Rodinal precipitate

[George Collier]

I have a 500ml bottle of actual Agfa Rodinal, I bought just as it was becoming unavailable some years back. I used about half, then switched to pyro variations. I want to use it again and I find that there is some precipitate settled, but loose. I have been shaking it gently now and then over the last couple of weeks and I can tell that much of it has redisolved, but there is still some loose in there. Is it worth continuing and would you trust it?

 

[Philippe-Georges]

Rodinal is somewhat like pouring cement, there is always a sediment after a period of standstill, but don't worry it will be still good (and though like concrete), even if it is as dark as coffee too...

 

[Matt Sullivan]

I've seen a couple of my buddies use decades old Rodinal to process some rolls, and they all turned out fine. The bottle had at least a half inch layer of sediment at the bottom but somehow the everlasting Rodinal worked out ok!

 

[otto.f]

If you had bought an M4 in 1964 with a gallon of Rodinal you’d been all set until the next BigBang

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

When in doubt either discard the developer or do a test with non-critical film.

 

[guangong]

I bought quite a few bottles of Agfa Rodinal when discontinued production was announced. Still have several unopened bottles. Never a problem.
Also, I did buy an M4 with Summicron lens in late 1960s.

 

[Philippe-Georges]

I bought quite a few bottles of Agfa Rodinal when discontinued production was announced. Still have several unopened bottles. Never a problem.
Also, I did buy an M4 with Summicron lens in late 1960s.

The trouble is, I think, that there is no more genuine AGFAPAN film to be processed in it as this was the ideal combo (to my opinion although).
As a matter of fact, I never saw any other film so well processing in Rodinal.
I still have 2 litter of Rodinal (decanted in glass bottles) but no AGFA film, which is sad...

 

[Alan Johnson]

Rodinal is something like this, post 4:

Pyrocat MC Longevity

The question about Pyrocat longevity comes up here on a regular basis. Just for info, I used some yesterday which was mixed in Glycol in August of 2012 and has been on my chemical mixing bench in an open squeeze bottle. Results were perfect, times and results the same as normal. Color change...

www.photrio.com

I think that potassium aminophenolate formed must be a supersaturated solution which over a period of years slowly deposits crystals if kept in a sealed container.

 

[George Collier]

Thanks for the responses. Interestingly enough, it is an M4(-2) that I'm testing, along with Pyrocat MC, with Tri-x, so I'll try the Rodinal, once it's fully dissolved.

 

[Tel]

Like you I had a bottle of original Rodinal that began to grow precipitate after sitting on a shelf for a while. I read that it wouldn't affect the usability of the developer but it bothered me to see it (and hear it) in the bottle. So I poured the contents of the bottle through a coffee filter and it looked a lot better. It worked too, and I've long since finished the bottle. I've done the same with C-41 developer too, when it began to show some bits of dark stuff in the bottom of the bottle.

 

[AZD]

I was dealing with this same question last week. Any crystals in the concentrate seemed to dissolve once diluted, but I poured the solution through a coffee filter anyhow. A clip test confirmed it was still active. Developed my roll of Kentmere 100 just fine.

 

[Jman13]

I bought quite a few bottles of Agfa Rodinal when discontinued production was announced. Still have several unopened bottles. Never a problem.
Also, I did buy an M4 with Summicron lens in late 1960s.

When was Rodinal discontinued? I purchased a bottle in my local store two weeks ago. (AGFA).

 

[otto.f]

The trouble is, I think, that there is no more genuine AGFAPAN film to be processed in it as this was the ideal combo (to my opinion although).
As a matter of fact, I never saw any other film so well processing in Rodinal.
I still have 2 litter of Rodinal (decanted in glass bottles) but no AGFA film, which is sad...

AgfaPHOTO APX 100 35mm 36 exposures

AgfaPhoto APX 100 is a medium-speed black and white negative film with a nominal sensitivity of ISO 100/21°. This film can be used universally and…

www.macodirect.de

 

[MattKing]

AgfaPHOTO APX 100 35mm 36 exposures

AgfaPhoto APX 100 is a medium-speed black and white negative film with a nominal sensitivity of ISO 100/21°. This film can be used universally and…

www.macodirect.de

That is AgfaPHOTO film, not AGFA film. AgX will explain
Same applies to Rodinal.

