 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Film Photography / Darkroom / March 2005Pan-F with Rodinal (1:100)
Can anyone tell me if it's possible to process Pan-F in Rodinal at 1:100 and still end up with it at iso 50? All the tables of development either have it at 1:25 or 1:50 for an end result of iso 50 ,,, or they have it processing in a dilution of 1:100 but with an end result of iso 25. I see times of around 11 minutes for iso 50 using 1:50 dilution of Rodinal. Any idea what the time would be for 1:100? Or is it likely to cause problems with the film? Thanks, Matt Why Rodinal? It's a poor developer. It does not give as much film speed as D-76. In the case of Pan-F, use EI 25. > Can anyone tell me if it's possible to process Pan-F in Rodinal at > 1:100 and still end up with it at iso 50? [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Matt UC napisał(a): > Why Rodinal? It's a poor developer. It does not give as much film speed > as D-76. In the case of Pan-F, use EI 25. Maybe a poor man's developer, but not "poor". At all. It gives much more defined and visually sharper image than D-76 (stock), with bigger but nice grain (it isn't a big issue with pan-f 50, is it?) and - thats true - lower speed. Not -1EV, maybe 0,5; so not EI 25 - go 32. cheers  Signaturealkos at tlen pl http://onephoto.net/portfolio.php3?id_autora=17765 > UC napisal(a): > > Why Rodinal? It's a poor developer. It does not give as much film speed > > as D-76. In the case of Pan-F, use EI 25. > > Maybe a poor man's developer, but not "poor". At all. It gives much more > defined and visually sharper image than D-76 (stock), with bigger but > nice grain (it isn't a big issue with pan-f 50, is it?) and - thats true > - lower speed. Not -1EV, maybe 0,5; so not EI 25 - go 32. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > alkos at tlen pl > http://onephoto.net/portfolio.php3?id_autora=17765 There are better non-solvent developers. Pick one - ANY one - and it will be better than Rodinal. Rodinal is the most over-rated developer of all time. UC napisał(a): > There are better non-solvent developers. Pick one - ANY one - and it > will be better than Rodinal. De gustibus non disputandum est. I've picked rodinal and I'm happy with the grain and tonality it gives (1+50 or 1+75) (as well as with xtol and acutol BTW :) cheers Signaturealkos at tlen pl http://onephoto.net/portfolio.php3?id_autora=17765 >UC napisa?(a): >> Why Rodinal? It's a poor developer. It does not give as much film speed [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >cheers I have a couple of rolls of film already exposed at iso 50 so I have to develop those at the marked EV. I'll maybe give it a go at 1:50 and then experiment with 32 in future. If anyone has any experience of trying it at 1:100 I'd like to hear how long they developed it for. Re: Rodinal - it's what I have. I am open to suggestions for something else in the future. What about Paterson FX-39? Matt Paterson FX-39 absolutely trounces Rodinal. I use it all the time. Try 1+17 dilution for 6,5 minutes at 20C/68F. DO NOT use Paterson's dilutions and times. > >UC napisa?(a): > >> Why Rodinal? It's a poor developer. It does not give as much film speed [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > Matt > Paterson FX-39 absolutely trounces Rodinal. I use it all the time. > > Try 1+17 dilution for 6,5 minutes at 20C/68F. > > DO NOT use Paterson's dilutions and times. Please explain why the developing times and dilutions that Paterson suggest, should not be used as a starting point. >> >UC napisa?(a): >> >> Why Rodinal? It's a poor developer. It does not give as much film [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] >> >> Matt Because they're WAY, WAY too long. > > Paterson FX-39 absolutely trounces Rodinal. I use it all the time. > > [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > >> > >> Matt Matt McGrattan napisał(a): > I have a couple of rolls of film already exposed at iso 50 so I have > to develop those at the marked EV. > > I'll maybe give it a go at 1:50 and then experiment with 32 in future. I like this dilution. For me it's "normal" one - while 1+25 is contrasty and 1+100 soft. When you'll finish developing, don't use stop bath - just pour clean water