Rodinal as a compensating developer?

[justin_craig]

Apologies if this is an exhausted subject, but here goes.

 

I have been playing around with Rodinal in Neopan 1600 (35 mm)

getting OK results at 1+50 and IE 640 ( could do with more shawdow

detail.)

 

I thought Id have go at using it as a compensting developer by

reducing the agitation. ( reducing agitation would hopefully exhaust

the developer localy at highlight areas but keep it working at

unexhausted shawdow areas, thereby rendering more shawdow detail but

holding the highlights from blocking up- from Ansel Adams The

negative) So I went 8 mins with agitaion once per 3 mins constant

the first 30 secs.

 

What I got for my troubles was lacking in shawdow detail, but worse

than that grain more apparent than my 1+25 dilutions ( this was at

1+50).

 

So dont higher dilutions decrease grain?

Did the reduced agitation just lose my shawdow detail because its

not dilute enough ( 1+50)? Did I not decrease agitaion enough?

Does reducing agitation increase grain because it encourages

clumping?

Is using it as a compensating dev in 35 mm format just fruitless?

Do I need to give extra exposure to film Im going to use a

comensating developer on? in which case wouldnt just pulling the

highights work just as well?

Do I have the concept of compensting developer wrong? ( Ie very

dilute developer)

 

I feel like I might have opened pandoras box but its fun anyway...

[titrisol]

I havent tested this in Neopan 1600.

 

Rodinal 1+200, agitate the first minute and then let it work for 2 or 3 hours (agitate once or twice in between if you want)

Stop/fix/wash

 

Works very well in APX 100/400 and HP5

 

Also Rodinal 1+100 fro 60 minutes, agitating once every 10 minutes

[titrisol]

I forgot, grain is always there, Rodinal only accentuates whatever grain structure of the film.

 

I don;t know if adding Ascorbic acid like P.Gainer suggested can help in this case too, either @ 1+25/1+50 or high dilutions like the ones I use

[john_stockdale2]

According to the latest Agfa film developer pdf (which has been withdrawn presumably for correction of some data pertaining to the new APX400), the speed of Neopan1600 in Rodinal is 400 at both 1+25 and 1+50 dilutions. The Kodak pdf for Xtol says Neopan1600 is 400 at normal contrast.

 

Now maybe they're just bagging the opposition, but it may be that Neopan 1600 is not very fast in some developers. I've used it only in Microphen, but of course that's totally different to what you're aiming for.

[scott_esposito]

Sounds like 8 minutes might not have been long enough. For what you're trying to do, I've used the following formula: agitate normally for 1/4 of the regular dev time then let the entire thing sit still for the full development time. So overall that would be the regular development time + 1/4. It's worked pretty well for me.

[aeiffel]

Hi Justin,

 

I'd suggest you give a try to higher dilutions while you're experimenting (eg 1:100 with a 50% dev time increase as a starting time). Unfortunately I have no experience yet with Neopan 1600 in rodinal, so please take this advice as a simple suggestion. It might need some adjustements but you may get closer to the compensating effect you're after.

Good luck and keep us informed.

[scott_eaton]

I guess Acufine or Diafine aren't available on your planet :-)

[lex_jenkins]

Ditto what just about everyone else has said.

 

I've used extremely dilute Rodinal (1:200) in two-hour stand processing of Tri-X. Since I've done this, so far, only when processing film exposed at night under a full moon or bright city lights I've downrated the Tri-X to around EI 200 and bracket in full stops.

 

Generally I get at least some shadow detail on every frame and good shadow detail on certain frames. If I was more meticulous about observing reciprocity characteristics I could probably improve my odds of getting more good frames.

 

The technique seems to control highlights very well. Only the very brightest light sources block up. Usually a little burning in solves the problem.

 

Grain is definitely pronounced, more so than when using Rodinal normally. That's the tradeoff when using Rodinal in this way with faster films like Tri-X.

 

Keep in mind that when Adams described his techniques he was referring to large format (and, at smallest, medium format in later years). So grain was less a concern. It doesn't make sense for 35mm shooters to duplicate everything in "The Negative" or other books based on the Zone System. (Also, I seem to recall that he used the technique you described with HC-110, not Rodinal.)

 

For your purposes - getting good speed (shadow detail) with less grain and some compensating effect - I'd suggest Microphen. I use it as straight stock solution (discarding the one-liter batch after 10 uses), agitating gently no more often than every minute.