 

[Philippe-Georges]

When was Rodinal discontinued? I purchased a bottle in my local store two weeks ago. (AGFA).

The 'original' AGFA Leverkusen made Rodinal 'disappeared' in 2005 with the demise of AGFA Leverkusen AG.
Then it was the oldest still made film developer, it was formulated by Momme Andresen in 1891!
The original formula is still owned by AGFA-Gevaert Mortsel in Belgium, who's manufacturing the JCH Streetpan 400...

 

[Jman13]

The 'original' AGFA Leverkusen made Rodinal 'disappeared' in 2005 with the demise of AGFA Leverkusen AG.
Then it was the oldest still made film developer, it was formulated by Momme Andresen in 1891!
The original formula is still owned by AGFA-Gevaert Mortsel in Belgium, who's manufacturing the JCH Streetpan 400...

Huh. Just realized mine isn't AGFA, but Adox....and I made the mistake because it is marked 'Rodinal' and not 'Adonal', which is what I thought all Adox Rodinals were marked.

 

[Philippe-Georges]

Huh. Just realized mine isn't AGFA, but Adox....and I made the mistake because it is marked 'Rodinal' and not 'Adonal', which is what I thought all Adox Rodinals were marked.

In 2004 the 'new management' AGFA Leverkusen reformulated Rodinal to meet the new EEC environmental standards.
But it worked the same and can be considered to be the same product.

 

[otto.f]

That is AgfaPHOTO film, not AGFA film. AgX will explain
Same applies to Rodinal.

Do you think it’s a significant different film? That needs different development?

 

[MattKing]

Do you think it’s a significant different film? That needs different development?

I truly have no idea - I just know enough to warn people not to get the new confused with the old.

 

[pentaxuser]

I truly have no idea - I just know enough to warn people not to get the new confused with the old.

Yes I am not sure either, Matt, based on everything I have read here but it certainly isn't the original Agfa film. The consensus, if that is not too strong a word in this context, is that it is made by Ilford, I think.

Don't some say that it is actually Kentmere by another name?

OP I have the times from an original Rodinal chart for a number of films including the original Agfa films so here they are: 1+25 1+50
APX 100 8 mins 17 mins
APX400 7 mins 11 mins

Check out the new AgfaPhoto times against these to see how much, if any, the dev times differ from the above

pentaxuser

 

[MattKing]

The consensus, if that is not too strong a word in this context, is that it is made by Ilford, I think.

Don't some say that it is actually Kentmere by another name?

Or, more accurately, that it is made by Harman Technology under contract.
With a possibility that it is coated by someone else, and confectioned under contract by Harman Technology.

 

[Philippe-Georges]

I truly have no idea - I just know enough to warn people not to get the new confused with the old.

I was told, at the time, by an AGFA-Gevaert rep. that the difference was in the reformulation to meet the EEC environment standards, the same happend with the paper…

 

[gone]

I poured the contents of the bottle through a coffee filter and it looked a lot better

This is something I always do w/ any developer, usually! The times I haven't, it's been difficult to track down the problem if something went wrong. It also eliminates a huge variable. I try to do it every time because I reuse my fixer, and often a developer too. Doing this slows things down, but it's free to do, and it works.

 

[Philippe-Georges]

This is something I always do w/ any developer, usually! The times I haven't, it's been difficult to track down the problem if something went wrong. It also eliminates a huge variable. I try to do it every time because I reuse my fixer, and often a developer too. Doing this slows things down, but it's free to do, and it works.

I slowly 'decant' and handel the bottle carefully when I pour Rodinal in the measuring cylinder so to hold in the sediment.
I fear that the insoluble crystallised Sodium (I suppose this it is) could scratch the emulsion, but this might be unnecessary, although you never know...

 

[eli griggs]

As I understand this and parodinal is that the crystals that form on the bottom the bottle, should be left in the solution.

I've never segregated the formula from the biproduct and I've never had trouble with this/these developers, other than what seemed excessive filler in Tylenol tabs, 30 of them, in making parodinal, and that largely was a non issue when developing films.