Stand development times for HP5+ in Rodinal?

Discussion in 'B&W: Film, Paper, Chemistry' started by kchoquette, Feb 22, 2013.

  1. kchoquette

    kchoquette Member

    Messages:
    38
    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2013
    Location:
    Lee, MA
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I'm looking to try a 1:100/20C concentration finally, but I don't know what I should do, as far as agitation and time! I have a fair amount of experience with HP5 at 1:50, but my results are considerably less contrasty and the grain is less tight than Tri-X

    Thanks for the help!
     
  2. wilfbiffherb

    wilfbiffherb Member

    Messages:
    310
    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2010
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    just leave it for an hour and a half with 3 inversions halfway throughout the cycle. it wont get you the best negative you could get but it will give you workable results.
     
  3. Gerald C Koch

    Gerald C Koch Member

    Messages:
    6,323
    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2010
    Location:
    Southern USA
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Stand development will give you even less contrast than what you are experiencing with Rodinal 1:50.

    If your negatives are lacking contrast and HP5+ is producing less grain than Tri-X are your HP5+ negatives being underdeveloped?

    As has been repeated over and over again on APUG, stand development is a specialized technique used for contrast reduction. It was never intended as a general purpose development method. It is used along with the Zone System for tonal compression. Is there a particular reason you want to do this other than curiousity?
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 22, 2013
  4. kchoquette

    kchoquette Member

    Messages:
    38
    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2013
    Location:
    Lee, MA
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I have a very minimalistic darkroom setup, so no matter what results are at least somewhat different from roll to roll. I was under the impression that stand developing might yield some better results in regards to tightening up some grain--which is actually my primary concern, moreso than contrast. Let me clarify by saying that there is MUCH more grain in my HP5+ negatives than my Tri-X.

    For whatever reason, when I push my Tri-X to 1600, the grain almost disappears and I'm left with a wonderfully clear image--which is what I would like to try and achieve with HP5+ here's a picture of what I've already produced with HP5+ and a Rodinal 1:50 concentration:
    tumblr_mimpz0rkFK1rsfqq7o1_1280.jpg
    (Edit: Click on the photo and it'll open up real big!)
     
  5. Richard S. (rich815)

    Richard S. (rich815) Subscriber

    Messages:
    4,967
    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Any examples of that grainless tri-x at 1600 you can show us?

    Also what are your times, temps, developer and technique on your HP5? Personally I'm loving it at 800 for about 15min with Rodinal 1-50 but its certainly not grainless. For less grain I use Tmax 100/400 or Acros.

    Also getting some nice look at 320 in HC-110:

    [​IMG]
    Devil's Tower Tele-Rolleiflex IlfordHP5+ HC-110dilH by rich8155 (Richard Sintchak), on Flickr
     
  6. kchoquette

    kchoquette Member

    Messages:
    38
    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2013
    Location:
    Lee, MA
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I've been thinking about changing developers for a while now. Those results you got a much closer to what I'm seeing when I'm developing for 1600 with Tri-X. I used the developing times on the Digital Truth page, 13th column down.

    As for my Tri-X, the most comparable image I would have is this:
    tumblr_mh3b8eCBMu1rsfqq7o1_r1_1280.jpg

    You can see the grain is a lot tighter and less pronounced than the HP5+ which confuses me greatly! It's something I haven't been able to figure out, but boy do I like shooting my Tri-X at 1600!
     
  7. Gerald C Koch

    Gerald C Koch Member

    Messages:
    6,323
    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2010
    Location:
    Southern USA
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    When Kodak reformulated their films and moved to a new modern coating facility they produced a very fine grained film in 400TX (the new name for Tr-X). So I am not surprised by your findings.

    Might I suggest that you try HC-110 1:50 with 400TX. This is a very nice combination. Development times are available at http://www.covingtoninnovations.com/hc110. Use the times for dilution E (1:48). The dilution 1:50 is easier to measure than 1:48. Just use 5 ml of concentrate to make 250 ml of working strength developer.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 22, 2013
  8. kchoquette

    kchoquette Member

    Messages:
    38
    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2013
    Location:
    Lee, MA
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Wonderful! It's liquid based, so I'll have less of a hard time using it, haha. Good call on it being 300ml, I only develop one roll at a time and usually flush the developer. Will this tighten up the grain for me some? I've been meaning to try some new developers.
     
  9. Gerald C Koch

    Gerald C Koch Member

    Messages:
    6,323
    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2010
    Location:
    Southern USA
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    HC-110 produces very fine grain with 400TX and nice tonality. The grain will be finer than for Rodinal. As an added plus the concentrate has a very long shelf life even in partially used bottles.
     
