Rollei Digibase C-41

perkeleellinen · May 18, 2010

I sent an email to Ag. Hopefully they can get hold of it.

Matt5791 · May 18, 2010

Yes - we are going to stock this chemistry soon. At first I thought it clashed with the Tetenal offering, but I like the idea of the separate bleach fix as some people prefer this. And the wide range of sizes.

steelneck · May 21, 2010

aprillove20 said:
Well, the concentrates can also be bought separate.

Yes, in different sizes too.

steelneck · May 27, 2010

Now i have developed my first film in it. It came out alright. I did actually plot a curve on a paper from the times in the manual to get times for 30 degrees celcius, 8min. This since i am used to that temp from Tetenal and the Rollei manual has times for 20, 25, 37,8 and 45. It was a Fuji P160C i tried with and i could use the same filtering as i have used before, so colors seem to be OK. In other aspects i could not see any difference from other rolls of the same film developed at labs or those i have done my self in Tetenal. So, judging from this first film this chemistry seem to do what it should, and in this case at 30 degrees/8min.

The concentrates was easy to mix, and i did not follow the manual that said to start with water at 49 degrees, i mixed it in water around 35 degrees, i did not even use a thermometer at the mixing stage. Part A, B, C and starter are all clear liquids, but when mixed the working solution becomes light amber. Unused the developer has almost the same color as the unused bleach, so mark your bottles with working solutions well.. All the bottles in the kit are not full, they are not even sealed with a plastic film under the cap as the Tetenal bottles. To me that says that these concentrates do not oxidize and thus i believe the long shelf life. The reason that all bottles not are full in the kit is probably that the working solutions have a bit different capacity, the Stab has three times the capacity per volume compared to the developer.

But, the manual did not contain any specifics about shelf life, other than "Extremely long shelf-life of the liquid concentrates". Not a word about the shelf life of working solutions, that info would be nice to have some words about since 300ml in enough for up to 6 films.

perkeleellinen · May 28, 2010

steelneck - do you have to extend the development times for each time the dev is reused?

steelneck · May 28, 2010

perkeleellinen said:
steelneck - do you have to extend the development times for each time the dev is reused?

Not a clue, so far i have only developed one roll.

Today when i looked a bit closer in different light on the small prints i made and compare them to the earlier ones i have made from P160C, there seem to be a very slight blue/magenta cast when using the same filtration. Well, further testing is needed to be able to say anything definite.

kompressor · May 28, 2010

perkeleellinen said:
do you have to extend the development times for each time the dev is reused?

Nope, you dont. Thats one of the fine thing with it. I have done 3:15 for almost 35 120 films on one litre work solution now. 38,5 degree.

DanielStone · May 28, 2010

kompressor,

so have you not noticed ANY changes, whatsoever?

density, highlight compression, shadow density build-up, loss of contrast, NO underdevelopment?

-Dan

AgX · May 31, 2010

kompressor said:
I have done 3:15 for almost 35 120 films on one litre work solution now. 38,5 degree.

That is about 3-times(!) of utilisation of what you get with the Tetenal kit, and even that needs processing time extention with the number of re-runs on the working solution.

hrst · May 31, 2010

I don't believe in magic. They seem to promise everything that is known impossible or to give non-professional, degraded results. They promise completely dustless negs and still I've seen examples here of the most terrible goo ever. They promise processing at almost any temperature, but I want to see it proved. Color contrast balance is dependent on diffusion rate and while it maybe can be controlled by modifying chemistry, it's hard to see how any chemistry could work for all temperatures without modification.

And, I don't also believe that this chemistry would sustain overusage (compared to other chemistry) without affecting density at all. It's probably just that they have lower quality standards. If you are happy with some nice color images with minor speed and color shifts and crossover and don't need perfect densitometry, you can probably abuse Kodak, Fuji and Tetenal chemicals as well and get identical results. They just don't promise anything.

Don't forget that we are dealing with some kind of con artist company here, with rhetoric over product reality. This product may be good but I wouldn't buy it, and it would be the last thing to believe their product is superior, new technology.

kompressor · May 31, 2010

The last post reminds me of one thing. Many of the famous writers in history, who wrote about murder, have never tried to kill somebody them self. Since they wrote fiction, its good enough. But please try the chemistry before stating its no good.

hrst · May 31, 2010

I've not stated the chemistry is no good. On the opposite, I've stated it may be good. But I don't believe in miracles. I've heard only two experiences; the first one is yours; the cleanest negs ever. The other one was here at APUG. They were worst ever and had terrible goo. This is probably an user error, though, at least partially.

We have to be a bit skeptical on products that promise miracles and that are sold by arguing that they are better than others. Kodak and Fuji don't do this as they need to care a bit more about their image. They can't live on the niche market.

