Tri-X in Rodinal Failure

[MattKing]

These are better, but I'm still not satisfied. Tri-X 400, 1/500th, F16, Rodinal 1:50, 12 mins. 10sec agitation each minute.

These are still much to grungy for me. Not sure if it's the camera/film combo, for film/developer combo, or what. But these aren't doing it for me.

View attachment 245929
View attachment 245930

Still too much contrast, but who can tell how much originates in the film and how much originates in the scans.

 

[glbeas]

They will probably look better as a wet print. What was the lighting like that day? Looks overcast, images look about right for such flat lighting.

 

[Pieter12]

Disregard my previous example. I looked back at the neg (it was shot over 2 years ago) and it is not Tri-X.

 

[ChristopherCoy]

They will probably look better as a wet print. What was the lighting like that day? Looks overcast, images look about right for such flat lighting.

It was very gray, very overcast and cloudy, and very windy and cold.

This is what I'm used to with TriX. This was shot with a fully manual Nikon FM. The contrast doesn't bother me, but this looks a lot more smooth than what I'm currently getting. I think I'm going to have to go back to D76 or HC110.

Greenhouse by Christopher Coy, on Flickr

 

[ChristopherCoy]

Even this one, which was shot with a Kodak Brownie with a flipped lens, looks a lot smoother and not so "newspaper" like.

wranglerhawkeye by Christopher Coy, on Flickr

 

[pentaxuser]

In my eyes only the rocks pic looks too contrasty. The bike and the seafront scene looks OK contrast wise. I take it that the 12 mins was at 68F? If the scanner operates the same way when doing both straight scans then it has to be that the meter was fooled into overexposure for the rocks, doesn't it?

On the other hand we are driven by our "visceral" feelings as a species. Lots of good examples of this starting from when we tried the then new fangled way of walking on our hind legs on the east African plains maybe 30-40,000 years ago.As such, if the pics are still grungy to you then maybe the combo isn't right and the solution is to abandon it and feel liberated. It's a great feeling to be liberated

pentaxuser

 

[pentaxuser]

I have just seen the dog. Now that is the post liberation state called serenity

pentaxuser

 

[ChristopherCoy]

.As such, if the pics are still grungy to you then maybe the combo isn't right and the solution is to abandon it and feel liberated. It's a great feeling to be liberated

pentaxuser

The scales are tipping towards the fact that it's not the right combo for me. The only reason I went with Rodinal is for its one shot use, and the fact that I wouldn't have to store gallon jugs. But after three rolls I'm just not liking the results. On one hand I feel like I shouldn't give up, accept the challenge and get a lot more strict with my techniques, and continue to shoot/develop until I make it work and get the result I like. On the other hand, I feel like I should just stick with what I know and what gives me the results I like, so that I don't waste any more film, chemicals, or money.

If I remember correctly, I've always used XTOL, but it appears to be on backorder at all the normal supply places. It looks like HC110 can be mixed for one shot use as well though so I'm reading data sheets and reviews online.

 

[jtk]

I‘ve just never ever been overly concerned with temperature, but I’ve always used D76 or similar too.

When I do this roll in the morning I’ll ice bath the solution to 68 and be extremely well timed on agitation etc.

Rodinal has a longer history of 35mm success than any other developer. Your examples do look terrible, particularly the black dog and the yacht harbor sky.

IMO you'd be better off with stand or semi-stand development at around 68deg. Personally, I mostly use 50+1 (that's fifty PLUS one), invert a few times to eliminate bubbles, then a few more times at around 20 minutes for a total of something like 45min (it ain't critical). That's for ANY B&W film...tho I never use slow films for hand-holding. In my long experience, stand/semi-stand with Rodinal is the wrong approach with 120 or with multiple rolls of 35 in one tank...for the latter I'd use less dilution and more agitation.

 

[ChristopherCoy]

If the scanner operates the same way when doing both straight scans then it has to be that the meter was fooled into overexposure for the rocks, doesn't it?

The second roll (rocks and bike negatives) were shot with the Yashica Minister D. Every frame on that roll was shot at ISO400, F16, and 1/500th. I metered a few spots with the "pocket meter" app on my phone, and left it there.

 

[pentaxuser]

The second roll (rocks and bike negatives) were shot with the Yashica Minister D. Every frame on that roll was shot at ISO400, F16, and 1/500th. I metered a few spots with the "pocket meter" app on my phone, and left it there.

