R09 failure

Discussion in 'B&W: Film, Paper, Chemistry' started by Alessandro Serrao, Aug 17, 2013.

  1. Alessandro Serrao

    Alessandro Serrao Member

    Messages:
    946
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2004
    Location:
    Rome, Italy
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Another case of R09 failure.
    New bottle bought 17th April 2013, bottle unopened and sealed until yesterday.
    Tried to develop a Fomapan 100 classic roll (1+50 for 8,5 minutes, 20°C).
    Results: underdeveloped a lot.
    Also the leader is a faint black.
    R09 bottle poured down the drain. Developer colour dark red with some grey hues.
    I'd say: R09 shot!
    I will stick only with Kodak products. In 15 years they never let me down a SINGLE time.
     
  2. MartinP

    MartinP Member

    Messages:
    1,346
    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    Shooter:
    35mm
    I'd have sent it back where you got it from and obtained a credit-note for another product. Any European supplier must accept bad-product returns and will themselves get a credit from the wholesaler.
     
  3. Ian Grant

    Ian Grant Subscriber

    Messages:
    17,523
    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2004
    Location:
    West Midland
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I'd have tested further first it's easy to make a mixing mistake.

    Ian
     
  4. Alessandro Serrao

    Alessandro Serrao Member

    Messages:
    946
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2004
    Location:
    Rome, Italy
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Actually I've tested two Fomapan 100 rolls, exposed with two different cameras (Nikon F90x and Olympus trip 35), bracketed and used two different diluitions (1+25 and 1+50).
    Same results: underdeveloped negs.
     
  5. mnemosyne

    mnemosyne Member

    Messages:
    301
    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2011
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I'm sorry to hear about the problems you encountered. I understand your anger and know this won't bring your precious pictures back, but just a suggestion ... If you or anyone else encounters such a problem again, I suggest you bring this to the attention of the manufacturer (maco?). That means, send them a formal complaint, maybe together with the remaining developer and the underdeveloped film.
     
  6. pentaxuser

    pentaxuser Subscriber

    Messages:
    7,928
    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Location:
    Daventry, No
    Shooter:
    35mm
    A pity that you have poured it down the drain. You may be finished with Rodinal but by sending it back you (a) get a refund or different product and (b) help Maco to identify a potential product defect which unless yours are the only two bottles to be affected will have ruined others' development. So you are helping yourself and indirectly other customers and Maco itself.


    pentaxuser
     
  7. Rick A

    Rick A Subscriber

    Messages:
    7,289
    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2009
    Location:
    northern Pa.
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Any chance your thermometer is not correct? I had that problem a couple of years back, and realized it when I compared my thermometer to a Kodak mercury unit. Developing at colder temps require more time than posted on spec sheets.
     
  8. rjs003

    rjs003 Member

    Messages:
    264
    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2004
    Location:
    Finger Lakes
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    I have formed the habit of shaking the bottle before using.
    I do this with everything: milk, orange juice, paint; so why not developer.
    Discovered this with old Rodinal that had sat for several months.
    If there are two or more ingredients, and the product sits for any length of time seperation will occur.
     
  9. Bill Burk

    Bill Burk Subscriber

    Messages:
    4,614
    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2010
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    Thanks, I won't argue against that!

    I am sorry to hear of your problem with the current incarnation of Rodinal.

    While I stick to D-76 for its reliability (and because I work for Kodak, but this is my opinion and not necessarily that of EKC), you may want to run tests of any developer until you become confident in it again. The test can be simple as dropping a snip of the film into a tray with the mixed developer and count the seconds until it starts turning black.

    That simple test should catch this potential problem and help you regain confidence which I am sure is shaken after suffering a developer failure.

    I'm more confident when I run full tests on my film to find appropriate exposure index and development times... If you get interested in that, I can guide you there.
     
  10. Richard S. (rich815)

    Richard S. (rich815) Subscriber

    Messages:
    4,800
    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisc
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    ....
     
  11. Shawn Dougherty

    Shawn Dougherty Subscriber

    Messages:
    4,181
    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2004
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Forgive me if I misunderstand... but testing two rolls is not much of a test.

    There are SO MANY variables. When you see underdeveloped negatives it just means... you need to develop them longer. Product failure is usually about the last culprit. Temperature / forgetting to shake the bottle / a mistake or two in mixing / not testing for your own times / too gentle or infrequent agitation (I could go on) are all more likely culprits than product failure at this point.

    I'm currently dabbling in D23 but I have been using Rodinal / Adonal (whatever it is called now) for several years and never had a bad batch. I've certainly made mistakes during that time and produced bad negatives though.
     
  12. Rick A

    Rick A Subscriber

    Messages:
    7,289
    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2009
    Location:
    northern Pa.
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    The only mistake I've made with R09 is mixing 1+100 and looking at 1+25 times--doh!
     
  13. Vaughn

    Vaughn Subscriber

    Messages:
    5,136
    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2006
    Location:
    Humboldt Co.
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    I have never shaken a bottle of HC-110...I do not think that stuff ever separates...
     
