rodinal vs Tetenal neofin blue

kmallick · Sep 6, 2012

I am used to Rodinal for slow to medium speed films. I like the shelf life, sharpness and the results. But I would like to give Tetenal Neofin Blue a try now that its available on Freestyle, although its on the pricey side for those one shot bottles.

So here is a question for those who have used both Rodinal and Neofine Blue: what can I expect in differences between the two developers on films like Ilford Pan F+ 50, Fuji Acros 100 and Agfa APX 100?

Tony-S · Sep 6, 2012

I'm gearing up to test NB but I have become quite enamored with Pyrocat HD and Delta 100. I'm still in the early stages of testing it and hope to do so with Acros, Pan F+ and Delta 400 in the coming weeks. Same for NB.

tony lockerbie · Sep 6, 2012

I have tried both, mainly with Pan F+, and the sharpness is very similar. I seemed to get more contrast from the Neofin than the Rodinal which I use at 1:50. Maybe diluting the Neofin would drop the contrast, haven't tested that though.
I have decided to stick with Rodinal for the reasons that you listed,and now that Rodinal is readily available again I will stay with that.
Neofin Blue is a great developer but the high price works against it, a bit hard to get here too. If you were using just the occasional film the one shot bottles might make more sense.
I have never tried Neofin Blue with Delta 100, but imagine that it would work well. Back in the early seventies I used to use Neofin blue with the slow Adox films and it was magic.

Rolfe Tessem · Sep 6, 2012

The Beutler (Neofin Blue) from the Formulary is only $9.25 for the amount needed to make one liter of each the A and B solution. At the normal 1:1:10 dilution, that develops one hell of a lot of film. If that is what is characterized as expensive, maybe your calculations are off .

I've recently tested APX100 in both Rodinal (the classic combination) and Beutler and the Beutler seems to me to have a small edge.

Richard S. (rich815) · Sep 6, 2012

This is so subjective I don't really understand the point, you're going to actually test three different films with two different developers. Are you going to test in exacting conditions so you can realize the exact differences? I recommend instead just go ahead and shoot a couple a dozen of each one and use both developers and see what you like. Both are great. Other opinions of which are "better" or which has an "edge" means what to you exactly? Just don't drop the prints before you get a chance to label them.

Rolfe Tessem · Sep 6, 2012

To my eye, with APX100, the Beutler seems to give a somewhat longer midtone gray scale than Rodinal does. It benefits from the edge effects and thus, even though the grain is about the same, the Beutler appears to be a bit sharper.

At the recommended times, the Beutler also has a bit more snappy contrast (this, of course, could be adjusted to be equal with more testing).

They are both really good developers for the slower, traditional emulsions and in general are more similar than they are different.

Oh yes, they are both really cheap!

Gerald C Koch · Sep 6, 2012

Maybe diluting the Neofin would drop the contrast, haven't tested that though.

The two developers Neofin Blue and the Beutler formula are already extremely dilute. Both work on the principle of the exhaustion of the developer. If you dilute them more than is recommended there may not be enough developing agent(s) left to properly develop a film.

Photographer's Formulary insists on saying that Neofin Blue and the Beutler formula are the same. They are not and the formulas are quite different. Look up the MSDS for Tetenal Neofin Blue. This why I don't like companies like PF that play fast and loose with the truth.

The Beutler developer is probably the cheapest developer to use. It consists of 3 ingredients and is very easy to make. I used it when I was a starving "graduate" student when money was very tight. Always liked the results with a slow film ISO ~40.

Rolfe Tessem · Sep 6, 2012

Gerald,

I doubt that the Formulary is deliberately misleading anybody. More likely, they are simply reflecting what their understanding is -- that Beutler and Neofin Blue are the same thing.

I doubt that people are going to the Formulary to obtain Neofin Blue -- most likely they are going there to get Beutler, which has a long and storied history.

I am a johnny come lately to it -- I only recently tried it when I packed in a hundred rolls of APX100 from Europe.

Very impressed and very cheap!

Gerald C Koch · Sep 6, 2012

I doubt that the Formulary is deliberately misleading anybody. More likely, they are simply reflecting what their understanding is -- that Beutler and Neofin Blue are the same thing.

That is not the understanding that one gets from their catalog entry. They don't even try the fiction that the formulas are similar. Forgive me but I think companies are entitled to protection of their tradenames. AFAIK the two developers have never had the same formula. I do agree that some people may erroneously equate them. Perhaps this is an opportunity for PF to educate its customers.

georg16nik · Sep 7, 2012

Tetenal Neofin Blue keeps box speed and gives extra clarity to Ilford Pan +.
Rodinal (or Kodak HC-110) is great until You get into Tetenal Neofin Blue or Ultrafin Liquid.

AndreasT · Sep 7, 2012

What I would like to know is which developer, Rodinal or Neofin Blau uses the speed better.
I think georg16nik left a subtle suggestion in his text. I used to use Rodinal a lot for my 4x5 negatives but changed over to FX-39. I was not satisfied with the speed of Rodinal although the other properties are great. I have always considered using Neofin Blau but then again one should not jump from developer to another.

georg16nik · Sep 7, 2012

Andreas, Tetenal Neofin Blue uses the speed better. Pan F+ in Neofin Blue is ISO50 and You can tweak it for more, while Pan F+ in Rodinal best results are @ISO25, at least in my opinion.
Paterson FX-39 is perfect for modern emulsions, so why bother if it works.?.

