Thoughts from a first time Rodinal user....

titrisol said:

Been there! It works great!
1+200 Rodinal for 1 or 3 hours, it owrked great with APX100
Agitate at beginning and then once or twice in the 2 hours

Click to expand...

Can we see an example?

there's a story that someone ask about Mortensen's agitation technique. A former student said he would do it "when ever he felt like it".

garryl said:

Can we see an example?

Click to expand...

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

120 AXP 100, 55 minutes, Rodinal 1:200.

Don;t have any with me, I'll scan something on Modnay

garryl said:

Can we see an example?

there's a story that someone ask about Mortensen's agitation technique. A former student said he would do it "when ever he felt like it".

Click to expand...

jjstafford said:

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

120 AXP 100, 55 minutes, Rodinal 1:200.

Click to expand...

I thought that might be it. Nice tonality and from the small size of the scan, grain looks great.

Of course I was a little distracted that first time by some fool shouting something at me. Something about a "toll for sewing"?

Here's something else to look at - AXP 100 @ 100 and Rodinal. It is more of an example of poor scanning technology, or operator error. (It never hurts to be humble. ) http://elearning.winona.edu/jjs/bluff

jjstafford said:

Here's something else to look at - AXP 100 @ 100 and Rodinal. It is more of an example of poor scanning technology, or operator error. (It never hurts to be humble. ) http://elearning.winona.edu/jjs/bluff

Click to expand...

Thanks JJ!

BTW is that someone standing at the fence in the upper left?

garryl said:

Thanks JJ!

BTW is that someone standing at the fence in the upper left?

Click to expand...

Yes. It looks like a hunter in camo, but I could be wrong. There is also someone on the hill taking a breather. She's in profile by the other fence, on the right.

I do not use enough Rodinal to make a meaningful contribution here except to say that Morten gets mightily upset with those that do not attend services regularly and gets very pissy if you are late for mass. So, you have been warned.

jimgalli said:

Click to expand...

That's a great result, Jim. Does the Pan-X Aero fit the holders on the 5" dimension, or do you need to trim it?

And do they still take Bank Americard at the Sandman?

David, the 5" dimension fits with no trimming. True both for 4X5 and 5X7.

To worshipers of the Church Of Rodinal

modafoto said:

I TOLD YOU SO

Click to expand...

I've put some film through Rodinal a few years back, and to be quite honest, didn't give it all that much thought back in the day. Now after having read all the Rod-a-Hype on these forums (recently) I decided to buy another bottle & make some tests. Perhaps my testing "conditions" were less then ideal for this particular "elixir", and didn't quite do it justice. However, after comparing my results to some of the scans posted on the site, I'm satisfied with being on the right track.

Here's what the survey said:

I tested mostly HP5 & some Delta 400 - All 120 format. All my shots were portraits, (which comprise 99.9% of my work thus far) done outdoors in indirect (no blaring sun) natural/available light, and usually towards the end of the day (1-2 hrs before sunset).

Development was BOTH in Jobo, slowest agitation setting "F", AND manual processing in a patterson tank, with constant agitation during the first minute, and 5-sec each minute thereafter. I used a water bath to temper the tank when at rest.

I tested HC-110 @ 1:63, Rodinal 1:50, 1:25, and iLfosol-S 1:9. Without getting into the specifics of each and every roll tested, I'll say that what I am reporting here is the "ideal" result of every combination.

All rolls were printed for D-Max on ilford Multigard Fb Matte. Results reported are based on judging the contact sheets, tested for & printed @ D-Max (maximum black) - @ Contrast Level #2 on a Saunders VCCE 4550 .

VERDICT:

HC-110 = Garbage! (at least for portraiture). I can see how you landscape buffs must love it as HC-110 has great local contrast. Unfortunately, for portraiture, local contrast can be both a curse and a blessing - and I'm not entirely sure I would know how to put either of those into words. I guess you just have to see the negs/contact sheets. The best I could sum up is that local contrast is great in the high-density areas of the negative (aka: "Highlight Separation") and terrible when you can see each and every wrinkle in the shadows and very little sparkle in the eyes. HC-110 seems to produce the latter, and as such, is out of the game.

Rodinal: "Acceptable" but in my experience, way overhyped! Agfa Rodinal is nothing more then a nice, 'low contrast developer'. C'est tous. Contact sheets produced from HP5 developed in the "holy elixir", developed manually as well as in-jobo easily give themselves away by their low contrast, almost "warmish" look. The contacts were acceptably sharp but I've yet to remark any "razor-like" features. Rodinal stays in the game for its potential, and for the fact that its cheap, but in my experiences thus far, it takes a graceful second-place.

