Tri-X developed in Rodinal

[Tomro]

Just as a personal experience: I also own a Digisix, and in comparison to my other meters it gives me values of up to 2/3stops of under exposure. Gossen told me that’s in the range of tolerance, but it might add up with Rodinal

 

[pentaxuser]

madNbad, your most recent set of pics look pretty good to me. I especially liked the one with SWTrails that had me on it with a walking stick

If you fine-tune the times again I'd be interested in seeing what the improvements are

pentaxuser

 

[bluechromis]

You'll find the whole Popular Photography 1979 article here:

1979 pop photo Rodinal article

1979 pop photo Rodinal article :: Film :: Home :: Darkroom

forum.mflenses.com

I found the times for FP4+ at 1:75 a tad under what I liked, so I added a little. Did not try Tri-X at these times.

Thanks for the article. Interesting the author recommended a 1+75 as the best all-around Rodinal dilution. He mentions additions to Rodinal like sulfite. At Ed Buffaloe's Unblinkiing Eye site, he has information about other additions to Rodinal. https://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/Rodinal/rodinal.html

 

[madNbad]

madNbad, your most recent set of pics look pretty good to me. I especially liked the one with SWTrails that had me on it with a walking stick

If you fine-tune the times again I'd be interested in seeing what the improvements are

pentaxuser

We live at the western edge of the Portland city limits and the trail system has been built by volunteers. Down the hill from that sign is a path that leads through a wooded marshland. Occasionally, it’s hard to believe we’re only a fifteen minute drive to downtown.
This adventure with Rodinal has been quite the learning experience!

 

[logan2z]

Interesting thread. I've been using Rodinal 1:50 for a while to develop FP4+ and have been happy with the results, but I've stuck with HC-110 for Tri-X. Maybe I'll give Rodinal/Tri-X a shot and see how that goes.

 

[StrangleMeRandy]

I am a huge fan of Rodinal 1+100 semistand for 120 and LF, I haven't tried it on 135 yet. The tonality is really quite nice, and the grain on 6x6 is exactly what I want it to be. I have one particular image in mind, though I can't seem to find the scan now... I do have a couple rolls of 135 Tri-X I need to develop, I usually prefer Xtol for smaller formats but maybe I'll mix it up...

 

[bluechromis]

We live at the western edge of the Portland city limits and the trail system has been built by volunteers. Down the hill from that sign is a path that leads through a wooded marshland. Occasionally, it’s hard to believe we’re only a fifteen minute drive to downtown.
This adventure with Rodinal has been quite the learning experience!

Good start with the pic's. I live in Gresham Oregon and we are lucky. We have the seacoast, a scenic gorge and a snowcaped mountain within a day's drive. We have to contend with overcast days and flat light, but there's always something to photograph.

 

[madNbad]

Swapped out the yellow filters with UV. Set the Sekonic 398 to ISO 200 to compensate for the Rodinal. Was going to wander out but so far today we had snow showers, rain, blinding sunshine and it all seems to change just about the time I’m ready to head out.

 

[madNbad]

Once again, thanks for all the advice. Made a few small changes, switched to just a UV filter but continued to meter at ISO 200 to compensate for the Rodinal, changed the developing time to ten minutes, developer mixed 50:1 at 20C, continuous gentle agitation for the first minute, three inversions every following minute, Foma stop for thirty seconds, Ilford Rapid Fix for seven minutes. Edges are clear, and the markings are easily read. This seems to be heading in the right direction!
M4, Voigtlander Nokton Classic 35 1.4 SC V2:






[

 

[madNbad]

And a few more:

 

[madNbad]

I also found this thread from a few years back:
https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/need-advice-tri-x-and-rodinal-development.147559/

 

[pentaxuser]

I also found this thread from a few years back:
https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/need-advice-tri-x-and-rodinal-development.147559/

I have just looked at this. What conclusions about Tri-X and Rodinal did you draw? All I managed was that there is nothing new under the sun or on Photrio

The 2 families came out to battle again and were contained in quotes such as " What makes you bother with Rodinal?( inference being: Are you mad? ) or I like it even with D3200

pentaxuser

 

[madNbad]

I have just looked at this. What conclusions about Tri-X and Rodinal did you draw? All I managed was that there is nothing new under the sun or on Photrio

The 2 families came out to battle again and were contained in quotes such as " What makes you bother with Rodinal?( inference being: Are you mad? ) or I like it even with D3200

pentaxuser

For me, it's making an old dog learn new tricks. Having never used it before and there being so many valid points of how to use it, learning how it works best for me has been worth it. I could have taken the easy way and stuck with HC-110 or even easier and mixed some D-76, gaining the information from the forum has been valuable. Learning about compensating for the loss of speed, when and how to agitate, it's been a bit frustrating but fun in other ways. When I hung the latest negatives to dry and saw how I was coming closer to the results I had been after felt like a win. When I was scanning the negatives it made me think of how much easier it would be using just digital. What fun would that be?

 

[madNbad]

A few more:

 

[madNbad]

Starting to get comfortable with Tri-X and Rodinal @ 1:50:

 

[madNbad]

As an aside, when I was metering the Antiques sign, a young man was walking past and apologized if he had interrupted my metering. He mentioned I might want to step into the shop and check out a 4X5 kit they had for sale. Itt was a very complete kit, then he pointed out it was a Sears Tower.

 

[BAC1967]

As an aside, when I was metering the Antiques sign, a young man was walking past and apologized if he had interrupted my metering. He mentioned I might want to step into the shop and check out a 4X5 kit they had for sale. Itt was a very complete kit, then he pointed out it was a Sears Tower.

Isn’t a Sears Tower 4X5 a re-branded Busch pressman?

 

[madNbad]

Isn’t a Sears Tower 4X5 a re-branded Busch pressman?

I thought it was a Burke & James at first but when I looked up Tower it was a rebranded Busch.

 

[albireo]

Fantastic progress! Well done.

Starting to get comfortable with Tri-X and Rodinal @ 1:50:

 

[madNbad]

Fantastic progress! Well done.

Thank you for all the assistance. It’s been quite the learning experience but the scanned negatives have almost no manipulation and the results keep getting better!

 

[otto.f]

Starting to get comfortable with Tri-X and Rodinal @ 1:50:

I have seldom seen such nice results with TriX/Rodinal, especially qua grain. It seems to me the 200 ISO plays the most important role there

 

[albireo]

I have seldom seen such nice results with TriX/Rodinal, especially qua grain. It seems to me the 200 ISO plays the most important role there

Development time is also key. A lot of people develop their negatives so that they'll work ok under their condenser head enlarger. They then attempt scanning them only to complain about excessive grain.

Exposing and developing a negative to optimise for wet printing and THEN hoping it'll work well for scanning too, is an ok strategy which can lead to good results in SOME light conditions.

However - if scanning is the main purpose, one can do much better. Systematically reducing development relative to a wet printing workflow is a good heuristic.

 

[Lachlan Young]

A lot of people develop their negatives so that they'll work ok under their condenser head enlarger. They then attempt scanning them only to complain about excessive grain.

Exposing and developing a negative to optimise for wet printing and THEN hoping it'll work well for scanning too, is an ok strategy which can lead to good results in SOME light conditions.

However - if scanning is the main purpose, one can do much better. Systematically reducing development relative to a wet printing workflow is a good heuristic.

This is not a good approach. If you can print the neg well in the darkroom, it'll scan well. If it doesn't scan well, then your scanner is thoroughly inadequate in terms of MTF performance and/ or your scanning techniques aren't at baseline competence. Camera neg Dmax (even pushed) will not exceed the density range performance of competent scanners. There's no special knowledge required, just an understanding of where some scanning software fails spectacularly at neg inversion/ coping with normal density ranges.

 

[albireo]

This is not a good approach. If you can print the neg well in the darkroom, it'll scan well. If it doesn't scan well, then your scanner is thoroughly inadequate in terms of MTF performance and/ or your scanning techniques aren't at baseline competence. Camera neg Dmax (even pushed) will not exceed the density range performance of competent scanners. There's no special knowledge required, just an understanding of where some scanning software fails spectacularly at neg inversion/ coping with normal density ranges.

As I said before, I don't disagree in general, but I'm finding increasing evidence that you can do better.

I highly respect your views in general on this forum as I've stated many times, but when it comes to scanning you seem to cling on to truisms.

Can you show some samples of your negative scanning work and illustrate your process in detail? We will then have a practical baseline to build up on for a constructive discussion.

 

[pentaxuser]

MadNbad, here's a question I don't think I asked originally: On your #84 what is the colour of the walker and arrow in pic 2 Both look black to me but being unfamiliar with U.S. road sign colours I thought I'd ask

Thanks

pentaxuser