the same scene in good harmony. Couldn't have done it without the Rodinal / semistand regimen I used. I would have blown the highlights.
- Thomas

Click to expand...

Thomas,

How did you meter the scenes in the cathedral? Did you know in advance that you would use Rodinal and stand development? I'm having trouble getting consistant results. Consistant from picture to picture. Varying light & brightness ranges for sure. I was just curious if I need to do something different with my metering for the 1:100 stand technique.

Flat, even light and underexposure seem to give me the best negatives. I am also interested in church interiors. So far, I haven't had much luck.

30 seconds initial and then 2 soft inversions per minute works great for me.

1+50 w/ Tri-x in small tanks.

Thanks for these posts...very interesting. I think the trend for agitating Rodinal with Tri-X is beginning to appear...looks like every other minute and very gently is what is working for most (or thats how I'm interpreting this). I've just changed from 2 pretty agressive inversions per minute to one gentler inversion every other minute and already the results show a difference. Negs are hanging and I can't wait to see the 11X14's.

Thread is still open to anyone who wants to contribute...

Michael

Photo Engineer said:

Well, MH, I don't use Rodinal although I have mixed up several batches experimentally to look at it chemically. I understood your intent from the OP though. I was just chiming in.

BTW, the last line of the book is quite chilling and is the reason for the title "Farewell to the Master". The woman walks over to the robot and says "Tell your master I said goodbye" and the robot, for the first time, turns and speaks. He says "You misunderstand, I am the master!" Only showing that if you create someone to have power over you, he will use it and become the master. So, the novelette had a double entendre and is appropriate here.

Don't let another's techniques become your master. Do what works and become your own master! That is the thought that ran through my mind as I read these posts.

PE

Click to expand...

A very creative reference though a tad bit dramatic parsing of what's really going on here don't you think? My interpretation of the OP's intent with this thread is to simply compile different users' preferences, not to set out slavishly copying another photographer's magic bullet. There are lots of techniques that work and work well so it can't be as simple as just "doing what works". I used PMK for 20 years with great results before stumbling on a post in this user group that changed my technique with this developer for the better. Did that post turn me into a humonculus? Feeling out what works best for others is a great way of further fleshing out the characteristics of a developer that you might already know and love.

Frotog;

It was a forewarning not a prediction that I was making. Nothing more. It struck me when I saw the OPs icon.

BTW, are you trying to say something by your creative misspelling of "homonculus"? It might be that this will end up as a huge bete noir on our back or a humongous homunculus.

PE

Sorry about that PE...BTW, did you mean "bete noire"?

To err is human. To forgive is divine.

PE

Ah! The magical power of language! Am I working hardly or am I hardly working? As long as I am doing photographic things, who cares?

Photo Engineer said:

To err is human. To forgive is divine.

PE

Click to expand...

yawn.

I meter for the shadows, I always do. Then I don't care what the brightness range is. If I develop sheets I do minus/plus dev, with roll film the semistand takes care of the highlights for me at the very dilute concentration of the developer (1+200 - 500ml of solution for each film).

Hope that helps!

- Thomas

Venchka said:

Thomas,

How did you meter the scenes in the cathedral? Did you know in advance that you would use Rodinal and stand development? I'm having trouble getting consistant results. Consistant from picture to picture. Varying light & brightness ranges for sure. I was just curious if I need to do something different with my metering for the 1:100 stand technique.

Flat, even light and underexposure seem to give me the best negatives. I am also interested in church interiors. So far, I haven't had much luck.

Click to expand...

Black spots with rodinal 1+300 and ortho film

TODAY i did some portraiture work on my work horse in studio. I used Rollei Ortho 25 in my 4x5" camera. It was just a test to see how it compared with my tech-pan soup and dev time: Rodinal 1+300 agitation 30 sek and stand for the next 29:30 at 20 degree in a temperature controlled water bath. Normal stop/fix/rinse and photo Flo.

If you have the bandwith to look at this 25MB file: www.tmax100.com/hassy.jpg

you will see a lot o black spots. This spots have nevere accured with Tech Pan in the soup. Is the answer that Rollei Ortho cant handle stand development?

Curious about this. Ill Guess Photo Engineer will know what those spots are

Erik

Erk;

There are so many defects in that photo it would be hard to say where to begin. There are streaks, white spots and black spots. The streaks are probably uneven development and the black spots appear to be from lack of development. The white spots are either dust during scanning or chemical spots during processing.

