What do you think is Rodinal's 'muse' film...the film it has most 'chemistry' with...star crossed lovers?

[Don_ih]

this quote is now officially borrowed

I'm always happy when you and I outright agree.

 

[MattKing]

Old Tri-X - from when I was young and impressed by grittiness.

 

[Paul Howell]

As noted by others in 35mm Tmax 100, then Pan F, and Foma 100 shot at 50. Have not tried Acros or Delta 100. In 6X9 I have used Tmax 400, in 4X5 HP5, have not tired Foma 400 it is on my list as soon as I order another bottle.

 

[pentaxuser]

As really no one here has talked about a "magic bullet", I don't see any danger at all.
.

On the contrary we and by that I mean the range of responses on Photrio nearly always mention it when a newcomer asks for the "special" combo of a film and developer.

pentaxuser

 

[Chuck1]

Henning thanks for sharing some of your test results.
Another vote for apx25
Currently looking for the next best thing to that

 

[Henning Serger]

Henning thanks for sharing some of your test results.
Another vote for apx25
Currently looking for the next best thing to that

Currently "the next best thing to that" is - at least concerning detail rendition (fineness of grain, sharpness, resolution) - ADOX HR-50.
HR 50 offers
- resolution and sharpness on about the same level
- much finer grain
- a bit higher effective film speed.

Significant differences are:
- HR-50 has superpanchromatic sensitization, APX 25 panchromatic
- HR-50 has a more S-shaped CC, APX 25 a more linear CC
- HR-50 is coatet on a PET base, APX on a TAC base.

Recently I've got a "new" batch of APX 25 (expired in 2004). Curious to see how well it has kept......

Best regards,
Henning

 

[Mark J]

Henning, do you have data on your dev time for HR-50 in HR-DEV ?
I tried it last year at the recommended time and temperature, and it was VERY contrasty with lost highlights.

 

[albireo]

When the light is good, I keep going back to Fomapan 100 in Adox Rodinal 1:50. Incredible combo for my taste.

I use it mostly in 120, but have recently started using it in 35mm. I compared it to another 100 ISO film recently, Adox CHS II 100, and I was shocked at how much I preferred the Foma 100. Much better defined, finer grain for example.

I don't use large format, but if I did I'd imagine Foma 100 in Rodinal would represent my main 'good light' film, even with the well known poor reciprocity characteristics.

 

[Henning Serger]

Henning, do you have data on your dev time for HR-50 in HR-DEV ?

Mark, of course:
E.I. 32/16°; Dilution 1+49; 20°C; Agitation: First 30s permanent, then 1x per minute; 14 min. dev. time.
I have tested for my personal needs:
The exposure meters of my Nikons, and optical enlarging with my Kaiser System V enlarger.
The film has a significant S-shaped CC. My focus was on getting perfect values for Zone V and VIII (for my print workflow). Due to the curve shape density values for Zone VI and VII are higher compared to standard films, and Zone IX and X are lower (flattening curve, compensating effect). That is just a characteristic of this film type, and has to be accepted. No matter what developer you are using, you will never get a straight, perfectly linear curve with it.
But so what, if I want that, I just use different films, horses for courses. The curve shape is part of the attraction of this film: From Zone III to Zone VIII you get an outstanding tone separation, and a very distinctive look.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[Mark J]

Thanks for taking the time to find that.
It looks more or less the same as the datasheet 11mins @ 22 which I used. I think my agitation was also very similar.
I think the curve shape is the problem, I prefer a much more linear response for my purposes. Same I issue, I suppose, with Rollei RPX 25.

 

[John Wiegerink]

Interesting you should say that, John. I've been looking at this site a lot in the last 2 days -

filmPanF

Fremkallertabell for Ilford Pan F film

fotoimport.no

I was struck by how Pan F+ does vary quite a lot, and it's notable that Rodinal gives it an interesting upswept response curve, but doesn't seem to accentuate the grain very much unlike with most films.
Are you a fan of highlight detail ?

Usually the only highlight detail I’m most concerned with is fluffy white clouds looking like fluffy white clouds, but yes, I like highlights a lot.

 

[Henning Serger]

Thanks for taking the time to find that.

You're welcome, Mark.

It looks more or less the same as the datasheet 11mins @ 22 which I used. I think my agitation was also very similar.

Well, a 2°C difference is a significant difference. And there are film-developer combinations which react stronger and more linear to temperature changes compared to development time changes. Concerning development time adjustment for example several times I had the case that e.g. for 10% increase in density, a 20/25% increase in development time was necessary.

Therefore I would give it just another try. And with that test either evaluating the CC (using a densitometer), and / or (at least) photographing a 20-step step-wedge to have a direct visual assessment of the tonal graduations.

