My first try with Adox 20

Discussion in 'Black and White' started by mjferron, Apr 4, 2010.

  1. Tough stuff to deal with. Very high contrast. Went down to a nearby brook under ideal overcast conditions and still I had a hard time holding back the highlights. My Fm3a's meter should not of had a hard time under those conditions. Film was rated at 20 using the recommended Adox 50 developer. Suggested times are 5-5.5 minutes so i went with 5 minutes 15 seconds at 68 degrees F. There is "no" grain and a hell of a lot of detail but if I don't learn how to control the contrast then it's back to Delta 100. Maybe I'll try 4 minutes 45 seconds next time. Any user suggestions?
  2. I use Diafine rate it at 25 3 minutes solution A and 2 in solution B.
  3. I would maybe try a few test rolls with a super slow developer and a long dev time.
    I shoot microfilm and Rollei ATP at around ISO 32 and develop it in a very weak caffenol.
    8 oz h20, 2 level tsp of Folgers, 1 level tsp of wasing soda seems to work with ATP at ISO 32.
    I have also used 8,2,2 as above on Bluefire at iso 32.
    I run it on a uniroller for around 40 minutes.
    I have tried very limited inversion agitation by hand but never get an even development so I stick with the uniroller.
    Contrast on bluefire is good. Contrast with ATP is still high for my taste. That said I prefer the factory bluefire developer at ISO80, but I was out.
    There are probably better developers for your film than above but maybe it will give you a start.
    Also in the bluefire literature, it mentions using a half strength mix to get better tones and it does work a lot better than the full strength developer.
    You could try to cut the factory developer in half strength wise and extend the development.
    This is bluefire at ISO 32 in the 8,2,2 formula above. Minolta Hi-matic.
    Rollei ATP in the 8,2,1, same camera, 45 min.
    I am not really happy with the ATP contrast, but I have not drum scanned them yet.
  4. Michael, I have the same problem with all the Adox (up to ISO 100 anyway). It is way too contrasty for my tastes as well. Originally I was developing in HC-110/F and H and then switched to Rodinal 1:100 with slightly better results. It is pretty sharp though, and the same problems I have with Delta 100 (very, very sharp, but too contrasty).
  5. Well here's one of the shots. FM3a, 35mm AIS F2 @ F11. Though I toned the highlights down there is still no detail in the whitewater. A similar shot even had the highlights on the bedrock where I'm standing blown out. I appreciate the suggestions.
    Larry I've never used Diafine but guess I'll have to give it a try.
    Troy my only attempt with Caffinol was a total disaster. LOL
    Michael I just developed my last roll of Delta 100 in ID-11. Though the light conditions were somewhat harsh I was till pleased with the outcome.
  6. I found that the Delta 100 in Rodinal 1-100 for 50 minutes full stand at box speed is pretty good.
  7. Larry, Yes, stand development is the only way I like Delta 100.
    Michael, I haven't tried silver printing the negative yet. My thought is it might be tricky considering the scan was so difficult.
  8. Want real high almost Kodalithic use Delta 100 at 400 and then process in Litho A&B developer for 3 minutes.
  9. >Troy my only attempt with Caffinol was a total disaster. LOL
    Funny, thats about all I use except for the Bluefire developer.
    I am seriously allergic to Metols and coffee is non toxic and always around.
  10. Well here's Delta 100 shot at 80 developed in ID-11 mixed 1-1. Bright noon Texas sun. I thought it came out pretty good considering the conditions. Highlights and shadows both in check.
  11. That is a nice shot for High noon
  12. Well it was the end of March so it's not July high noon but still the sun is already getting hot and high in the sky down here.
  13. LOL close enough as I am just getting more light to shoot with. I used to live in Arizona it seemed it was High noon most of the day. However not like when I lived in Panama.
  14. I've got the wet print of this drying as we speak. Looks pretty good.
  15. My usual trick for high-noon sunny day type shooting (without the Colt Peacemaker) is to downrate the film a bit and give appropriately less development. Just the old "plenty of exposure, don't overdevelop" adage for roll films. Has worked well for me many times with TMX (usually at EI 64-80 souped in ID-11 or Microphen) and FP4+ (EI 64 in ID-11). Helps get the desired overall tone without resorting to gymnastics during enlarging.
    With Pan F+, the only slow b&w film I've used in the past decade, EI 50 (right at the box speed) works well with Diafine for exposures in bright sunlight. With other developers EI 50 produced chalk and soot contrast that was very difficult to enlarge or scan well. With ID-11, Ilfosol-S, Rodinal and others, EI 25 worked better. But I still preferred Pan F+ in Diafine.
    Regarding metering, most TTL metering - especially averaging and "smart" full frame metering modes - can be fooled by high contrast scenes. Spot metering can help if you don't mind the calculations needed to choose the appropriate exposure based on which part of the scene you're metering. Or just use an incident meter - saves a lot of work for me most of the time. With my meterless medium format cameras I'll use an incident meter about 90% of the time, and only rarely drag out the Pentax Spotmeter V.
  16. All micro films have the problem of a too high contrast. Therefore you have to develop in a low contrast (document) developer.
    Alternatives: RLC, Diafine, Rodinal 1+150, Caffenol, Technidol.
    The original Adox CMS 20 material is comming from Agfa, also sold under SPUR Orthopan UR. Rollei ATP1.1 is a technical pan film. Here you have a bit more chance in a regular contrast negative.
    Here an example in Rollei ATP-DC and in Rodinal 1+150.
    iso 25 ATP-DC 1+11,5 6:00 minutes.
    iso 15 Rodinal 1+150 6:30 minutes.
  17. I still want to give the Adox 50 developer another try. I'm thinking maybe 4.45 with a bit less agitation might hold back the highlights. Now that I think of it I might have gotten sloppy and had the developer at a temp closer to 69 degrees which would not have helped the cause.
    As far as exposure the wagon shot was sunny 16 counted down to F8 and another stop added for a green yellow filter. That gave me 1/250 at F8 for the exposure that worked well. it's getting into the deep shadows with out a meter that gives me fits.
  18. Back in the 1950's when Adox films were at their peak, the typical developer used was Tetnal Neofine Blue. Today I think I would try a Willie Beutler type developer such as:
    Water (distilled) 750ml
    Pinch of sodium sulfite
    Metol 25 grams
    Sodium sulfite 20 grams
    Sodium metabisulfite 5 grams
    water to make Solution A 1 liter
    Solution B
    Water 750 mls.
    Sodium carbonate (mono) 25 grams
    water to make 1 liter
    For starters, dilute 1 part A, 1 part B, 8 parts water. Develop for 8 minutes @20 degrees C. I'd do a bracket series to test @ EI 8, 16, 20, 25, and 32 to see where your shadow detail falls-I'd bet you'd end up right around EI 16 with this combo. Should tame the contrast adequately, and give you plenty of acutance.
  19. Maxim
    The 20 is a microfilm not a traditional thick silver film.
  20. My apologies-I thought this was a re-introduced version of Adox KB 14:(
  21. The KB14 is the CHS 25 I believe.
  22. Same scene, Efke 25 in Beutler 1+1+10, 7:00 minutes.
    Efke 25 / Adox 25 is a traditional single layer film from the 50's then Dr. Schleussner later Dupont. Afterwards the film was/is produced by Fotochemika in Croatia.
    The Beutler (Metol) type developer was especially made for these films in the 50's. Indeed a simple receipture of 3 components only.

Share This Page