Phototherm and Rodinal

Film Photography & Darkroom discussion

Moderator: Keith Tapscott.

Post Reply
imaz
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2007 2:17 pm
Location: New Rochelle NY

Phototherm and Rodinal

Post by imaz »

Hi,

I have a Phototherm rotary tube processor and i would like to use rodinal.
I currently use tmax developer at 1:5. The results are great but i would like to try rodinal.

Does anyone have any thoughts as to a starting time for Tmax 100 4x5 and Trix 4x5?

Thanks
-ian

Ornello
Posts: 879
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:49 am

Re: Phototherm and Rodinal

Post by Ornello »

imaz wrote:Hi,

I have a Phototherm rotary tube processor and i would like to use rodinal.
I currently use tmax developer at 1:5. The results are great but i would like to try rodinal.

Does anyone have any thoughts as to a starting time for Tmax 100 4x5 and Trix 4x5?

Thanks
-ian
Rotary processing is not recommended, especially for acutance developers. Rodinal would be my last choice in a developer (it gives poor speed and high graininess), and it would be the worst choice for rotary processing, because the acutance effects are destroyed by the constant agitation in a rotary processing scheme. Standard tanks, inverted once or twice per minute, yield the best results overall. Acutance developers are useful for miniature work (though Rodinal is among the worst, if not the worst, of these) but of no value whatsoever for large format. I don't understand your thinking here at all.
Last edited by Ornello on Fri Aug 10, 2007 3:17 pm, edited 2 times in total.

imaz
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2007 2:17 pm
Location: New Rochelle NY

Post by imaz »

Hi Ornello,

Thanks for the info.
I have a bottle in the darkroom and i wanted to use it for something.
Ive never used rodinal before. Ive heard so many good things and so many bad things about it.

My thinking was purely economy. Tmax developer is expensive.
Especially in a phototherm. I guess i will have to look for something else.

Any recommendations?

Thanks!

Ornello
Posts: 879
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:49 am

Post by Ornello »

imaz wrote:Hi Ornello,

Thanks for the info.
I have a bottle in the darkroom and i wanted to use it for something.
Ive never used rodinal before. Ive heard so many good things and so many bad things about it.

My thinking was purely economy. Tmax developer is expensive.
Especially in a phototherm. I guess i will have to look for something else.

Any recommendations?

Thanks!
I'm not sure that anything would be better than what you are using. DK-50 in a tank with hangars is what I would use to process sheet film.

CJBas
Posts: 35
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 4:06 pm

Post by CJBas »

Rodinol is a compensating developer. The way these developers work best is with minimal agitation. What happens is that, as a fresh layer of developer lies across the film’s emulsion, the developer is expended first by working on the highlights (the more dense parts of the negative). Then, while the developer on the highlights sits inactive (having been expended), the developer continues to work on the shadows.

That’s what produces the acutance at the areas where shadow and highlight meet. And they also help to give you a more easily printable negative by continuing to work on the shadows while they are not working on the highlights.

But for this to work, the film has to sit still for a period of time (say, a minute). So they are not the best developers to use in a rotary processor.

D-76 was initially developed as a motion picture film developer. Those processors are constantly pulling film through the developer (constant agitation). Ilford’s ID-11 is a similar developer. Personally I wouldn’t use either of these developers because they are not compensating developers and negatives produced by them do require more dodging in the shadows for me to get the resulting prints I want. But for rotary processors they may be your best bet. Freestyle, by the way, markets their own equivalent of D-76 as a considerably lower price.

Rodinal is based on a formula first introduced in 1891. It works, and is a reasonably good developer for what it is. However, since Afga started packaging it in plastic bottles, you really never know how good it is by the time you get it. FG-7 is an excellent compensating developer, but like Rodinal it starts to go bad very quickly once the bottle is opened and air reaches the solution.

HC-110, on the other hand, is a thick syrup and does not deteriorate neatly so quickly. In it’s higher dilutions (1:31 or 1:63 in the American version) acts as a compensating developer. DK-50 diluted 1:3 is also a compensating developer but I’ve found it can produce objectionably harsh grain on some newer films.

imaz
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2007 2:17 pm
Location: New Rochelle NY

Post by imaz »

thanks!

rotary tube is a hard nut to crack.

CJBas
Posts: 35
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 4:06 pm

Post by CJBas »

imaz,

Are those the tubes intended to float while being supn? If so I've used them sith some success in developing 9x10 negatives.

What size fil are you using?

CJ

imaz
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2007 2:17 pm
Location: New Rochelle NY

Post by imaz »

Hi CJBas,

The tube cant float. The have an open spout and are meant to be attached directly to the processor. The phototherm is an automatic processor.
Plug it in, fill the bottles up, load the film and set the times.
Its a great unit. One of my best purchases.

They can only hold 4 sheets of 4x5. The larger tube can hold 8.
Phototherm has a holder that you load he sheets into. Its pretty cool.
I think it uses 400ml for 4 sheets but i could be wrong.
Not terribly economical but convenient.

best,
ian

Ornello
Posts: 879
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:49 am

Post by Ornello »

CJBas wrote:Rodinol is a compensating developer. The way these developers work best is with minimal agitation. What happens is that, as a fresh layer of developer lies across the film’s emulsion, the developer is expended first by working on the highlights (the more dense parts of the negative). Then, while the developer on the highlights sits inactive (having been expended), the developer continues to work on the shadows.

