Rodinal Stand Development: Maximum possible dilution using 3ml rodinal?

[tomfrh]

Whenever you are dealing with developer exhaustion, you need to remember that the amount of exhaustion will vary considerably with the subject(s) of the photograph(s). A roll of high key subjects will exhaust the developer much more quickly than a roll filled with shadows.

Yes, thanks for this advice. I'm mindful of this. I've found it averages out fairly well across a roll of normal photos, however no doubt it can go wrong if the overall exposure is skewed high or low.

 

[NB23]

Oh no, stand developing always opens up Pandora's box on here. I've used it before but much prefer 1+1 D-76 or 1+4 DD-X these days. Anyways FWIW when I did do stand developing I would always use at least 5mL of Rodinal, which at 1+100 would give me a perfect 5mL/500mL Rodinal/Water split. Personally I wouldn't recommend using less than 5mL of Rodinal as it will exhaust faster, and possibly before, the magic one hour mark of stand developing.

But you do realize that there's absolutely nothing scientific in all what you said.

5ml, one hour... why 5, why not 7.5?
Why one hour? Why not 48:36 or 1:03:45? What's the scientific basis behind One hour?

The answer is simple, to me: it's all magical thinking.

 

[tomfrh]

Why one hour? Why not 48:36 or 1:03:45? What's the scientific basis behind One hour?

Yes this is why I like to govern via rodinal quantity and let it run a long time to exhaustion (rather than say developing in 5ml 1:100 for a "magic" amount of time). That way you largely eliminate the time (and temperature) variables.

I'd like to know more about how long it takes to exhaust. I've heard some say it actually exhausts fairly quickly, and that it's all over by 1 hour, but I'm not sure I believe that.

 

[zanxion72]

At least 10ml of Rodinal is required to fully develop a 36exp 135 film. 3ml will not work as expected and with 5ml you will get thin but usable negatives. At 1:100 and with just 5ml of rodinal in the solution, the first 30 minutes are important. After that, the developer in the solution will be completely depleted.

 

[pentaxuser]

. 3ml will not work as expected

I am sure Tom is big enough to stand up for himself but what I think you mean is that 3ml will not work as expected for you, assuming you have tried it at this dilution. It clearly works for Tom at least the dilutions he has already mentioned. Whether you would consider the negatives to have "worked" is of course another matter.

pentaxuser

 

[zanxion72]

I am sure Tom is big enough to stand up for himself but what I think you mean is that 3ml will not work as expected for you, assuming you have tried it at this dilution. It clearly works for Tom at least the dilutions he has already mentioned. Whether you would consider the negatives to have "worked" is of course another matter.

pentaxuser

O.k. Since it works, there is no need of further contributing to this anything else. Glad it works!

 

[Alan Johnson]

I think the rate of development is likely controlled by diffusion of developing agent from the solution to the emulsion, depending on concentration and agitation, but below a certain pH development will stop. If you were to try 1:1000 ,it depends on maintenance of adequate pH , even if it is left for a very long time.

 

[tomfrh]

I think the rate of development is likely controlled by diffusion of developing agent from the solution to the emulsion, depending on concentration and agitation, but below a certain pH development will stop. If you were to try 1:1000 ,it depends on maintenance of adequate pH , even if it is left for a very long time.

Yes I was thinking diffusion would provide a limit at some point.

Could you elaborate on pH requirements? Do you understand the chemistry of it?

 

[Harry Stevens]

Why don't you start of with 1.5ml and add another 1.5ml at the 30 min agitation, now that is a experiment.
For me film is to expensive to use in a 3ml dilution and the pictures that I take deserve better.

 

[tomfrh]

For me film is to expensive to use in a 3ml dilution and the pictures that I take deserve better.

As I've said before, I'm not doing it to be a cheapskate. 5ml simply doesn't work for me. My negs end up over cooked. Like many people I find 3ml comes out fairly spot on.

I've tried 3ml in 1000ml and it came out much the same as 3ml in 300ml. I'm simply curious where it falls apart...

 

[Gerald C Koch]

The photographer William Mortensen used stand development many decades ago. He was soundly ridiculed by other photographers of the time among them Ansel Adams. Mortensen called his method development to gamma infinity.