I think the curve shape is the problem, I prefer a much more linear response for my purposes. Same I issue, I suppose, with Rollei RPX 25.

Rollei RPX and Rollei Retro 80S (same film: Agfa Aviphot Pan 80) have a much stronger S-shaped curve and significantly less shadow detail (I have tested and used it quite a lot). So you will have more problems. ADOX HR-50 is the much better product in comparison.
Besides this important technical advantage of HR-50: For me personally it is also very important to support a company which is investing in real production, and has built up own production capacities. Maco Photo Products (user of the license for the Rollei-Film brand) is a pure distribution company, with no own production facilities.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[Chuck1]

When the light is good, I keep going back to Fomapan 100 in Adox Rodinal 1:50. Incredible combo for my taste.

I use it mostly in 120, but have recently started using it in 35mm. I compared it to another 100 ISO film recently, Adox CHS II 100, and I was shocked at how much I preferred the Foma 100. Much better defined, finer grain for example.

I don't use large format, but if I did I'd imagine Foma 100 in Rodinal would represent my main 'good light' film, even with the well known poor reciprocity characteristics.

You've had no quality issues with the foma 120 films

 

[John Wiegerink]

You've had no quality issues with the foma 120 films

I haven't had any with Foma 100. I'm now going through my first roll of Foma 400 in my Pentax 67, so the verdict is still out on the Foma 400. I would not touch Foma 200 in 120 with a ten foot pole. I have never been lucky enough to get the Foma 200 to work in any of the cameras I use. It works fine in 35mm, but not 120.

 

[Ian Grant]

I haven't had any with Foma 100. I'm now going through my first roll of Foma 400 in my Pentax 67, so the verdict is still out on the Foma 400. I would not touch Foma 200 in 120 with a ten foot pole. I have never been lucky enough to get the Foma 200 to work in any of the cameras I use. It works fine in 35mm, but not 120.

I began using Fomapan 100 & 200 while living abroad, around 2007, I could not get any Tmax film, and switched to Ilford & Foma. You have to realise Foma films build up contrast fast and need less development, also increased exposure, typically half box speed and 25% less development, compared to other films. That tames the contrast.

Ian

 

[albireo]

You've had no quality issues with the foma 120 films

In my experience of a few years of constant usage, Foma 100 and 400 in 120 are problem-free, but there are undocumented batch differences. You need to adjust and retest periodically.

Forma 200 has documented and intermittent issues with hairline scratches. I posted my results from recent batches in another thread. Recent batches have been problem-free in my chain.

 

[John Wiegerink]

I began using Fomapan 100 & 200 while living abroad, around 2007, I could not get any Tmax film, and switched to Ilford & Foma. You have to realise Foma films build up contrast fast and need less development, also increased exposure, typically half box speed and 25% less development, compared to other films. That tames the contrast.

Ian

I rate Foma 100 at ISO 64 and the roll of Foma 400 I'm trying now is at ISO 160. I will develop it in Adox XT-3-R (Xtol clone) for 20% of the recommended time with very gentle agitation.
albireo says his last recent batch Foma 200 in 120 was trouble free, but I'd have to see it to believe it. I truly hope he is right, but I'm not wasting any more money or time trying to prove it one way or the other.

 

[Corn_Zhou]

Fomapan100 and Rodinal 1+50 is a match made in heaven

 

[sperera]

very interesting messages in reply thank you all keep them coming!

 

[Prest_400]

Makes me nostalgic; Back in 2009-10 I really wanted to tri Tri-X in Rodinal, gritty classic grain. Ironically, I have never done it as it took me almost a decade to get into a darkroom and B&W. I do remember that people mentioned the Ilford films (HP5) to be excessively grainy in this developer. As some forumers already have done, many swore by APX souped in it. But that combo is all but gone nowadays, unless ADOX come back with a new APX.

However, I have only so far tried Fomapan 100 in Rodinal. Medium format, classic. Otherwise it was mostly HC100 and lately XT3 (XTOL).

 

[Chuck1]

Unless adox comes back with a new apx, I hope they do

 

[JensH]

My vote for PanF+ (120, EI 25), when low contrast subjects don't need a compensating developer... grain is fine in a very pleasing way.

 

[khh]

I love the results Rodinal 1+50 have given me with Fomapan 200. Great tonality and, at least in medium format, very pleasant grain.

 

[Chuck1]

I'm a little reluctant to try foma 200, you've had good luck regarding the films quality?

 

[koraks]

I'm a little reluctant to try foma 200, you've had good luck regarding the films quality?

I think it's great in 35mm and sheet film format, but the QA is suspect in 120 roll film format. Some say this is solved, but I've gotten so used to people saying this and then the same problems popping up again that I've become numb to it. But again: great stuff in 35mm and sheet film!