Rodinal Disaster?

panchromatic · Mar 13, 2005

jim appleyard said:
Hey, do you drive a Ford or a Chevy?

While Kodak devs. are quite good ( I have occasionally strayed from the Church and used them; I'm sorry!) , there is just more than one way skin a cat. For some shots/films, Microdol- X might be your dev. of choice. HC-110 is quite economical and easy, D-76 can be found almost anywhere on the planet and Rodinal has it place, too. While many photographers eventually settle on one dev., and there's nothing wrong with that, to not acknowledge other devs. is a bit narrow. Many photographers spend too much time worrying about devs. and grain and not enough on lighting and composition.

Just hang out here long enough. The light from the Church will find you!

Haha I drive a Lincoln (pretty much ford) anyway so pretty much your saying.... experiment? It would be better if there was one clear choice. and i'm sure i'll learn alot about this subject in my adventures in the darkroom.

--Ryan

Ed Sukach · Mar 13, 2005

I disagree with the idea that "Rodinal produces LARGER grain". It produces distinct grain. The grain structure is not "mushed" - each grain is cleanly defined, with no "smearing", or indistinct borders. The grain is more apparent - and the reward for that is increased acutance.

It all depends on what is desired. Some susbscribe to the idea that there should be NO suggestion of grain at all, and that becomes the most important attribute. Rodinal is not for them. Personally, I LIKE Rodinal, for the acutance, the tonal characteristics, definition and the "feel"of the images produced with it.

panchromatic · Mar 13, 2005

Ed Sukach said:
I disagree with the idea that "Rodinal produces LARGER grain". It produces distinct grain. The grain structure is not "mushed" - each grain is cleanly defined, with no "smearing", or indistinct borders. The grain is more apparent - and the reward for that is increased acutance.

It all depends on what is desired. Some susbscribe to the idea that there should be NO suggestion of grain at all, and that becomes the most important attribute. Rodinal is not for them. Personally, I LIKE Rodinal, for the acutance, the tonal characteristics, definition and the "feel"of the images produced with it.

I will definitly have to try this and see how I feel about it. I assume that dev. times and such are availible for most common black and white.

thank you

Ryan

titrisol · Mar 13, 2005

Look into unblinkingeye.com, article called appreciating rodinal by Ed Buffaloe.
You'll find it enloghtening

panchromatic said:
I will definitly have to try this and see how I feel about it. I assume that dev. times and such are availible for most common black and white.

thank you

Ryan

jim appleyard · Mar 13, 2005

panchromatic said:
I will definitly have to try this and see how I feel about it. I assume that dev. times and such are availible for most common black and white.

thank you

Ryan

Yes, times/temps/dilutions for most films in Rodinal can be found on the Massive Dev. Chart at digitaltruth.com.

unblinkingeye.com also has times/temps/dilutions, but here they are of a more personal nature. They are posted by individual photographers and often they tell *WHY* they do it that way.

BWGirl · Mar 13, 2005

panchromatic said:
I will definitly have to try this and see how I feel about it. I assume that dev. times and such are availible for most common black and white.

thank you

Ryan

Yep, as the others said, they are available. Also, if you do a search here on whatever film & rodinal, you will probably find some mention in a thread or three!

If you can't find anything about a particular film, just ask! There are many of us RAs (Rodinal Acolytes) just waiting to answer questions & help others learn the Way!

joeyk49 · Mar 13, 2005

I recently purchased Agfa Rodinal concentrate in the bottle. It was easier to use than the powdered developers, which has to be mixed to a stock solution and then diluted again for your working solution. The negatives turned out great; probably the best I've developed in my short alchemist career. It probably helped that I was developing Agfa film...but we'll see how it works on Ilfsord soon enough. I'm hoping the prints turn out as well.

jim appleyard · Mar 13, 2005

joeyk49 said:
I recently purchased Agfa Rodinal concentrate in the bottle. It was easier to use than the powdered developers, which has to be mixed to a stock solution and then diluted again for your working solution. The negatives turned out great; probably the best I've developed in my short alchemist career. It probably helped that I was developing Agfa film...but we'll see how it works on Ilfsord soon enough. I'm hoping the prints turn out as well.

There are lots of folks who just despise HP-5 in Rodinal. I like what I see when I use that combo, but I haven't done it a lot.

On the other hand, Ilford's FP-4 and Pan-F in the old magic elixer are pretty much universally accepted.

titrisol · Mar 14, 2005

The article is here:
http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/Rodinal/rodinal.html

titrisol said:
Look into unblinkingeye.com, article called appreciating rodinal by Ed Buffaloe.
You'll find it enloghtening

modafoto · Mar 14, 2005

BWGirl said:
If you can't find anything about a particular film, just ask! There are many of us RAs (Rodinal Acolytes) just waiting to answer questions & help others learn the Way!

Remember to listen to the Rodinational Anthem every day!

panchromatic · Mar 14, 2005

titrisol said:
The article is here:
http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/Rodinal/rodinal.html

Thank you, I did read it, very interesting. For some reason though I think like everyone else i'll end up trying 478392 devs. before settling on a couple.

--Ryan

Thomas Bertilsson · Mar 14, 2005

Fine Grain Developer

I've never used it myself, but my local pro lab uses Kodak Xtol developer for their b&w dip and dunk system. It produces very nice negatives where a 16"square print from a 6x6 neg using Agfa APX400 has very little visible grain.

I still think Rodinal has a sharper look to it, and prefer it unless really large enlargements are called for.
Some people don't recommend Rodinal with higher speed emulsions, but I love it with Tri-X and APX400.

- Thom

panchromatic said:
so it has a higher grain structure... and if you needed or wanted an extremely fine grain what would you suggest? (of course i've been schooled that microdol was what to use in that case)

--Ryan

titrisol · Mar 14, 2005

I guess that's the way for most of us.
I started using Metinol and Rodinal from AGFA, then moved to D76 for years (under kodak or clone names), experimenting here and there, specially with home-brews.
When I moved to the US in 99, I started using FG-7, Acufine, Ilfosol-S and DDX, then got back with Rodinal.

I finally settled with Rodinal and DDX (now Clayton F76+)
Though I love to experiment with things like Caffenol, Rodinal+VitC, etc.

panchromatic said:
Thank you, I did read it, very interesting. For some reason though I think like everyone else i'll end up trying 478392 devs. before settling on a couple.

--Ryan

BruceN · Mar 14, 2005

Right now I have 3 developers on my shelf - Rodinal is definitely the mainstay; I keep a bottle of DDX handy mostly for Delta3200, but sometimes I use it on HP5 or APX400 depending on what I'm looking for; and I'm just starting to experiment with some PMK. I may still have some ID-11 sitting around, but it's been so long since I used any that it's probably time to dump it.

Bruce

Rodinal Disaster?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency