Rodinal version with best shelf life

Camel Rock

A
Camel Rock

  • 4
  • 0
  • 46
Wattle Creek Station

A
Wattle Creek Station

  • 7
  • 0
  • 53
Cole Run Falls

A
Cole Run Falls

  • 2
  • 2
  • 38
Clay Pike

A
Clay Pike

  • 4
  • 1
  • 41

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
198,939
Messages
2,783,540
Members
99,753
Latest member
caspergsht42
Recent bookmarks
0

dcy

Subscriber
Joined
May 9, 2025
Messages
504
Location
New Mexico, USA
Format
35mm
Last year I found a bottle of ORWO R09 (the East German equivalent) from the 80s among my dad's old photo things. It sat in the attic for over 30 years, under an uninsulated roof which means it got cold in the winter and hot in the summer which I'd expect would be more likely to kill it than just the passage of time. But it works perfectly fine. It's very dark but doesn't even have any crystals or sediment on the bottom. Indestructible stuff.

View attachment 404176

I am convinced that there are only three things that will survive the nuclear apocalypse: cockroaches, 1960s refrigerators, and Rodinal.
 

baachitraka

Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2011
Messages
3,555
Location
Bremen, Germany.
Format
Multi Format
They have a long shelf life, so I will be developing using the last bottle that was opened 7 years ago.
 
OP
OP
Pseudodionizy

Pseudodionizy

Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2024
Messages
14
Location
Poland
Format
35mm
Thank you all again for your replies, I appreciate them a lot! I also wanted to ask, do you have any ideas what kind of creative things I could do with that exhausted/semi-exhausted Rodinal? It would be a shame to just get rid of it, perhaps there's something experimental I could use it for? I know I could try to develop prints in it, but currently I don't make prints.
 

dcy

Subscriber
Joined
May 9, 2025
Messages
504
Location
New Mexico, USA
Format
35mm
Thank you all again for your replies, I appreciate them a lot! I also wanted to ask, do you have any ideas what kind of creative things I could do with that exhausted/semi-exhausted Rodinal? It would be a shame to just get rid of it, perhaps there's something experimental I could use it for? I know I could try to develop prints in it, but currently I don't make prints.

My own experience with exhausted developers is that they are a world of frustration and pain. In my case it was an exhausted paper developer. I don't know to what extent my experience applies to film, but here it is:

I kept getting horrible muddy prints. As I've moved to better, commercial and fresh developers, my time in the darkroom has only gotten easier. A bad developer will just not develop properly, meaning that the shadows won't get as dark as they're supposed to. If you try to compensate by developing longer, you just make the highlights darker without making the shadows darker and the whole thing becomes muddy. Nothing really creative about that. Your time and energy is worth more than the $14 it takes to buy a new bottle of Adox Rodinal.
 

thinkbrown

Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2025
Messages
100
Location
Boston MA
Format
Analog
Fwiw, I recently purchased a sealed glass bottle of rodinal on eBay with a date from 1976 written on the box. Works exactly like my modern bottle of R09.

Rodinal is vulnerable to oxidation if stored in partially empty bottles, but sealed the shelf life seems to be indefinite
 

Model71

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 14, 2025
Messages
13
Location
North Carolina
Format
Multi Format
Is there a method for testing chemicals for validity prior to using the chemicals? The idea of loosing film roll(s) during development due to "stale" chemicals sounds like russian roulette to me. Am I missing something obvious?
 

dcy

Subscriber
Joined
May 9, 2025
Messages
504
Location
New Mexico, USA
Format
35mm
Is there a method for testing chemicals for validity prior to using the chemicals? The idea of loosing film roll(s) during development due to "stale" chemicals sounds like russian roulette to me. Am I missing something obvious?

You can test whether or not the developer is completely dead by grabbing a piece of film leader (so it's been fully exposed to room light), developing it, and then fixing it. If the developer worked, the fixer should not clear the image.

But this test will not tell you if the developer is partially dead. For that, the only test that I can think of is to designate a sacrificial roll of film and develop it properly: Grab a roll of film, put it in your camera, and spend all 36 shots on the exact same test scene. Then store that somewhere safe. When you want to test a developer, go to a dark room or use a dark bag, grab about 2 inches of film, put it in your Patterson or Jobo tank, and develop it normally. If the developer is still good, you will see your test scene. For extra points, develop the scene when you first open the developer and save it so you have a stable point of comparison.

EDIT:

For what it's worth, I don't do any of this myself. I have three film developers: Two that have long shelf lives (PC-TEA and Rodinal) and one that I make myself in small batches that I know I will use quickly (D-23).

I believe most developers will "warn" you when they're going bad because the Dmax decreases gradually. But that's not true for all developers. XTOL is infamous for its "sudden death syndrome".
 
Last edited:

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
53,034
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
Many of us who do their own developing also use bulk film, so short, test rolls are available and perfect for the task.
 
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