TMax 100 & Rodinal question.

I just stared using Rodinal and shoot a few sheets of TMax 100 on 8x10 to test it out. I shot at 100ASA and developed 12 minutes @ 20 degrees in a tray, the dilution was 1:50

After hanging the negatives to dry I notices that they were thin and lacked a full range. After doing some reading I noticed that I should have extended the development 10% since Rodinal is a compensating developer. I've shot hundreds of Tmax Rolls and 4x5 sheets and dev'd in DD-X at box speed with no issues and the negs looked great.

Would a higher concentration, say 1:25 or adjusting my exposure make a difference in the future?

Agree with Michael, The only film I can shoot at box speed and develop in Rodinal is the two Agfa APX 100 and 25
Tmax100 and Acros looks so much better if exposed at 60
I believe that a more dilute Rodinal will increase speed so using it 1:25 instead of 1:50 will not increase film speed but I could be wrong on that, I always use 1:50

Rodinal is speed-reducing. Either develop longer and have more contrast, or expose a bit more.

I usually shoot Rodinal about a stop slower than Xtol, which I think is similar in its speed-boost to DDX.

Thanks everyone! I think I'll shoot a sheet at ASA50 and give it a look.

Ironically, I shoot TMX at 200 and dev in Rodinal as normal and I have no trouble, the literature even says you can shoot at 200 without loss of shadow detail and no need to extreme dev times... Hmm, not sure what to say, my negs look fine, not thin at all...

Hi Stone

You are scanning not wetprinting and need thin low contrast.
Wetprinting can burn through dense negatives but detail in the toe needs more effort.

Noel

Tmax 100 was my film of choice processed in Rodinal (after APX 100 was discontinued in Sheet film), I did some Zone system testing and used it at 50EI in Rodinal 3:100 in normal lighting. I found I didn't get the contrast I required from 1:50.

It's an excellent film/developer combination but Tmax has a very optimistic box speed unlike APX 100 which gave me almost identical results but a full stop more speed. I suspect you have a combination of under exposure losing shadow detail and under development giving poor highlights.

Ian

Xmas said:

Hi Stone

You are scanning not wetprinting and need thin low contrast.
Wetprinting can burn through dense negatives but detail in the toe needs more effort.

Noel

Click to expand...

But these negs are not thin... I will have to take a picture of the negs if I can remember when I get home.