What I say is that I don't believe all of the promises. I find official C-41 chemistries very, very good. I also remember Maco-Rollei's marketing goofs quite well.

steelneck · Jun 2, 2010

I have now processed my second roll in this soup, it came out OK too. But this time i really cannot compare it against anything since it was a Superia 1600, a film that i have never tried before. The same filtration that i use for Reala was very close, but i had to open up 1 stop, probably because of a clearly visible darker film base in this 1600 film. I used the same 8min 30 degree centigrade processing temp as in my last report in this thread. This time i did not experience any slight blue/magenta cast, it could be that i was a bit sloppy in my manual processing the first time (i did also use a tank that i have never used before - i know, a bad thing to change two things..).

I will be pushing this new chemistry a bit regarding shelf life, i have made 350ml working solution and i am storing it in 500ml bottles at room temp.. Lets see when it starts to "behave" in some way..

I have to say that i was impressed with the S-1600 film, i had expected much more grain. A 10x15cm copy at normal viewing distance in a photo album do not have any disturbing grain, i would say that it performs better than my old EOS 300D at this ISO. But i find this film quite contrasty and i do not think that could be blamed on the chemistry since the P160C came out quite as expected and that the filtration was in the ballpark. So far the chemistry seem to do what it should, nothing more nothing less.

hrst · Jun 2, 2010

Every chemistry should work in a very, very similar way. If it does not, then it fails miserably and shouldn't be sold at all. If you get good results, that just means that the chemistry is at least usable. That's all. If you want to compare, you have to do very careful side-by-side comparisons with the exactly same images on the same film and with very careful processing. Then, there is probably very little difference in any chemistries.

It would be interesting, though, to see a proper comparison about the promised possibility to process in different temperatures than 37.8C, to see if Fuji/Kodak chemicals work as well with the same temps/times or not.

Superia 1600 is very fine-grained. 30x20 cm optical prints show very manageable grain. I don't find it especially contrasty, either.

steelneck · Jun 4, 2010

hrst said:
It would be interesting, though, to see a proper comparison about the promised possibility to process in different temperatures than 37.8C, to see if Fuji/Kodak chemicals work as well with the same temps/times or not.

Yes, that would be interesting, done by someone who can manage the temperatures carefully. I have found 30C to be the practical limit with the things i have around.

For me the issue of shelf-life, both concentrates and working solutions are also very important. That is the reason i bought a small kit of the Rollei chemistry to test in the first place. Picture-quality-wise i am OK with Tetenal, but it goes bad on the shelf.

I am just a hobbyist and do not have all the experience as many of you have, can someone tell how big filtration differences that is normal between different films on the same paper? (assuming no corrections for shooting conditions)

steelneck · Jun 20, 2010

A little bump on this thread.. I have now, after a month and two processed films in the same 350ml working solution. seen a bit of white slush, or whatever it could be called, in the bottom of the little more than half full bottle containing the developer, stored in room temp. As i wrote earlier, i am pushing things a bit just to test. Some day next week i will try to process a roll of Reala in it for 8min at 30C. If this also comes out OK i am going to be close to say that this will be my choice of C41 developer in the future.

kompressor · Jun 20, 2010

Im now 12 weeks and almost 40 120 films into my once 1 litre of chems. All done at 38 degree celsius. Guess ill soon have to mix up a new batch. Just to be sure the last five films are done at 3:45 in stead of 3:15 in dev. stage.

steelneck · Jun 20, 2010

kompressor said:
Im now 12 weeks and almost 40 120 films into my once 1 litre of chems.

40! That is about double the max-capacity for working solution they state in the manual. Are you talking about 1 litre concentrate?

hrst · Jun 20, 2010

steelneck said:
If this also comes out OK i am going to be close to say that this will be my choice of C41 developer in the future.

Have you tested, or are you going to test, or has SOMEONE tested the same with the official Kodak/Fuji chemistry?

My experience is that these processes are quite robust, at least for people who don't run precise densitometric measurements. It probably isn't any special property of Rollei, but the C-41 process in general. I might be wrong, but want it proved at least some way.

kompressor · Jun 20, 2010

steelneck said:
40! That is about double the max-capacity for working solution they state in the manual. Are you talking about 1 litre concentrate?

1 litre working solution.

steelneck · Jun 21, 2010

kompressor said:
1 litre working solution.

Then i think i can expect a couple of more films from my 350ml, it will probably be killed by air in my half filled bottle before i exhaust it. I will keep on using my first batch for unimportant tests and outdated film, until it dies or start to show signs of it.

kompressor · Jun 21, 2010

I use protectan gas in the bottles. And off course for testing i use not important films. For commercial development i use one litre only up to 20 rolls before i discharge it.

JLP · Jun 22, 2010

For those interested, just got of the phone to Freestyle, they expect to receive the Rollei Digibase C-41 kits by June 30
Sounds like the price will be very reasonable.

wblynch · Jun 22, 2010

JLP said:
For those interested, just got of the phone to Freestyle, they expect to receive the Rollei Digibase C-41 kits by June 30
Sounds like the price will be very reasonable.

This is great news.

I'll have to go straight to the store and get some. Good excuse for a trip to Hollywood.

steelneck · Jun 23, 2010

Sounds like all those user comments that i could not find when starting this discussion will start to appear in a month or so..

Rollei Digibase C-41

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency