Thin FP4+ negs in Rodinal.

Greetings,
I don,t shoot a lot of slower B&W film. However yesterday seemed like a good time to do a bit of window still life as the temperature dropped like a stone and I was itching to shoot.
After going through a roll(36 exp) of bulk loaded FP4+ I developed it in Rodinal but was unhappy with the outcome. Heres my methodology : Developer (rodinal) 1:50 at 20c. 12 minutes,agitation for the first 30sec. then 5 sec. each 1/2 minute. My negs are printable but on the thin side. Any ideas on where I might have goofed?

Thanks All,
Mike

If there is little or no detail in the shadows you have under exposed the film.
If the scene you photographed had good contrast, the negative is flat but has detail in the shadows you have both under exposed and under developed. In the same conditions if there is detail in the shadows you have under developed only. If the contrast in the scene was low, you have detail in the shadows but the negative is flat you have under developed. The general rule is that you expose for the shadows and develop for the highlights.

Mike, Les has covered all the bases and has given a wonderful summary of exposure and development. I would only ask, in addition, what setting did you use for your film speed? Usually, I don't find film to run at the factory's numbers or even close, and will cut the speed in half if I haven't done testing. In thin light I have been known to give more exposure. Sounds like you have a challenge for cabin fever this winter. For me a "slow" b&w film would be somewhere around asa 6. Best, tim

P.S. They (those people on the weather, the "experts") are saying 78f today for the high, but that could be wrong.

Thanks Les. Now that I think about it my metering was probably off a bit because of the intensity of back /side light.

And Tim.......Ya got a spare cot?

Mike Kennedy said:

... Heres my methodology : Developer (rodinal) 1:50 at 20c. 12 minutes,agitation for the first 30sec. then 5 sec. each 1/2 minute. My negs are printable but on the thin side. Any ideas on where I might have goofed?

Thanks All,
Mike

Click to expand...

Ilford suggests 15' for FP4+, Agfa suggests 18'. I think 17' is the absolute minimum. With FP4+, you should get normal contrast, normal speed, and a straight line from 0.15 beyond 1.95.

Since Rodinal builds density pretty evenly across the scale,
I think it's safe to say you've under-developed the film by a hefty margin.

Of course, this all goes out the window if you're set up for #3 paper instead of #2, and you're probably not going to be developing the film long enough to build full shadow density. Rodinal, in my world, doesn't lend itself to the sort 'creative under-development' metol / phenidone developers excel at. On the other hand, we don't really need to obsess over minimal densities with contemporary films like we did in the '50s, and Rodinal offers ample rewards for full, but careful, development.

cheers
.

In my experience, Rodinal doesn't give full film speed. When I used Rodinal, I gave about 2/3 or 1 stop more exposure.

It'll be personal from person to person. I use FP4 at box speed developed in rodinal 1+50 @ 68*F for 13 minutes. No problems with thin negs at all. If I develop for 15-18 minutes I get way too dense negs.

Trial and error, trial and error, trial and error....

huggyviking said:

It'll be personal from person to person. I use FP4 at box speed developed in rodinal 1+50 @ 68*F for 13 minutes. No problems with thin negs at all. If I develop for 15-18 minutes I get way too dense negs.

Trial and error, trial and error, trial and error....

Click to expand...

Maybe we shouldn't call it trial and error.

It is simply bringing the photographic system into an effective balance.

Or harmony. Using the tools to get the results we want.