[doug_clow]

im no expert on anything really, but i got some interesting results trying the stand developing that lex recommended. i used tmax (e.i. 50)in 120 with rodinal at 1-200. 30 sec. agitation to start then let sit for 2 hrs. my shots were of a lonely tree on a hill top later in the day with no clouds. most of my negs. seem a little too dense for my condensor enlarger (havent got to print them yet) but i was shocked at the seperation of tonal values and that i still could see definition in the foreground grasses. im going to try to cut stand time down to 1hr. 30min. for my enlarger type as i feel a shorter cut in time would not do to mmuch.

[chris_waller]

I'm a Rodinal user and have processed Neopan 1600 in it. I rated it at 800 ASA and devved at 1:25 for 6 minutes. Thus at 1:50 and 640 ASA I'd suggest a time of 11 minutes. Rodinal is an acutance developer so will always acentuate grain. Higher diltuion and reduced agitation will give increased compensation. I've just run some trials giving one inversion per minute as opposed to one per 30 seconds and achieved a noticeable though subtle reduction in highlight density. The exact mechanism of compensatng debelopment is not as simple as I once thought. Sensity of the developing agent to bromide is also a key factor and para-aminophenol is not particularly susceptible to restraint by bromide. Increased dilution reduces the rate of crystal growth and thus may result is more 'fuzzy' silver filaments, giving the appearance of increased grain. I typically downrate film by one stop, so shadow detail should be fine.

[justin_craig]

Thanks all,

 

So it seems that higher dilutions and longer dev times are needed here to get the compensating effect. And even then Im stuck with larger appearing grain.

Ive found Tmax developer to be a little kinder to the fim both in terms of shawdow detail and grain so maybe I'll just stick to that- with reduced agitation and pulling if need be to control contrast. Too bad cause theres something I really love about the rodinal suped film - tonality perhaps, sharpness too.... Ive yet to try actuol which Ive heard is good too.

 

It'll be fun to try some of your suggestions in a slower speed film however, maybe some APX100 or Tmax. And also with a different developer in fast films to try and save highligts in night people photography etc- HC110, Microphen....

[aeiffel]

Slow films souped in diluted rodinal look great indeed. Among my faves I'd recommend you test APX100 (EI80) in rod 1:100, and Accross or Tmax (EI64) at 1:50. Check Beau's stuffs for some great shots using Tmax this way.

 

For faster films (Tri-x mostly, or above) you may be interested in giving Diafine and Microphen a try.

 

Regards.

[ramiro_aceves]

Hello

 

I made some tests in the past year with Rodinal 1:25, 1:50 and 1:100 dilutions and posted here. I could not see any evidence of reducing grain at the big dilutions. I even noticed a grain increase with 1:50 dilution compared to 1:25 dilution. I have not tested edge effects.

I hope you can find my tests in photo.net.

 

Ramiro.

[ramiro_aceves]

Sorry, I found my post:

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=0051ww

 

Hope this helps.

Ramiro.

[lee_shively]

Back in the 1970's, Bill Pierce wrote about Rodinal at high dilutions mixed with sodium sulfite as a compensating developer for Tri-X film. It was part of his "down-and-dirty" photography column in the long dead "Camera 35" magazine. The sulfite reduced the apparent grain and sped up the development.

 

For several years I followed his formula and processed Tri-X in Rodinal diluted 1:75 with 2/3 (more or less) coffee scoop--I told you it was "down-and-dirty"--of sulfite per 8 oz. The time was 11 1/2 minutes at 70 degrees. The negatives were thinner than normal but they had good shadow and highlight detail. At the time the negative printed perfectly on Agfa Portriga Rapid Number 3 using a condenser enlarger. I still have some of those negatives and they still make nice prints.

 

I stopped using this formula when sodium sulfite became hard to find locally. I never used it with any film other than Tri-X, so I don't know what your results might be with Neopan. I do remember Tri-X did not push well using this combination.

[aeiffel]

Ramiro> I second your remark on the the 1:50 dilution. It doesn't work well with some films - for example APX100 (also posted somewhere on PN) - but it does a great job with some fine grain films such as TMX or Across. Worth a try IMO.

[ramiro_aceves]

Thank you for information. Yes, you are right, I saw the increasing grain with 1:50 dilution and Tura-P150 film, that it is suposed to be APX100 ?¿? I have to try it with other films.

 

We'll keep in touch