AndreasT · Sep 7, 2012

Thanks georg16nik, true why bother. FX-37 works well.

mr rusty · Sep 7, 2012

Totally irrelevant, but I have two vials of neofin red I inherited. No idea if they are a) any good b) worth using

Jojje · Sep 8, 2012

Agfa APX 100 and Neofin Blau (formerly Rot) has been my favorite combination for years in 35mm. Good speed, slight contrast reduction with small grain. Have used Rodinal as well. Works very well too - bit grainier and 1/3 f-number less speed.
An example here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/jojjek/6106334161/in/photostream/lightbox/
Mr rusty: Your Neofin Red vials will be just fine.

Gerald C Koch · Sep 8, 2012

Tetenal Neofin Blue because it contains phenidone probably gives betterspeed and shadow detail.

At one time there were two developers, Neofin Blue and Neofin Red. The Blue was formulated for slow films and the Red for fast films.

kmallick · Sep 11, 2012

OK, so I have decided to give Tetenal Neofin blue a shot (no pun intended)! I am planning to buy the kit with 5 bottles of 30ml concentrate each. But the directions are thoroughly confusing. The instruction pamphlet is a nightmare and the massive dev chart makes things worse for this developer by mentioning 'stock' (i.e. no dilution). I googled for some help and I couldn't find some definitive answer. Hopefully someone here can help.

I plan to use it for developing one 120 roll at a time in a Paterson tank that takes 500 ml of soup. Do I use one full bottle of this developer, dilute it to make 500ml soup and reuse it once to develop two rolls of 120? or maybe load two 120s in a reel and develop both in that 500ml soup?

Gerald C Koch · Sep 11, 2012

Michael R 1974 said:
My understanding is the "real" Neofin Blau contained Catechol.

I have read the same thing both for NB and HC-110. But these rumors never seem to be substantiated. However from the time that MSDS's became available neither developer seems to have contained catechol. However it is true that at one time HC-110 Replensher did contain catechol as listed on its MSDS. Jerry

Henning Serger · Sep 11, 2012

kmallick said:
So here is a question for those who have used both Rodinal and Neofine Blue: what can I expect in differences between the two developers on films like Ilford Pan F+ 50, Fuji Acros 100 and Agfa APX 100?

From my experience with both developers and the mentioned films with Tetenal Neofin Blue you will get
- a bit better contour sharpness
- a bit finer grain
- higher resolution
- higher speed (1/3 - 2/3 stops,depending on the film)
- a compensating effect; not so dense highlights

compared to Rodinal.

The formular of Neofin Blue has been modified over the years and also been adopted to the progress in newer emulsions.
Due to the current MSDS is contains Metol, Hydrochinon and Phenidone:

http://www.tetenal.de/sidaopener_de.htm?file=SIDA/SIDADE/100126.pdf

Ilford Pan F in Neofin Blue has been one of my favourite film - developer combinations over the years. Excellent stuff.

Best regards,
Henning

Henning Serger · Sep 11, 2012

kmallick said:
or maybe load two 120s in a reel and develop both in that 500ml soup?

Yupp.

kmallick · Sep 11, 2012

Henning Serger said:
Yupp.

excellent! thanks.
any advice on what time and inversion should I try for 2 rolls of APX 100 in 500mL soup?

Henning Serger · Sep 11, 2012

kmallick said:
excellent! thanks.
any advice on what time and inversion should I try for 2 rolls of APX 100 in 500mL soup?

Well, generally I recommend evaluating the characteristic curve of your film - developer combination with a densitometer. So you get the optimal results for your individual situation: your agitation method, contrast according to whether you use an enlarger with diffusor, condensor or a mixed system.
As starting point for the first test use the data sheet.
In the data sheet you have two times: One for a 3 sec. agitation rhythm, and for a one minute agitation rhythm.
I recommend using a one minute agitation rhythm: Gives best sharpness.

Best regards,
Henning

kmallick · Sep 11, 2012

Henning Serger said:
As starting point for the first test use the data sheet.
In the data sheet you have two times: One for a 3 sec. agitation rhythm, and for a one minute agitation rhythm.

Ahhh, ok! thats what the 3 sec and 1 min is for in the confusing datasheet. now that explains. thanks a lot.
what do the .55 and .70 in the columns designate?

Gerald C Koch · Sep 11, 2012

kmallick said:
what do the .55 and .70 in the columns designate?

Contrast values the classic β beta. I would recommend reading up on the Characteristic Curve (H&D curve) and how it is used to determine the contrast value for a particular film/developer combination.

kmallick · Sep 11, 2012

Gerald C Koch said:
Contrast values the classic β beta. I would recommend reading up on the Characteristic Curve (H&D curve) and how it is used to determine the contrast value for a particular film/developer combination.

Thank you. Will do. But I wish Tetenal had some reference or short explanation in the datasheet. They assume it is for the experts.

rodinal vs Tetenal neofin blue

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency