Rodinal

[RoboRepublic]

I just wanted to ask the folks on this board: when people mention that they have developed in Rodinal, do they mean a specific brand or formulation?
My understanding is that it is the grand dad of all developers. And if so, is Adox Rodinal is pretty much the same as, say, AGFA Rodinal?

 

[Lachlan Young]

Current Adox Rodinal is (to the extent disclosed about it) the same as the last formulation of Agfa Rodinal. If people are using a derivative Rodinal-type developer (RO9, various home made approximations etc), they usually specify that.

The para-aminophenol in Rodinal is a close relative & predecessor of Metol.

 

[MattKing]

To complicate matters, R-09 actually approximates older versions of Rodinal - it has evolved over time.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

I use Adox's "interpretation" of Rodinal and seems to be doing the same as the original.

 

[Martin Rickards]

My Foma R09 diluted 1:50 works fine for Ilford FP4+ at 20º for 15 minutes.

 

[AgX]

My understanding is that it is the grand dad of all developers.

It is so in meaning that it is the photo product longest on the market.

It was invented by Momme Andresen, who was dye-stuff chemist at Agfa when they still where "only" a manufacturer of a variety of synthezised chemicals mainly from the field of aromates, yielding products as dyestuffs and pharmaceutics.
Andresen was also photoamateur. Thus not surprisingly he invented some developing agents, partially on his own rights. First Agfa were not even interested in marketing that stuff. But Rodinal turned out to be a success product. This was the reason for Agfa to establish the same year (1891) a photo department, which by time dominated the firm, to the extent that a new, huge plant was built in the nowhere (1909).

 

[darkosaric]

I buy from ADOX: nowadays only Rodinal, in past I used also a lot of APH09 (now called Adonal?). I do this just because I like Fotoimpex and Adox, and I want to support them, I don't think that other Rodinal versions are worse / different that Adox. Friend of mine uses Foma version, results looks just like Adox version.

 

[AgX]

The specialist amongst us on the Rodinal versions seems be Ian Grant. I guess he will chime in...

 

[JPD]

To complicate matters, R-09 actually approximates older versions of Rodinal - it has evolved over time.

When you look in the East German Agfa (and later ORWO) recipe books you see the formula for Agfa 8, but not 9, published. Most probably because it was a commercial product and a trade secret. Ian Grant should know more, but I guess that the R-09 formula stems from Agfa/Orwo Wolfen and is pre-war.

 

[halfaman]

I have used Compard R09 and Adox Adonal/Rodinal and they are the same developer to me according to the results I get.

 

[AgX]

For historic matters see here too:


and here

https://www.digitaltruth.com/articles/historic-rodinal.php

 

[john_s]

All the various versions should produce the same results if fresh (although I remember reading that one version needed the dilution to be a little less, I think it was an east German version).

However after some period of storage, it seems that the current versions diverge in effectiveness. I haven't used it since the real Agfa version of the late 20th century, with crystals.

 

[guangong]

I herded a lifetime (maybe) supply of Agfa Rodinal when announced discontinued, and before replacements were available. So I still have a while to go before need to evaluate newer versions.

 

[Donald Qualls]

When I cite my experience, I always specify that I used Parodinal. This is a 100% work-alike, same times, same dilutions, same results (seemingly),but likely not quite the longevity. I haven't tried keeping it for longer than 9-10 months, because when I was using it regularly, that was how long it took to use up a half liter batch of concentrate.

 

[David Lyga]

For historic matters see here too:
View attachment 256225

and here

https://www.digitaltruth.com/articles/historic-rodinal.php

In the digital truth formula it says to mix Part B into Part A 'until the pellet dissolves'. Then it says to mix both solutions in a new container.

MY QUESTION IS THIS: After the 'pellet dissolves' from Part A, do you KEEP putting in Part B until it is all used up?

To me, then, this makes no sense to add Part B 'only until' the pellet is dissolved if you are going to add the rest of Part B anyway. Do I make any sense here? - David Lyga

 

[removed account4]

hi roborepublic
there's some interesting info here
https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/rodinal-equivalent.46041/#post-664882
because over the years as mentioned there have been a few different versions,
they say RO-9 is similar to the original stuff .. ( from eons ago ).
there's also a church related to Rodinal
https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/the-church-of-rodinal.6323/

 

[Donald Qualls]

In the digital truth formula it says to mix Part B into Part A 'until the pellet dissolves'. Then it says to mix both solutions in a new container.

MY QUESTION IS THIS: After the 'pellet dissolves' from Part A, do you KEEP putting in Part B until it is all used up?

The way I read it based on the methods in the article you linked (and the way I've seen it explained before), as you add the Part B you'll see a precipitate form; you'll continue until the precipitate just redissolves, and then stop. If you run out of part B, you'd continue to add sodium/potassium hydroxide until the precipitate redissolves. The idea here is that whatever that precipitate is, you want the solution of it to be saturated, but as much of the stuff as possible in solution (as opposed to sitting uselessly on the bottom of the vessel), so you stop adding the caustic that redissolves it as soon as it's all gone back into solution.

As the ingredients are called out, you should have a slight excess of the caustic, which will be discarded (safest way is to pour the caustic solution into a large container of plain water, then put that down the drain).