That’s what produces the acutance at the areas where shadow and highlight meet. And they also help to give you a more easily printable negative by continuing to work on the shadows while they are not working on the highlights.

But for this to work, the film has to sit still for a period of time (say, a minute). So they are not the best developers to use in a rotary processor.

D-76 was initially developed as a motion picture film developer. Those processors are constantly pulling film through the developer (constant agitation). Ilford’s ID-11 is a similar developer. Personally I wouldn’t use either of these developers because they are not compensating developers and negatives produced by them do require more dodging in the shadows for me to get the resulting prints I want. But for rotary processors they may be your best bet. Freestyle, by the way, markets their own equivalent of D-76 as a considerably lower price.

Rodinal is based on a formula first introduced in 1891. It works, and is a reasonably good developer for what it is. However, since Afga started packaging it in plastic bottles, you really never know how good it is by the time you get it. FG-7 is an excellent compensating developer, but like Rodinal it starts to go bad very quickly once the bottle is opened and air reaches the solution.

HC-110, on the other hand, is a thick syrup and does not deteriorate neatly so quickly. In its higher dilutions (1:31 or 1:63 in the American version) acts as a compensating developer. DK-50 diluted 1:3 is also a compensating developer but I’ve found it can produce objectionably harsh grain on some newer films.
For the record, D-76 was introduced and tested for developing motion-picture film on racks. There was a special softer version of D-76 for continuous agitation type systems. I own the Kodak booklet Some Properties of Fine-Grain Developers for Motion Picture Film (1929) in which all the variants of D-76 are described. It is very informative.

For more about how to develop sheet film (for which I would never use any kind of rotary system), see:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/ ... eveloping/

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/8 ... _Film.html

http://www.tpub.com/content/photography ... 09_261.htm

http://www.adorama.com/catalog.tpl?op=i ... Processing

CJBas
Posts: 35
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 4:06 pm

Post by CJBas »

imaz,

Glad you're happy with it. In that case I'd urge you to stick with a non-compensating developer like D-76 or ID-11. If you're looking to save some $$, Freestyle sells a 'generic' D-76 in powderform. Look at their "76" develolper.

Fotohuis
Posts: 141
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2005 12:25 pm
Location: the Netherlands
Contact:

Post by Fotohuis »

Rodinal is an excelent developer for slow and medium speed classical type emulsion films.
For modern type and higher speed emulsions and especially for rotation methods it's not suitable due you will loss acutance and have much more grain.

Rodinal (A&O/Agfa) is packed in silar (TM) plastic bottles so there is no problem at all for a long storage at all.

From 1+10 (as paper developer) to 1+25 this para-amino phenol developer will act as depth developer.
Above 1+50 and up as semi-compensating developer with over 1+75 some small staining effect.


http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id ... 545&size=o
"De enige beperking in je fotografie ben je zelf"

http://www.FotohuisRoVo.nl
http://gallery.fotohuisrovo.nl/

Keith Tapscott.
Posts: 534
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 8:58 am
Location: Plymouth, England.

Post by Keith Tapscott. »

My choice for Large/Deep tanks would be Kodak D-76 replenished with D-76R. DK-50 is good, but a bit too rapid and needs to be scratch mixed from raw chemicals these days. Also, the technical data for films to be developed in DK-50 is sparse. T-Max RS is replenishable although I personally prefer D-76 from my limited experience with the regular T-Max developer.
I would steer clear of Kodak HC-110 and Ilfotec HC developers, which IMO are too rapid and tend to provide a tonal gradation which I find harsh.
For 35mm and 120 size rolls, either D-76 diluted 1+1 or one of the liquid developers from Paterson are good choices for `one-shot` consistency.
As you already have a Photo-Therm, stick with the T-Max developer diluted 1+5 for processing large film sheets.
A small-tank made by Paterson or Jobo using intermittent agitation, provides very good B&W negatives for processing roll-films.

Ornello
Posts: 879
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:49 am

Post by Ornello »

Keith Tapscott. wrote:My choice for Large/Deep tanks would be Kodak D-76 replenished with D-76R. DK-50 is good, but a bit too rapid and needs to be scratch mixed from raw chemicals these days. Also, the technical data for films to be developed in DK-50 is sparse. T-Max RS is replenishable although I personally prefer D-76 from my limited experience with the regular T-Max developer.
I would steer clear of Kodak HC-110 and Ilfotec HC developers, which IMO are too rapid and tend to provide a tonal gradation which I find harsh.
For 35mm and 120 size rolls, either D-76 diluted 1+1 or one of the liquid developers from Paterson are good choices for `one-shot` consistency.
As you already have a Photo-Therm, stick with the T-Max developer diluted 1+5 for processing large film sheets.
A small-tank made by Paterson or Jobo using intermittent agitation, provides very good B&W negatives for processing roll-films.
This is excellent advice from Keith. Rodinal has many adherents and a cult-like following that is not justified at all by the performance of the developer. Most of them are unaware of the developer's many limitations.

Rodinal is the last developer I would use.

Lowell Huff
Posts: 129
Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2004 6:09 pm
Location: Los Angeles, CA 90061
Contact:

Post by Lowell Huff »

PHOTOTHERM RECOMMENDS OUR f 76 DEVELOPER WITH THEIR EQUIPMENT. I HAVE DILUTIONS AND PROCESSING TIMES FOR THE VARIOUS FILMS.

Post Reply