Why Can't I get Decent Fp4 Negs in Rodinal?

[spanky]

I just hung up a 120 roll of fp4 to dry and once again the

highlights, mainly the sky, are too dense. Why does this keep

happening? I rated the film at 125 and developed 1+50 for 15 minutes.

I've rated this film before at 65 and cut development but this just

resulted in negs that were too flat. There must be a better way. In

school I was taught the old expose for the shadows develop for the

highlights. Our teacher said to lessen contrast (which I take to

mean highlight density) just cut back on development. However,

doesn't cutting back on agitation have the same effect? I agitate

for the first full minute and for 10 seconds every minute after,

doing about 6 or 7 gentle inversions. Maybe I should not agitate for

the whole first minute and only do a couple inversions every minute

after that? I'm afraid that if I don't agitate enough I'll get

bromide streaks as happened before when I tried to keep highlights

down my cutting agitation. Thanks for any advice.

Regards,

Marc

[ronald_wills]

Your teacher was probably right. I would leave everything else the same including

agitation and cut back developement to 12 minutes. Hope you find that sweet spot.

[chris_waller]

I give four inversions in the first 30 seconds then one inversion every 30 seconds after that.

[ronald_moravec1]

My experience is 10/60 agitation is the same as 5/30 less 10% time.

[johnmarkpainter]

Marc,

 

FP4 is a tricky film (for me anyway). If you overexpose, it blocks up. If you overdevelop, it

blocks up.

 

Do a search for "FP4 Stand Development" and read up. It might be your best bet. Diafine

is worth a shot too but you rate it at 200.

 

If you are dead set on FP4 you might end up with a different developer. I LOVE Rodinal but

my best results with FP4 were with high dilutions of HC110 or in Diafine.

[roger_hicks1]

Dear Marc,

 

The Ilford Party Line is that while some people get good results with FP4 in Rodinal, they don't recommend it because it gives poor speed and large grain (as it does with many films -- the only reason I can see to use it is because you like the tonality).

 

Some of the nicest 35mm FP4 shots I have ever seen were processed in PMK.

 

Cheers,

 

Roger

[jay_de_fehr]

Hi Marc.

 

Reducing agitation to a few inversions every 3-5 min. might give you better results, but don't reduce your intial agitation or you risk uneven development. I get really beautiful FP4+ negs with 510-Pyro 1:100/7min/70F/ Ilford agitation. Good luck.

 

Jay

[lex_jenkins]

Rodinal is wasted on FP4+. And, much as I'm a fan of Diafine on Tri-X, I don't care for the results with FP4+ except for long nighttime exposures.

 

Some of the best results I've gotten with FP4+ came from using a plain vanilla technique: Expose at around EI 80 or so, develop in ID-11 1+1, agitate conventionally. Very fine grain and sharpness, no muss, no fuss.

[paulh]

I got nice results using Rodinal and FP4+.

 

Try rating the film at 100 or 125, and diluting Rodinal at 1+100. Agitate for 15s each minute for first three minutes (~ five inversions), then one inversion every three minutes for 18 to 20 minutes. You should get a good tonal range, and grain shouldn't be an issue either.

 

I use this agitation scheme and dilution for most films, and just vary the time (although most 100 speed films end up at around 18-20 minutes) and have not had any problems with streaks.

[nikos peri]

I have found that Rodinal is very sensitive to over agitation - with any film. You are shaking

quite a bit, with that first entire minute. I do 30 secs initial, and two inversions per

minute.<P>

I also don't find FP4 in Rodinal to come near 125 ISO, as that will ensure large black areas of

shadow. I wil normally use it at 80, and develop 12 minutes as per above.

[randall ellis]

Interesting, FP4+ and Rodinal is my main combination. I have used it with both roll and sheet film to make many of my favorite negatives.

 

By the way, there is somewhat more to "the old expose for the shadows develop for the highlights" method than you have described here. Try this and see if you get better results.

 

If there are no shadows - the light is very flat - expose and develop for the rated box speed and development times on the Massive Dev chart.