Ilfosol-S: Our "grand prize winner". Ilfosol produced the most sparkling eyes, milky skin tones & deep/rich blacks. It has excellent highlight separation with minimal separation in the shadows, imo, ideally suited for portraiture. The obvious drawbacks - The price tag, and from what I've been told, very very poor shelf-life once opened.

Conclusion:

I will reiterate what I said in the begining of this post: I'm sure my conditions weren't necessarily ideal. Perhaps the fact that the model I used (Mom) had overly dark features (hair/eyes) and less then fair skin made Rodi's job of redering all that more difficult.

Also, in Rodinal's defence, I will say that I'm undoubtedly biased towards Rodinal as years back, I produced a couple of prints from HP5 that were breath taking! And from memory, I believe those rolls were souped in Rodinal. Perhaps my expectations were unfair.

Lastly, the film speed. HP5 is rated at iso-400 and based on my own testing, it doesn't fall all that short of that. I've read in numerous places that Rodinal works best with slower films however, grain wasn't really a problem and so I'm not entirely sure how a slower film would improve on the shortcomings obsverved, grain not having been among these.

It should also be pointed out and reiterated that my results are entirely based on contact sheets, printed to D-Max. It not unlikely that the characteristics of my negs described as shortcomings, would in fact lend themselves quite well to the contrast control employed when enlarging a print.

Despite ilfosol's seeming "magic-bullet" characteristics, it's short comings are significant enough to keep me interested in refining my skills with Rodinal. Despite its rendition of "better" contact sheets, ilfosol's tonal range is far shorter of Rodinal's, and as such, it would seem to me that ilfosol'd negs would lend themselves poorly to producing 3-dimensional images as might be possible with Rodinal.

I plan to keep testing and would most certainly appreciate any input that might help me along.

Cheers
Daniel

AGFA does not recommend Rodinal for HP5+ at the 1+50 dilution because of its inability to get above CI of about 0.6 with that strength. It won't get much above that with 1+25. But if you were to add a dollop (1 teaspoon per liter, or 4 grams if you are squeamish) of sodium ascorbate per liter of 1 + 50 working solution, you would see a different animal. Don't throw away you Rodinal until you have tried it.

gainer said:

AGFA does not recommend Rodinal for HP5+ at the 1+50 dilution because of its inability to get above CI of about 0.6 with that strength. It won't get much above that with 1+25. But if you were to add a dollop (1 teaspoon per liter, or 4 grams if you are squeamish) of sodium ascorbate per liter of 1 + 50 working solution, you would see a different animal. Don't throw away you Rodinal until you have tried it.

Click to expand...

Are you saying 4g (1 tsp) of Sodium Ascorbate p/liter of 1:50 or 1:25? Also, what would Sodium Ascorbate accomplish? And would this be available from B&H or from a chem supplier?

Cheers
Daniel

4 grams of sodium ascorbate per liter of Rodinal working solution at the 1+50 dilution will give you about the same developing times as the 1+25 working solution without the ascorbate. You can often buy sodium ascorbate at health food stores. You can make it from ascorbic acid quick and dirty with 1 teaspoon of ascorbic acid and 1/2 teaspoon of baking soda. Mix it in a little of the solution and let it finish fizzing before you add the rest. The purpose here is to get rid of the carbonic acid gas which will affect the pH if you leave too much of it in.

The grain will be finer but still sharp. I am of the opinion that much of the beloved large but sharp grain of plain Rodinal is the result of sharp grain clumping. I am in favor of sharp, unclumped grains. Actual resolution, if you consider the bandwidth beteen the 3 db points, is better than apparent sharpness of edge effects. I am, of course, a heretic.

Ascorbic acid and its sodium salt (sodium ascorbate) are developing agents by themselves and they are additive or superadditive with many other developing agents (including the one found in Rodinal).

I buy my ascorbic acid from Trader Joe's. Ascorbic acid is also available from The Chemistry Store: http://www.chemistrystore.com/Ascorbic_Acid.htm

gainer said:

4 grams of sodium ascorbate per liter of Rodinal working solution at the 1+50 dilution will give you about the same developing times as the 1+25 working solution without the ascorbate. You can often buy sodium ascorbate at health food stores. You can make it from ascorbic acid quick and dirty with 1 teaspoon of ascorbic acid and 1/2 teaspoon of baking soda. Mix it in a little of the solution and let it finish fizzing before you add the rest. The purpose here is to get rid of the carbonic acid gas which will affect the pH if you leave too much of it in.

The grain will be finer but still sharp. I am of the opinion that much of the beloved large but sharp grain of plain Rodinal is the result of sharp grain clumping. I am in favor of sharp, unclumped grains. Actual resolution, if you consider the bandwidth beteen the 3 db points, is better than apparent sharpness of edge effects. I am, of course, a heretic.

Click to expand...

I've done a bit of searching on the web for "sodium ascorbate" and so far all i come across is "vitamin C". Is this the right stuff?