Thanks It suggests to me that the rocks' exposure needed to be different from the sea-front scene. I have an Agfa Isollete I with very limited speeds of only three and no metering at all. As a result of that I tend to use one aperture setting and one of the speeds but it is a compromise and as a result my contact sheet always show quite a variation between the shots. The same aperture and shutter speed is OK and there may be little scope for variation with the camera involved but it is not ideal in my opinion

pentaxuser

 

[MattKing]

Increase exposure - an EI of 200 rather than 400 (Rodinal doesn't always give full speed).
Decrease development by 15%
Compare the results.
That being said, HC-110 is a good alternative. Photrio's Jason Brunner likes 1 + 49 dilution, and that works quite well:
https://www.photrio.com/forum/resources/hc110-made-simple.220/
(effectively this is the same as HC-110 dilution E).
HC-110 may appeal to you a bit more if you increase exposure a bit - try EI 250 or EI 320.
And you need to be careful to ensure that you use enough of the HC-110 syrup - Kodak recommends a minimum of 6 ml syrup per 135-36 roll. So that means a minimum of 300 ml of 1 + 49 working solution.

 

[ChristopherCoy]

Increase exposure - an EI of 200 rather than 400 (Rodinal doesn't always give full speed).
Decrease development by 15%
Compare the results.
That being said, HC-110 is a good alternative. Photrio's Jason Brunner likes 1 + 49 dilution, and that works quite well:
https://www.photrio.com/forum/resources/hc110-made-simple.220/
(effectively this is the same as HC-110 dilution E).
HC-110 may appeal to you a bit more if you increase exposure a bit - try EI 250 or EI 320.
And you need to be careful to ensure that you use enough of the HC-110 syrup - Kodak recommends a minimum of 6 ml syrup per 135-36 roll. So that means a minimum of 300 ml of 1 + 49 working solution.

Nice! Thanks for that link. I had been reading multiple ancient threads that mentioned Brunner, but the links to his webpage are no longer existent.

So if I stick with Rodinal I'll meter for 200, and develop for 12.35 minutes instead of 13, which would around 12 minutes and 20 seconds - after ensuring that my chemicals are on point at 68°F.

As for HC-110, I mix 500ML of solution at a time since I have a 16oz steel tank. With Rodinal I mix 10ml to 500ml of distilled water. I was planning on using HC-110 at the "Dilution H" rate, which is half of Dilution B but double the development time since Dilution B is anywhere from 4.5 to 6 minutes depending on temperature, and there is so much controversy over Kodaks presumed mistake on their literature.

 

[MattKing]

A 15% reduction in time from 13 minutes gives you a time of 11.05 minutes - use 11 minutes instead.
To use Jason's dilution, use 10 ml of HC-110 and add 490 ml of water. If you are planning to develop two rolls at a time, that is only 5 ml of syrup per roll, so you are stretching the capacity recommendations a bit. You will probably be okay, as long as you don't have two over-exposed rolls of polar bears on white snow - not likely I guess in Texas.
As for the presumed mistake - most likely people just don't agree with Kodak's choice of target contrast.

 

[sterioma]

I was planning on using HC-110 at the "Dilution H" rate, which is half of Dilution B but double the development times.

(Sorry to digress a bit, hope you don't mind) I have often read this advise but after doing some test I have found out that it does not work for me, at least for HP5+: moving from Dil H to Dil B if I cut the time in half I get a one zone expansion (N+1) in zone system parlance. In other words, using Dil B at half of the time of Dil H gives me a denser negative.

 

[jtk]

One of the nice things about highly diluted Rodinal (e.g. 1+50 or 1+100) is that development time is VERY non-critical, as is temperature. a few degrees up or down is irrelevant. Of course, 75 degrees is beyond reasonable. In general box speed seems appropriate in all sorts of light, but it will give you 800 with TriX without any sort of push. It's very good at looking into deep shadows and not fooled by chrome auto bumpers. If a person can't get very good results with Rodinal... Of course one may want to push further or be anxious about grain, but pursuit of those goals before basic success with Rodinal seems, um..

 

[jtk]

I don’t like you. You seem like a largely curmudgeon of a person. I have yet to read a positive word about anything, or anyone from you.

I probably would like you more if you indicated you wanted to learn...rather than simply giving up after failures. My own various failures have motivated learning. Stand processing Rodinal, for example was NFG for me with 120 because one side of the film got more processing than the other, which taught me that the wonderful results I've seen in the work of others, who used stand processing for their 35mm, didn't apply well to the larger format. If I shot 4X5 I wouldn't stand process for the same reason.

I don't deny being a curmudgeon sometimes, but if you want to see my positive side you could visit Photrio's "Photographer" group, where you 'll see that I've promoted more photographers than anybody else over the past year or two. Not being a shopper or gear head, I don't like gear nearly as much as I like photographers.

Best wishes.

 

[bernard_L]

I‘ve just never ever been overly concerned with temperature, but I’ve always used D76 or similar too.

I think I'm going to have to go back to D76 or HC110.

Mind you, this temperature thing is not just Rodinal. Mostly all developers are sensitive to temperature (with a few exotic exceptions). You'll need to have a thermometer and use it. Which means:

1. Bring your chemicals within the range 68-75°F
2. Measure the actual temperature in the developing tank when approx 3min into the dev time (dev tank may be warmer/colder)
   
3. Adjust actual dev time accordingly
4. Make sure that stop, fix, and wash are within 5°F of dev temperature.

Some abrasive comments are not entirely surprising if you come for advice and proclaim sloppiness.

 

[ChristopherCoy]

Okay, that explains your grainy result. I use 13'@68 1+50 and always get negs that meet my expectations. If you develop at MDC recommendations you should do well. I also agitate for 5 sec per minute so I don't blow out the highlights. Let us know how you fare tomorrow. Good luck!!

Nothing wrong with your photos. In the sky some grain, but that is not bad. I always use Rodinal 1+25 with Trix, @400 box speed. I find this a nice combo, here are two examples:

Nice, Darko, 1+25 adds a nice 'punch!' Feels like Salgado!

I've ordered a proper thermometer, as well as additional rolls of film and some HC-110. I plan to do a development experiment with both developers, and I've been talking to a member whom I greatly respect about it. The scene will be set up in the shade, on a full sun day, and will contain dark/gray/white bath towels for texture, set up on a box for shadows, and will contain a gray card and white sheets of cardstock with A, B, and C printed on them. The goal is to divide the rolls into two or three groups and process each part in the two developers. The rolls will be shot at +1EV, Normal, and -1EV.

For this experiement, which dilutions/temps/times do you recommend for Rodinal? Additionally, should I experiment with stand/semi-stand development and if so what do you recommend?

 

[grain elevator]

These are better, but I'm still not satisfied. Tri-X 400, 1/500th, F16, Rodinal 1:50, 12 mins. 10sec agitation each minute.

These are still much to grungy for me. Not sure if it's the camera/film combo, for film/developer combo, or what. But these aren't doing it for me.

View attachment 245929
View attachment 245930

They're underexposed. 1/500 @ f/16 is for full sun, which you don't have in these pictures, and even then will often leave the shadows with too little detail. And in Rodinal, TriX probably doesn't reach ISO 400 anyway. I'd try with two stops more exposure in this lighting, maybe even three. The underexposure means that you, or your scanner driver unbeknownst to you, need to bring up contrast in the shadows, which increases grain. Obviously you need to rethink your metering, educated guessing (sunny 16) should be more accurate than this.

 

[ChristopherCoy]

Also, I was reading this post and the thought occurred to me that I only used 10ml of Rodinal in 500ml of water. If the minimum recommendation is 6ml per 35mm roll, shouldn't I have used 12ml? Would the missing 2ml of rodinal have any effect in any measurable or observable amount?

 

[pentaxuser]

Also, I was reading this post and the thought occurred to me that I only used 10ml of Rodinal in 500ml of water. If the minimum recommendation is 6ml per 35mm roll, shouldn't I have used 12ml? Would the missing 2ml of rodinal have any effect in any measurable or observable amount?

The surface area of 135 film and 120 film is almost the same so the same minimum amount applies to both. Some use it as low as 5ml minimum, others say 6ml so you did use Afga's minimum.

So, No, I don't believe that 2 ml would make any difference

pentaxuser

 

[ChristopherCoy]

The surface area of 135 film and 120 film is almost the same so the same minimum amount applies to both. Some use it as low as 5ml minimum, others say 6ml so you did use Afga's minimum.

So, No, I don't believe that 2 ml would make any difference

pentaxuser

Yeah... I just realized that its 6ml of HC110, not 6ml of Rodinal. Everything is kind of running together at this point.

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

You are most probably seeing micro-reticulation due to variation in temperature. See this informative post by @Ian Grant who advises keeping temperature variation within +/- 1C throughout the process.

It's not the temperature itself it's variations in temperatures in the rest of the processing when the emulsion is softer causing sudden expansion or contraction of the emulsion, and grain clumping also called micro-reticulation.

In fact modern Rodinal is worse as it now has excess Hydroxide, and that softens films further. Some people get increased grain and even actual reticulation with Rodinal and Fuji Acros when they don't control the temperatures properly. Tmax 400 can also give increased grain

Every stage Dev, Stop, Fix & wash needs to be +/- 1° C, or as close to that as possible.

It can happen with any developer & film, but Rodinal is more prone to it because of the hydroxide which is not used in many other developers.

Ian

 

[darkosaric]

Nice, Darko, 1+25 adds a nice 'punch!' Feels like Salgado!

Thanks. That is best compliment I got in 2020 .