 

If there are shadows but the light is not harsh, cut the film speed by one stop (i.e. 125 becomes 64) and cut the development time by %25.

 

If the shadows are strong - harsh light - cut the film speed a futher 1/3 stop (i.e. 125 becomes 50) and the development time by %33.

 

This method will result in flatter negatives, typicaly resulting in a negative that prints well with a 2 1/2 or 3 filter; depending of course on how you interpret the lighting conditions. I find the results very easy to work with in the printing stage using this method over the results obtained from using a flat film speed for all lighting conditions.

 

An excellent reference for using this technique is Barry Thornton's "Edge of Darkness" book, which is still in print and quite valuable for learning to understand the actual processes involved in exposing and developing film. Two other very good references for understanding the underlying concepts of exposure and development are "The Film Developing Cookbook" by Anchel and Troop and Bernard Suess's book "Creative Black and White Photography: Advance Camera and Darkroom Techniques". I strongly suggest these books to anyone who is serious about learing to make quality black and white photographs. It is very difficult to get consistant resluts without understanding what is going on and the concepts are really very simple if explained well, as they are in these books.

 

As for agitation, I use 30 seconds intitialy, and then 10 seconds per minute afterwards with about 5 - 7 inversions in that time with good results. I would not cut the agitation too much without understanding exactly what agitation does. Rodinal works quite well with stand and semi-stand development, but before you start experiementing with minimal agitation you should so some reading to understand what is going on. There is a difference between less agitation and less development time.

 

As previously recommended, make only one change at a time and write down all the variable for each film so that you can go back and draw a logical conclusion. I started with this combination and have never had a reason to change it, but everyone has different expectations so your mileage may vary.

[conrad_hoffman]

Sometime back I did developer tests on FP4+, fiddling around with times to get the contrast index exactly matched. Rodinal was one of those developers. My conclusion was that you could get nearly identical results using Rodinal, as using D-76 and several others. The trick, as always, is just exposure and development. IMO, you haven't hit the sweet spot yet. FP4+ looks better when exposed at EI64-80. Your agitation sounds fine (it's exactly what I do), so I'd just cut the development time a bit. Obviously you went too far that one time, but the answer is somewhere in-between on both EI and development. IMO, FP4+ is highly immune to changes in developer formulas; you just have to dial it in with whatever you use. If you have an unreasonable brightness range, say bright flat skies, it will reproduce the range, and be tough to print. You might want to try a graduated filter if skies are overcast, or a yellow or orange filter for sunny days. Or compose such that the sky is minimized.

[chris_waller]

I concur with Randall's observations about downrating FP4 to 64 or even 50 ASA. I also use HP5 with Rodinal, downrating to 160 ASA. The picture below was taken using that combination, although the light was rather subdued by overhanging foliage.<div></div>

[User_502260]

FP4+ has to be one of the easiest films to work with. I don't agree that using it with an EI lower than 125 is necessary. You can get good results with FP4+ with almost any developer. It is very nice in Paterson Aculux 2 if you can still find any. It works nicely in ID11/D-76 either straight or 1:1. I have had very nice results with it in AMALOCO AM-74 at 1:15. You will gain a little speed in Microphen or other phenidone based developers. The results with FG-7 1:15 with plain water are also good. You can get realy excellent results with PC-TEA if you want to make that up yourself.

 

I stocked up on enough Rodinal to make a swiming pool of working solution but I don't like it with fast films or even most medium speed films. With the right (wrong) technique you can even get grainy TMX negatives with Rodinal. I plan to try Rodinal with some Delta 100 film in 120 size. Unless you really like the extra grain I don't think it's worth using Rodinal for FP4+ even in 120 size.

[titrisol]

15 minutes in 1+50? Sounds about right.

 

Keep your time, but cut your agitation to 30 secs initially and once every other minute afterwards. That'll keep the highlights from blooming.

 

How do these negs print?

do you see detail in the highlights once the film is DRY? If you do then a little D/B is all you need.

[j. salty]

I did some quick research and FP4+ rated at box speed and 1:50 dilution has 3 different listed development times. On the Massive Development Chart it's 15 minutes, on AGFA's PDF file it's 13 minutes and in Anchel's Film Development Cookbook it's 8.5 minutes.