 

[Alan Johnson]

Yes I was thinking diffusion would provide a limit at some point.

Could you elaborate on pH requirements? Do you understand the chemistry of it?

See p 120 here, it looks like p-aminophenol is not going to develop below a pH around 8:
https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015016032883;view=1up;seq=132
The chemistry is probably like that of methyl 1,4 aminophenol {metol} which requires sulfite to remove its insoluble oxidation product.

 

[tomfrh]

See p 120 here, it looks like p-aminophenol is not going to develop below a pH around 8:
https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015016032883;view=1up;seq=132
The chemistry is probably like that of methyl 1,4 aminophenol {metol} which requires sulfite to remove its insoluble oxidation product.

Thanks for the info!

 

[Simon Howers]

I generally use stand development. I use ~3ml rodinal per roll and mix with enough water to cover whatever film I'm developing.

I was debating online about specifying in terms of dilution (e.g. 1:100) vs rodinal quantity (e.g. 3ml). I strongly believe it's rodinal per roll that counts. Someone challenged me and said concentration matters, and that 3ml rodinal in 1litre water wouldn't work, because 1:333 is "too diluted". So I did this test and it worked fine (I left for maybe 6 hours to give the rodinal a chance to find the film). Nice contrast range from clear to solid black.

It got me wondering though - how far could you dilute 3ml rodinal and still have it work? If you diluted 3ml in say 10 litres of water and left it a week would it get there?

Any insight into how it actually works would be appreciated.

Tom,
I suggest you read Iridescent Light by Michael Axel. It's published by Blurb.com. It contains a full discussion of what's going on in stand development and an explanation of the use of Rodinal, both solo and in combination with other developers.

Simon

 

[tomfrh]

I suggest you read Iridescent Light by Michael Axel. It's published by Blurb.com

Thank you.

I will definitely check it out.

 

[Simin Johnson]

I've had very good results following this:

Stand Development With Rodinal

 

[pentaxuser]

Thanks for the link, Simin. There is no mention of optical printing and these may be reversed negs subject to a lot of scanning manipulation to get them to look this good but somehow I doubt it. So it would certainly lend credence to 5ml of Rodinal being sufficient for Stand Development.

pentaxuser

 

[Pobletto]

Hi pentaxuser

That's actually my site! Yes, I can confirm that those are just straight scans, made with an Epson V750. The only editing I do with any of my black and white scans is get rid of any dust spots, and slight adjustments to contrast if needed. Usually 'Auto Levels' in Photoshop is enough.

I've been stand developing for years now. The results are always consistent with the films I use; Tri-X and FP4. As I mention on my website, I've found through experience T-grain films like Tmax do not work well for me. I've also recently started stand developing with HC-110 too, with good results. This produces less grain than Rodinal, so is preferable for certain subjects if I'm using Tri-X. Hope this is useful to you.

All the best, Gerald.

 

[Simin Johnson]

Hi Pobletto

Thanks for the info on your site. It's what got me started on stand development, and although my pictures aren't as good as yours, I'm really happy with the results. Cheers!

 

[Gabriel Aszalos]

Michael Axel’s book seems to be claiming (Chapter 14) that he is using 300ml of fluid per 35ml roll. Fluid which he mixes in a 1L batch at various dilutions: 1+100, 1+200 or 1+300. This means that at 1+200 he is using 5ml of Rodinal to create 1L of fluid, out of which he then uses 300ml for one roll. This means approximately 1.5ml of Rodinal concentrate per roll. There are so many mixed messages here. Hard to know the truth without failing on one’s own?

Here is a quote from the book:

“Determine how much developer you will need. This seems very basic, but with stand development, there is no latitude for failure. I recently miscalculated the amount of chemistry needed for a very large tank that I don't use very often, and the top roll was developed along only the bottom half of the film. From now on, I will remember it this way: each 35mm roll takes 8 ounces of fluid. Each 120 roll requires 16 ounces. Your tanks may vary in size, but these are fairly standard amounts for stainless steel tanks and reels. It is better to mix too much chemistry than too little.
To make one liter of 1:100 dilution of Rodinal developer, draw 10 ml of concentrated developer from the bottle of Rodinal, and put it in a clean, empty 1 liter graduate. If you have hard water, or water containing lots of chemicals and minerals, I suggest you use distilled water instead of tap water. Make sure your water is at 68 degrees Fahrenheit and mix it into the graduate containing the 10 ml of concentrated Rodinal. Mix thoroughly.
If you plan to stand develop for two hours, you should mix your developer […]”

Excerpt From
Iridescent Light
By Michael Axel
This material may be protected by copyright.
​

Am I misunderstanding this?

​

 

[NB23]

It’s not because it’s in a book that it’s suddenly official and biblical.

Anything works, you will always develop a film with any sloppy technique, with any dilution of any developer. Stick to the manufacturer’s recommendations. Any deviation from there is going into arty-farty land.

 

[john_s]

I don't understand the obsession with finding the absolute minimal amount of Rodinal that will "work." As dilution increases the results will change, maybe for the better, maybe for the worse, until it's definitely worse. I use a developer that's cheaper than Rodinal so I don't have to worry.

 

[pentaxuser]

Unfortunately the OP who was an active contributor in the debate and who claimed that even 5ml overdeveloped his film never did report back on his attempt to find the limit of what dilution was possible. He hasn't been seen since May 2019. I always find it disappointing when this happens but in terms of proving a point that an OP seems convinced is valid then all I and others can do is draw negative conclusions about that OP's seemingly strongly held belief

If an OP has discovered something that flies in the face of what the general consensus believes but does not give us the proof then this does a great disservice to any claim and wonder how much "hot air" was involved in the OP's experiments

A pity but that's how it ends with so many of these threads


pentaxuser

 

[pentaxuser]

Michael Axel’s book seems to be claiming (Chapter 14) that he is using 300ml of fluid per 35ml roll. Fluid which he mixes in a 1L batch at various dilutions: 1+100, 1+200 or 1+300. This means that at 1+200 he is using 5ml of Rodinal to create 1L of fluid, out of which he then uses 300ml for one roll. This means approximately 1.5ml of Rodinal concentrate per roll. There are so many mixed messages here. Hard to know the truth without failing on one’s own?

Here is a quote from the book:

“Determine how much developer you will need. This seems very basic, but with stand development, there is no latitude for failure. I recently miscalculated the amount of chemistry needed for a very large tank that I don't use very often, and the top roll was developed along only the bottom half of the film. From now on, I will remember it this way: each 35mm roll takes 8 ounces of fluid. Each 120 roll requires 16 ounces. Your tanks may vary in size, but these are fairly standard amounts for stainless steel tanks and reels. It is better to mix too much chemistry than too little.
To make one liter of 1:100 dilution of Rodinal developer, draw 10 ml of concentrated developer from the bottle of Rodinal, and put it in a clean, empty 1 liter graduate. If you have hard water, or water containing lots of chemicals and minerals, I suggest you use distilled water instead of tap water. Make sure your water is at 68 degrees Fahrenheit and mix it into the graduate containing the 10 ml of concentrated Rodinal. Mix thoroughly.
If you plan to stand develop for two hours, you should mix your developer […]”

Excerpt From
Iridescent Light
By Michael Axel
This material may be protected by copyright.
​

Am I misunderstanding this?

​

I am not so much misunderstanding what he said based on what you give as his quotation as simply NOT understanding what he said. He seems to be saying that to cover film you need 300ml of fluid and I agree(OK Jobo tanks only require 240ml but let's stick with 300ml ) a 120 requires double this in terms of fluid to cover it and I agree. However he seems to be also saying that you require a minimum of 10ml of Rodinal but is this per film? It is what Agfa Rodinal used to state but we know that Adox who make the same stuff claim that 5ml is OK M and that is also what Ed Buffalo in his article about Rodinal says as well

Does Michael Axel then mean that as 300ml is enough to cover a 35mm film then 1L can do 3 films so each only gets 3.333ml of Rodinal? As 120 film requires double which is 600ml of fluid then a 120 gets 6.666ml of Rodinal so that's double the amount of Rodinal for a 120?

So Michael Axel's article or his page of a book which you quote raises more questions than it answers

pentaxuser

 

[Gabriel Aszalos]

So Michael Axel's article or his page of a book which you quote raises more questions than it answers

I agree. Unfortunately quite poorly written.