Rodinal vs Beutler test

[Relayer]

Hello

Film - Neopan SS 100ASA.
Left side - Rodinal 1:50, 20C, 15min
Right side - Beutler 1+1+8, 20C, 9min
Agitation in both cases - 5sec per min

1:1 crop (2400dpi)

both frame have near identical histogram and gamma

 

[el wacho]

thanks for this Relayer.

 

[Shawn Dougherty]

Were these developed to the same CI?

 

[Relayer]

Were these developed to the same CI?

no, I just get dev time for NeopanSS from digitaltruth.com

 

[GRHazelton]

Interesting. To my eye the Beutler seems "sharper," probably higher acutance, but perhaps a little grainier.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

You won't see the true difference with a scanner, unless it's a drum scanner or an Imacon.
You will see an approximation of the grain. You need a true 4,000dpi optical resolution to resolve grain.

 

[David Allen]

On screen it is difficult to tell the difference but I think that the Beutler ones look slightly better.

This would fit with my conclusions as I standardised many years ago on Thornton's two bath which is a derivative of the Beutler formula.

Besy,

David
www.dsallen.de

 

[Michael W]

Interesting results. Beutler is a very good dev.

 

[Jojje]

Neofin Blau (same as Willi Beutler's) has been my long time favourite developer. Now my stock is running a little low and I am considering of mixing my own as this is a very simple developer.
I have been using quite a bit of Rodinal as well. In real life terms as in printing Rodinal delivers grainier negatives. High speed films do not come out very well in Rodinal: grainy and low contrast.

 

[Jim Noel]

Interesting. To my eye the Beutler seems "sharper," probably higher acutance, but perhaps a little grainier.

Also better internal contrast.

 

[GRHazelton]

I've never used Rodinal, but when in my teens my father (a chemical engineer who'd souped his own film in the 30s) and I mixed our own Beutler. He was able to buy the chemicals easily, he really knew what he was doing, and we had a proper scale, which I now have. We were very pleased with the results, usually shooting with Plus-X of beloved memory. I should revisit Beutler, either mixing my own for old times' sake, or using Neofin-Blue. We generally developed to rather thin negatives, and often used contrast grade 3 as a standard paper. YMMV, of course. Even with a really crappy enlarger and a so-so Wollensak lens we got some really nice enlargements, on Luminos, Kodabromide, Spiratone, in other words, whatever paper was within a high schooler's budget. Now that I have a Beseler 23C, a Schneider Componon S f2.8 50mm I should revisit some of those old negatives of 50 or so years ago.

Would that my father were still alive to enjoy film and the bargains now available....

 

[john_s]

I prefer the look of the Beutler in these examples. Am I correct in concluding that it also produces more film speed (shadow detail)?