I have to see the roll and the edges to make a better guess.

PE

streetshot said:

desire to make a more soulful image, Rodinal [is] the answer.

Click to expand...

The 'soulfulness of Rodinal', the 'mystique of Pyro'.

Just crying out to be combined to create a developer with 'soulful mystique'.

Anybody tried it for the ultimate in clique niche boutique?

Mix 1-100 then 15sec start then 1 over at each 45sec Works great for all films and tech pan I have 20 rolls left. Grain on tech pan is fine. I use 16oz metal tanks@ 68f.

I did a new test today with Ilford Ortho 25 @ 20 ISO, Rollei Ortho 25 @ 20 iso and Tech Pan @ 20 iso. Solution Rodinal 1+300 agitation 30 sec stand development in 15 minutes and agitation in 30 sec and stand development in 14:30 seconds. I will show some pictures when they are printed and scanned.

Results

kompressor said:

I did a new test today with Ilford Ortho 25 @ 20 ISO, Rollei Ortho 25 @ 20 iso and Tech Pan @ 20 iso. Solution Rodinal 1+300 agitation 30 sec stand development in 15 minutes and agitation in 30 sec and stand development in 14:30 seconds. I will show some pictures when they are printed and scanned.

Click to expand...

The ortho pictures is on 4x5" Tech Pan on 135 scanned at 3200PPI

Ilford Ortho 25 Plus: www.tmax100.com/ioh.jpg

Rollei Ortho 25: www.tmax100.com/roh.jpg

Tech-Pan: www.tmax100.com/tph.jpg

Dev.times in the Quote

Thank you!

Thomas Bertilsson said:

I meter for the shadows, I always do. Then I don't care what the brightness range is. If I develop sheets I do minus/plus dev, with roll film the semistand takes care of the highlights for me at the very dilute concentration of the developer (1+200 - 500ml of solution for each film).

Hope that helps!

- Thomas

Click to expand...

thomas,

Thank you very much. You have helped.

mabman said:

Lately I've been using Rodinal 1:200 and stand development

Click to expand...

How much solution are you using per roll?
Thanks, in advance.
robert

neelin said:

How much solution are you using per roll?
Thanks, in advance.
robert

Click to expand...

Can't answer for mabman, but most people find 2-3 ml of concentrate per 36 exposure roll of 35mm to be sufficient in whatever dilution they use. Agfa recommended more, something on the order of 5-10 ml per roll IIRC. So total volume can be determined by minimum concentrate volume (2-3 ml) per roll at whatever dilution you desire.

Lee

Photo Engineer said:

... Do what works and become your own master! That is the thought that ran through my mind as I read these posts.

PE

Click to expand...

If you do not mind, I would like to tell you what I do for a friend who's doing a lot of travelling and shooting B&W documentary photography, mostly in available light, on APX 400 exposed at 1600 ASA. She is using a pair of old Pentaxes K1000 with a 50 mm F1.2 and a 135 mm F2.5. So, I process her films, sometimes 50 to 60 rolls, in batches of 7 films in my Colenta which is working like the variable rotating principle (for turns forward, three turns back, five turns forward, two turns back and so on and on at a variable and alternating rhythm). Rodinal 1+25 @ 20 °C for 20 min + 1 gr. Borax per 1 L work solution ( reed, why I do this, "Begone ,Fog!" by P. Gainer here : http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/Rodinal/rodinal.html ).
The films come out so good that some of the colleagues did not want to believe it until I performed a process run in there presence!

I have to admit that, when I did it for the first time, I was much surprised it worked that good!
I use Rodinal whenever I doubt that the also very good Pyrocat-HD would fit for the job, but that is an other story.

Good luck,

Philippe

I guess I'll chime in here. I use Rodinal at 1+100 with Arista Ultra iso100. Set the timer for 18 minutes. Constant gentle inversions for the first 60 sec, then one gentle inversion only at 15, 10, and 5 min. Nice midtones, no streaking. I find HC110 at 1+100 gives VERY similar results, without as much accutance. BTW-all with 120 film and 500ml of solution.

If you want absolutely stunning negs, try lith film at iso 5 souped in rodinal at 1+150. Develop by inspection with rocking the tray at the same 5 minute interval. Grainless and bleedingly sharp with surprising midtones for lith film.