  14. Sponsored Ad
  15. jim appleyard

    jim appleyard Member

    Messages:
    2,127
    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Odd, very odd. I've been using Rodinal (and now Adonal from Freestyle) for nearly 30 years. Only once has it let me down. I had only 10mg left in a bottle and used it to do a roll. 20mg leftover was enough, but 10mg didn't cut it. I guess everything has some sort of shelf-life. Other than that, Rodinal has been great.
     
  16. mnemosyne

    mnemosyne Member

    Messages:
    301
    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2011
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    While it might not do any harm with Rodinal, I would generally advise against shaking developers, as it will introduce oxygen into the solution, which will have a negative impact on the life expectancy of most developing agents.
     
  17. Richard S. (rich815)

    Richard S. (rich815) Subscriber

    Messages:
    4,800
    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisc
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I also don't shake my Rodinal ever as sometimes it does crystallize. Those crystals do not dissolve from the shaking so you end up having crystals on your film. I just use whatever's left without the crystals, works fine
     
  18. Kevin Caulfield

    Kevin Caulfield Subscriber

    Messages:
    3,271
    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2004
    Location:
    Melbourne, A
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I've recently started making and using home made traditional Rodinal, and the size of the crystals has amazed me. A few days ago I used about 10 ml from a 50 ml bottle and when I looked at the bottle a couple of days later I noticed two massive crystals about 15 mm square and about 6 mm thick.
     
  19. Patrick Robert James

    Patrick Robert James Subscriber

    Messages:
    474
    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2012
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    I have been using a Sodium version of Rodinal for over a year now. No crystals, no loss in activity. If I can find the formula I wrote down (I know I wrote it down somewhere!) I will post it.

    I mix everything myself these days, except for rapid fix. The last bottle of Rodinal (or whatever it was called) ended up having huge crystals in it which was disconcerting. I decided to make a Rodinal replacement so I don't have to rely on any of the different versions that are out there. I sure wish Agfa was still around. Never had an issue with their Rodinal.

    I think Ian was going to do a big treatise on Rodinal. I anxiously await it.
     
  20. clayne

    clayne Member

    Messages:
    2,837
    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2008
    Location:
    San Francisc
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Water absorption?
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 18, 2013
  21. NB23

    NB23 Member

    Messages:
    1,070
    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2009
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Isn't R09 the one that is known for expiring very fast? It's not the Original Rodinal that's for sure.

    About Kodak, I must admit that they we're the absolute Champs of QC and overall Quality products. They we're PERFECTION all the way. They still are. Let's hope they can salvage what's left.
     
  22. R.Gould

    R.Gould Member

    Messages:
    596
    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2010
    Location:
    Jersey Chann
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I developed a film yesterday in RO9/one shot,from a bottle that is well over 4 years old and it was perfect, so as far as I can see the RO9, keeps as well as the original Rodinal, I use the same dilutions and times as I have used for Rodinal which I have been using since I first started using rodinal, which was so many years ago I have lost track. and I have yet to find any rodinal, either as Rodinal or any of it's new names, have let me down.
    Richard
     
  23. Ian Grant

    Ian Grant Subscriber

    Messages:
    17,523
    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2004
    Location:
    West Midland
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    R09 was the formula number however Agfa always called it Rodinal. When Agfa split after WWWII both East and West German branches called it Rodinal however when the western side merged with Gevaert they paid Orwo compensation in return for giving up the trade names, Orwo called Rodinal R09 from that point as does their successor Calbe.

    Agfa Gevaert then modified their Rodinal by dropping the level of p-aminophenol but increasing the pH, making it far easier to manufacture, this is still made today in the same former Agfa factory and sold as R09 One Shot, Adonal etc and is no different to the Rodinal sold until recently by Agfa . Unfortunately because John of J&C in the US the Rodinal trade name can't be used any longer, he registered the it there Agfa is still in existance but have no financial interest in resolving trade name issues for companies they sold off.

    So the question quite rightly is who made that R09. J&C were selling Calbe R09 in packaging mimicking Agfa Rodinal, and that caused legal issues around the time J&C ceased trading.

    Ian
     
  24. clayne

    clayne Member

    Messages:
    2,837
    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2008
    Location:
    San Francisc
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Why is J&C still interested in any of this, BTW? Seems like the right thing to do by giving up the name.
     
  25. Ian Grant

    Ian Grant Subscriber

    Messages:
    17,523
    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2004
    Location:
    West Midland
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I think there were health issues with the owner of J&C and the damage had already been done, a Canadian company had registered the Trade name there as well.

    Part of the problem then was the names belonged to Agfa and not the companies that took over parts of the former consumer photo division and some coating/chemistry.

    Ian
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 18, 2013
  26. R.Gould

    R.Gould Member

    Messages:
    596
    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2010
    Location:
    Jersey Chann
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    T RO9, Calbe/adox apho9,Etc does not do as well as the rodinal/ro9one shot/adonal we love today, It tends to crystalize badly and when I used it, and I did like the results, I would buy a litre bottle, the only size available at the time, but over two bottles I dumped around a third of the litre as it lost potency and was more crystal than liqued, so I went back to first of all Rodina, then RO9 one shot from Maco/Rollei, and never had a problem with it,I see lately that Adox are now selling the APH09 in 500 ml containers, amd the other ro9, which is the Foma, and is the same older formula as the APH09, is sold in 250ml containers, so if the OP was using the original RO9/apho9 type then it is possible to have a failure,
    Richard