[Todd Adamson]

This weekend I tried a few different things, to start to get a feel for what I like in B/W films and processing, and I thought I would share my experience here. Still working with just Rodinal, but this time I went for a more traditional protocol as opposed to the stand protocol I did the first time. Dilution was 1:40. I agitated continuously for the first minute, then for 5 seconds each minute thereafter. I have three combinations, and I'll show three pics for each. Questions and comments are welcome, as well as suggestions for improvement.

First, Fomapan 100, and the total time in Rodinal was 9 minutes:







Next, Tri-X 400, develop time was 13 minutes:







Last, Fomapan 400, and develop time was 13 minutes; I did this roll and the Tri-X simultaneously:

[Wheatfield]

The Fomapan 100 looks really nice. I tried Tri-X in Rodinal a couple of times and didn't like it. I thought at the time it was coarse looking.
The Fomapan 400 faired better than the Tri-x, but not by much.
Rodinal is a great developer, but it's not a universal one.

[Todd Adamson]

The Fomapan 100 looks really nice. I tried Tri-X in Rodinal a couple of times and didn't like it. I thought at the time it was coarse looking.
The Fomapan 400 faired better than the Tri-x, but not by much.
Rodinal is a great developer, but it's not a universal one.

I agree the Tri-X is gritty. I happen to like it for these web files, though printing will be a different story. But I think the images are somehow more lively.

I'll be trying other chemistry, of course, but since I'm just getting started, I want to spend a bit of time exploring the Rodinal. Next on my list is to do a roll of the Tri-X with a stand protocol, very dilute for a much longer time. Once I've done that I will likely move on the D-76 and see what I can do with that.

I love how flat the Foma is when finished, great for scanning. But the film has other properties I'm not thrilled with: it seemd prone to water spots conpared with the Tri-X and the Neopan that I developed earlier this week. Also, and this may simply be random bad luck, but both rolls of Foma from today had a lot of dust on the negs which didn't happen to the Tri-X treated the same way.

[fs999]

I used also continuous agitation, until I tried the stand development.
The difference of the grain appearance is enormous...
I have developed a Rollei Pan 25 this weekend, not scanned yet, but I think the result is excellent.

[Todd Adamson]

I used also continuous agitation, until I tried the stand development.
The difference of the grain appearance is enormous...

That's exactly why I want to try stand with the Tri-X. The first roll I ever developed (last week) was Neopan 400 using a 1-hour stand, and I thought it was pretty nice. If I can get a somewhat cleaner scan yet retain that silvery glowishness of the Tri-X using stand, then I'll be pretty happy.

As Wheatfield said, R09 isn't for everything, but I'm not ditching it yet for Tri-X. But I have heard several people say they didn't like R09 for T-grain films....something to do with grain structure and the way R09 works, though I didn't entirely understand it.

To be honest, I much prefer to put my film in the can and walk away for an hour or so than to babysit it even for 10 minutes, so I think my initial exploration of processing will be geared toward finding a film I like with stand development.

[Wheatfield]

But I have heard several people say they didn't like R09 for T-grain films....something to do with grain structure and the way R09 works, though I didn't entirely understand it.

I don't remember Rodinal's formulation offhand, but if it contains a silver solvent, that would cause it to mush the grain in T-grained films, and would lower the acutance and apparent sharpness tremendously.
Microdol-X is an example of a high solvent developer, and it destroys T-Max sharpness.

[Todd Adamson]

I don't remember Rodinal's formulation offhand, but if it contains a silver solvent, that would cause it to mush the grain in T-grained films, and would lower the acutance and apparent sharpness tremendously.
Microdol-X is an example of a high solvent developer, and it destroys T-Max sharpness.

Thanks. I was thinking that Tri-X was T-grain for some reason, but I guess that isn't the case.

[GeneV]

I don't remember Rodinal's formulation offhand, but if it contains a silver solvent, that would cause it to mush the grain in T-grained films, and would lower the acutance and apparent sharpness tremendously.
Microdol-X is an example of a high solvent developer, and it destroys T-Max sharpness.

Makten posted some nice shots with TMY in Rodinal on the MF forum. However, in the reductions from MF it might be hard to see effect you are describing.

I don't buy a lot of T-grain films for 35mm these days. I have always stayed away from the combo of TMY and Rodinal because it seemed counterproductive to what I am paying extra for with TMax to soup it so as to try to make it look more like Tri-X. I generally prefer Rodinal with slower films, but I do like Neopan/LegacyPro 400 in Rodinal.

[fs999]

Did someone try the Adonal (Adox's Rodinal or Agfa's 2004 formula) and Adolux APH09 (1918 Rodinal formula) ?

[stevebrot]

I don't remember Rodinal's formulation offhand, but if it contains a silver solvent...

It does not. That is what distinguishes Rodinal from many other developers. As a result, it delivers excellent acuitance. I suppose I should look up the thread, but Nesster (Jussi) posted an old magazine article with a fairly complete discussion of Rodinal.


Steve