[rothelle]

Fp4 is a good popular film about a 1/3 stop faster than the Delta 100.My best performance to be process were in TMax Developer at 1:5 instead of 1:4 with a temp of 75 degrees. I did use it in Rodinal/ other developers back when I first started out. This is a great film to play with. I have seen my best results with TMax developer, at high temps:. slightly grains, better sharpness and eccellent in tonal gradation. Chang nothing but your development times, you are almost got it. It gets more grainy in Rodinal. Also from my notes you should play with it in Perceptol 1:2, 14 minutes at 20 celsius, speed drop to 80 but you get beautiful prints from this film. Have fun that what it is all about anyway.<div></div>

[spanky]

Thanks for all the great replies so far. I've been wanting to try my had at stand development but I'm worried about maintaining the temp. inside the tank. Is this a non-issue? With the warmer weather just around the corner it doesn't take long for liquids to warm up before too long if left out at room temp. I've also used Rodinal 1+100 for other films. These negs seemed ok but I'm still fairly inexperienced enough to not really see any difference. Plus, I'm not sure if 5ml to 500ml water is safe. Like I said the other negs appeared fine but maybe they could have been better? Here is an good example of what I've been dealing with this film/dev combo. I do have some HC110 on hand, maybe I'll try it 1+32 (this is solution B if I remember correctly)

Regards,

Marc

Regards,

Marc<div></div>

[henry_a]

Marc,

 

Judging from the scan you've posted (if thats possible) you need more exposure and less development. But don't make sweeping changes to what you're doing. Stick with your same developer and dilution, just change times and exposure for your next test.

 

Rate the film at 80 and develop for 10-11 minutes. Agitiate slowly, gently and continously for the first minute then a couple of gentle inversions every minute. Keep your film speed, agitiation ritual and temperature -THE SAME- from here on out. After you see those results adjust -ONLY- your time in your next test. Not enough contrast calls for slightly more time, too much contrast calls for less. Your second test roll should be very close.

 

Shooting against the light into hard sunlight as in the frame you show is beyond what you can expect of film without filtration. A medium yellow or yellow/green filter will be very useful to you.

[nikos peri]

Bright sunny day? Where are the shadows? That's a lowish contrast situation, very different

from the very high contrast shot of the couple at the beach.

[photojim]

I agree with Roger about PMK. FP-4 Plus is delicious in PMK.

 

I have never developed it in Rodinal so I can't offer any intelligent comments. I've always stuck to using Rodinal with slow films (sub-ISO 100) for some reason.

[rustys pics]

Rodinal used to be one of the best developers out there for FP-4 and HP-5, but when Ilford

switched to the "Plus" films they look terrible in Rodinal.

 

If you really want to see a 125 film that shines in Rodinal, try some Kodak PLus-X.

I do think that 1:100 stand development is your best chance to get good negs with FP-4+.

[marek sramek]

FP4+ is also very nice in Acutol.<div></div>

[terence_spross1]

Temperature is important, if you are at 75 degrees, the ideal time will be less (I like to work B&W at 75 degrees also as I'm used the maintaining accurate temperatures for color). People doing B&W tend to not pay close attenttion to temperature. Is the thermometer calibrated? Are you allowing the tank to cool while processing instead of holding the tank at a constant temperature? Is the tank submerged partially in a water bath?

 

When holding back on agitation, never hold back the initial agitation as it is important to start development evenly at the same time in all areas of the film.

[gnashings]

FP4+ @125 in Rodinal 1+50 is one of my favourites, and my main combo. It has to be an easy film to work with if I get great results from it, as I am no master photographer. A different look, but beautiful in its own right is souping this film in D76 (ID11) 1+1. I don't recall the time, but I know that I found I got best results from a minute or so longer than the massive dev chart. My agitation is 30s econds to start, 10 seconds each minute. I use patterson tanks and use the stir-stick provided, so far with no ill effects.

Are these blocked highlits apparent on the negative, or only when you try printing?