into tank and leave it there, no stirring, for 5-10 minutes. It will give you some more shadow detail (so-called non-bromide developing) > If anyone has any experience of trying it at 1:100 I'd like to hear > how long they developed it for. It will give you a rather flat negative. If the subject you've photographed was very contrasty, try it. > Re: Rodinal - it's what I have. I am open to suggestions for something > else in the future. Rodinal is ok... I think some would be surprised looking at i.e. HP5+ exposed at 1600 and developed in 1+100 @ 75 minutes :) Anyway, try X-tol. It gives full film speed, small grain if used undiluted, nice tonality (although I prefer Rodinal here), and pushes films very good if diluted from 1+1 to 1+3. cheers Signaturealkos at tlen pl http://onephoto.net/portfolio.php3?id_autora=17765 >Matt McGrattan napisa?(a): > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >5-10 minutes. It will give you some more shadow detail (so-called >non-bromide developing) I had a go this morning at 1:100. The negatives look OK. Maybe a bit flat and perhaps a little dark -- I'll need to scan them before I can get a good look. However, peering through a loupe they look much better than previous attempts -- which were incredibly grainy and contrasty. Matt > I had a go this morning at 1:100. If you go to Rodinal 1:200 and only do digital renditions, then you can develop all B&W roll films at the same time and temperature: 50 to 100 minutes with no agitation for wonderful, even results. Conventional enlargement might require a hard filter/paper. >> I had a go this morning at 1:100. > >If you go to Rodinal 1:200 and only do digital renditions, then you can >develop all B&W roll films at the same time and temperature: 50 to 100 >minutes with no agitation for wonderful, even results. Conventional >enlargement might require a hard filter/paper. I'm quite interested in trying this. I take it this is a case of stand development? Does the temperature need to be controlled? e.g. load the highly dilute developer and the sit the tank in a sink filled with water at approx 20 degrees? [given that it's fairly close to room temperature I don't imagine it'll cool that quickly] Matt > I'm quite interested in trying this. > > I take it this is a case of stand development? Does the temperature > need to be controlled? 70F is fine. Note that I do this only for 120 film, APX 100 to be specific. >Anyway, try X-tol. It gives full film speed, small grain if used >undiluted, nice tonality (although I prefer Rodinal here), and pushes >films very good if diluted from 1+1 to 1+3. As long as it works. Regards, John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.puresilver.org Please remove the "_" when replying via email > As long as it works. 1l packages gone a long time ago... There is no problem with Xtol, if you keep it in 0,5 / 1l bottles, full and airtight. cheers Signaturealkos at tlen pl http://onephoto.net/portfolio.php3?id_autora=17765 >There is no problem with Xtol, if you keep it in 0,5 / 1l bottles, full >and airtight. All evidence to the contrary aside. John - http://www.puresilver.org "Are you planning on accepting the new definition of photography?" Frank Pittel "Just as soon as humanity accepts a new definition of the term humanity." John S. Douglas : Maybe a poor man's developer, but not "poor". At all. It gives much more : defined and visually sharper image than D-76 (stock), with bigger but : nice grain (it isn't a big issue with pan-f 50, is it?) and - thats true : - lower speed. Not -1EV, maybe 0,5; so not EI 25 - go 32. Please ignore the troll. SignatureKeep working millions on welfare depend on you ------------------- fwp@deepthought.com >Can anyone tell me if it's possible to process Pan-F in Rodinal at >1:100 and still end up with it at iso 50? Yep and nope. Yes I can tell you that you will probably not get a good image with that combination at EI50. I haven't tried PanF+ with Rodinal but the best I could do with the older PanF was about EI 16. John - http://www.puresilver.org "Are you planning on accepting the new definition of photography?" - Frank "Just as soon as humanity accepts a new definition of the term humanity." - John |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.