Thomas Bertilsson said:

For my own purposes, to make the grain look its best, and to get razor sharp prints, and finally to get the midtone qualities I want - intermittent agitation.

I develop all films the same way, and they are exposed between box speed and one stop overexposed usually. I hear Foma needs shorter development times.

30 minutes, agitate continuously by rolling my daylight tank on the floor for the first 90 seconds, then two gentle inversions every 5 minutes.

Dilution: 1:200 using 500ml per film.
Temp: Starts out at 70*F, then it depends on the room temperature what it ends up being.

Rinse and fix. Fully developed shadow values. Glorious midtones. Awesome local contrast. Grain that is beautiful both in 35mm and 120 formats. Highlights that are very easy to control during printing. Basically, it produces a negative that prints easily and is easy to manipulate. To emphasize on Don's 'what's for lunch' analogy - you get a five course meal that you can choose to devour any way you like to.

I have attached a print scan from an Efke KB 100 35mm neg. I used diffusion while printing, so the grain isn't really apparent. Ilford MGWT fiber glossy, developed in Ilford Multigrade 1+9 at 68*F.

I hope that helps. But I concur with Don - tell us what you have found to give some substance to the thread.

- Thomas

Click to expand...

Can this method be used with plastic reels? I've read that a stand or semi stand developing method in plastic reels because they restrict the natural flow of the developer.

From what I've read, stand developing means leaving the film alone for the duration of the developing process, so inverting the tank twice every five minutes probably isnt stand developing. Would letting the tank stand undisturbed for five minute intervals be too long for plastic reels?

I'm trying out a film and developer I've never used before, and I dont want unevenly developed negatives to screw up my results

WGibsonPhotography said:

From what I've read, stand developing means leaving the film alone for the duration of the developing process, so inverting the tank twice every five minutes probably isnt stand developing. Would letting the tank stand undisturbed for five minute intervals be too long for plastic reels?

Click to expand...

Can't answer the plastic reel question. I haven't used them but a couple of times since switching to stainless in 1972.

Agitation every 5 minutes is a compromise to prevent bromide streaking and uneven development while still getting most of the characteristics of stand development. That's often called semi-stand, or reduced agitation, or something else. There's no fixed definition of these terms. Try a test roll with frames of even midtones (to detect streaking) first if you're worried about potential problems with a new method and then do your important shots when you're comfortable with it.

Lee

Lee L said:

Can't answer the plastic reel question. I haven't used them but a couple of times since switching to stainless in 1972.

Agitation every 5 minutes is a compromise to prevent bromide streaking and uneven development while still getting most of the characteristics of stand development. That's often called semi-stand, or reduced agitation, or something else. There's no fixed definition of these terms. Try a test roll with frames of even midtones (to detect streaking) first if you're worried about potential problems with a new method and then do your important shots when you're comfortable with it.

Lee

Click to expand...

I am planning on doing a few test rolls of Ilford HP-5 and Delta 400. From the reading I've done on the internet, people really love or really hate these films in rodinal, and I may be making a mistake by using them, but I have the film now, so I might as well try it out.

Even if they turn out bad, it's no big loss. I've spent some money that could have been used for something else, but at least I'll have the insight of knowing firsthand what the results are, and hopefully I can spread that wisdom to fellow photography students at the college I attend.

My plan is to develop three rolls of each film and keeping everything the same except for development . I chose to change development time/solution/agitation because I've noticed that variable seems to vary widely amongst the comments and reviews I've read. All of the pictures will be taken under similar lighting (as similar as possible) with the same lens (not that the choice of lens really matters, I dont think), hopefully on the same day.

I'm gonna develop one HP5 and one Delta 400 according to the box intstructions, then I'm gonna develop a pair at the development time/temp the box says with the agitation method I used in my photography classes, then I'm gonna try the method of Thomas Bertilsson because his development method intrigued me.

I know it might sound like a weird test. My curiosity has been tapped when I was reading about film and developer combinations. I'm hoping that will give me a variety of contrasts, tonal ranges, and grain. Hopefully I'll find one I like and tweak it to my preference when I develop film in the future.

I've been using Arista 200 and 400 since I started my photography classes and I want to branch out a bit. hopefully i'll get some good negatives. If not, the insight will be useful in the future