Ascorbic acid and its sodium salt (sodium ascorbate) are often referred to as "Vitamin C."

So "Ascorbic Acid" & "Sodium Ascorbate" are interchangeable as far as Rodinal is concerned? I'm gonna scout out some local health food store. So far I've found a ton of "vitamin C" pills but i've yet to find it in powder form available locally.

Also, as in my earlier post, I'm wondering what exactly this will do for HP5 in Rodinal?

Thanks for all the help!
Daniel

gainer said:

4 grams of sodium ascorbate per liter of Rodinal working solution at the 1+50 dilution will give you about the same developing times as the 1+25 working solution without the ascorbate. You can often buy sodium ascorbate at health food stores. You can make it from ascorbic acid quick and dirty with 1 teaspoon of ascorbic acid and 1/2 teaspoon of baking soda. Mix it in a little of the solution and let it finish fizzing before you add the rest. The purpose here is to get rid of the carbonic acid gas which will affect the pH if you leave too much of it in.

The grain will be finer but still sharp. I am of the opinion that much of the beloved large but sharp grain of plain Rodinal is the result of sharp grain clumping. I am in favor of sharp, unclumped grains. Actual resolution, if you consider the bandwidth beteen the 3 db points, is better than apparent sharpness of edge effects. I am, of course, a heretic.

Click to expand...

...or Athanasius, perhaps we will have to wait for Morten to convene the council to decide but, for now, let's keep throwing stuff in the Rodinal.

I, for one, need a box score. In reading through the posts here and the stuff on unblinkingeye I count the following: sodium ascorbate, borax, sulfite, metol, XTOL, and glycin. (this includes combinations of the foregoing). I am sure there are more that I have missed. I suppose there is arguably a lot I have missed, but one question seems more persistent than the rest. Am I correct in reading your suggestion on the addition of borax to say that the borax alone at 1g/l will provide most (or all) of the benefit of ascorbate? Thanks.
Celac.

Not exactly, you have to neutralize the acid, by adding some baking soda.
Also Erythorbic acid (iso-ascrobic) is interchangeable for photographic purposes and in my case cheaper (meat-preservation and canning supply)

IMHO ascorbate reduces the grain size and increases the activity of Rodinal, thus giving you better contrast and sharpness.
I personally like HP5 in Rodinal, even though the contrast is a tad low, but FP4/Delta100 in Rodinal may blow you away

sharpfocus said:

So "Ascorbic Acid" & "Sodium Ascorbate" are interchangeable as far as Rodinal is concerned? I'm gonna scout out some local health food store. So far I've found a ton of "vitamin C" pills but i've yet to find it in powder form available locally.

Also, as in my earlier post, I'm wondering what exactly this will do for HP5 in Rodinal?

Thanks for all the help!
Daniel

Click to expand...

I tried a roll of Tri-X in an Xtol and Rodinal mixture. It worked OK but if I want the effects of Xtol with more snap and Rodinal with less grain, I think that I'd just stick with D-76.

Flotsam said:

I tried a roll of Tri-X in an Xtol and Rodinal mixture. It worked OK but if I want the effects of Xtol with more snap and Rodinal with less grain, I think that I'd just stick with D-76.

Click to expand...

How about Rodinal and XTOL mixed. I haven't done it a lot, but it is used a lot AFAIK.

modafoto said:

How about Rodinal and XTOL mixed. I haven't done it a lot, but it is used a lot AFAIK.

Click to expand...

That is what I did. Here's a link:
http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/Rodinal/rodinal.html
about two thirds of the way down the page.

It also has more information about Gainer's Rodinal/ascorbic acid mix.

pelerin said:

...or Athanasius, perhaps we will have to wait for Morten to convene the council to decide but, for now, let's keep throwing stuff in the Rodinal.

I, for one, need a box score. In reading through the posts here and the stuff on unblinkingeye I count the following: sodium ascorbate, borax, sulfite, metol, XTOL, and glycin. (this includes combinations of the foregoing). I am sure there are more that I have missed. I suppose there is arguably a lot I have missed, but one question seems more persistent than the rest. Am I correct in reading your suggestion on the addition of borax to say that the borax alone at 1g/l will provide most (or all) of the benefit of ascorbate? Thanks.
Celac.

Click to expand...

Not my quote. Borax cures excess fog. Ascorbate increases activity, decreases grain but can increase fog. Ascorbate + a little borax increases activity, decreases grain, decreases fog.

I'm not THAT kind of heretic.

gainer said:

Not my quote. Borax cures excess fog. Ascorbate increases activity, decreases grain but can increase fog. Ascorbate + a little borax increases activity, decreases grain, decreases fog.

I'm not THAT kind of heretic.

Click to expand...

How much Borax p/Liter Rodinal 1:50? How does all this affect processing times?

Cheers
Daniel