  10. Gerald C Koch

    Gerald C Koch Member

    Messages:
    6,323
    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2010
    Location:
    Southern USA
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I might add that some people use a medical syringe which is intended to deliver such things as cough syrup. One is illustrated in the Covington site. However, a recent post indicated that these may not be very accurate. A better choice would be to buy a 25 - 30 ml graduate (1 ounce). Either the syringe or the graduate is made to hold the marked amount so it is important to rinse it and add the rinsings to the dilute developer.
     
  11. kchoquette

    kchoquette Member

    Messages:
    38
    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2013
    Location:
    Lee, MA
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Interesting! I've been lead to believe that D76 yields the clearest negatives, which is pretty important to me. As for HC-110, from what I can see off of Flickr, people seem to be getting the clearest results with dilution B. Apart from the concentration amount, I can't figure out what it is that makes it so clear sometimes and then other times, it's grain all over the place! And don't even get me started on the Tri-X curl, it's almost cruel!

    As for this current roll of HP5+ I have, what would be the best way--using Rodinal in order to get a less grainy negative? Loss of contrast is fine, as that's nothing Photoshop can't fix up in half a second.
     
  12. Richard S. (rich815)

    Richard S. (rich815) Subscriber

    Messages:
    4,967
    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Likely how the film was exposed, and also the time in developer.
     
  13. Richard Jepsen

    Richard Jepsen Member

    Messages:
    683
    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2006
    Location:
    Oklahoma, US
    Shooter:
    Med. Format RF
    Mr. Koch is right about dilution and contrast. My experience is HP-5 initially looks sharper as the grain is more prominent than Tri-X. Even enlarging D-76 developed -135 negs to 8x enlargement factor HP-5 grain intrudes if using a condenser enlarger. So type film is a factor.

    But your question is how to reduce Rodinal enhanced HP-5 grain with the end use a scan. Avoid overdevelopment/overexposure. Develop at 1:50 ratio and shoot near the -135 film box speed. Use a tripod vs increasing the EI. If you want a Ralph Gibson look someone in APUG may post his technique and type materials.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 24, 2013
  14. Sponsored Ad
  15. kchoquette

    kchoquette Member

    Messages:
    38
    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2013
    Location:
    Lee, MA
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Thanks so much, everyone. I really appreciate all the help. I would certainly lean towards developing in D76, if I shot often enough to make use of the solution--which is why I think one-shot and liquid type developers are best for my purposes.

    I've ordered some HC-110 as I've seen a lot of results on Flickr that I absolutely love using it. The below is a perfect example of the exact range and tone I would love to achieve from my Tri-X or any b/w shots.

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/carstenbeier/7434338396/

    Now all I have to do is figure out a way to get rid of the absolutely HORRIBLE curl I get from my Tri-X negatives! Maybe I'll check out Neopan 400 in the future.
     
  16. cliveh

    cliveh Subscriber

    Messages:
    4,770
    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2010
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    Stick with D76, use 1:1 and discard, also forget stand development.
     
  17. Richard S. (rich815)

    Richard S. (rich815) Subscriber

    Messages:
    4,967
    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Those are some seriously blow out highlights and blocked up shadows if you ask me...
     
  18. kchoquette

    kchoquette Member

    Messages:
    38
    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2013
    Location:
    Lee, MA
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I totally agree about the shadow detail being way too extreme. The contrast is definitely a little on the strong end, but I'd be damned if it wasn't achieved in post. I'm not going for as strong of a contrast but the lack of grain here is definitely something I've yet to get out of my own negatives.
     
  19. macandal

    macandal Member

    Messages:
    157
    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2009
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    I am thinking of doing this developing time for HP5 in Rodinal at the dilution 1:100. How important is it that I do the inversions? What happens if I simply pour the developer into my tank (I'm doing 4x5) and let it be for 90 minutes, no agitation at all? Would the lack of agitation--even if it's just one at the 45 minute mark--affect in any way the results?

    (Another way of asking this would be, what is that single agitation midway through the process doing to the developing of the film?)

    Thanks.
     
  20. StoneNYC

    StoneNYC Subscriber

    Messages:
    8,210
    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2012
    Location:
    Connecticut,
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    One minute initial agitation, then one full slow inversion every 20 minutes for 1 hour (so 3 inversions)...

    HP5+ in Rodinal 1:100

    This is what happens...

    ImageUploadedByTapatalk1397784192.329344.jpg

    90 minutes may be too long.

    I've heard of 1:200 for 2 hours with nothing after the initial agitation but have never tried it.
     
  21. Gerald C Koch

    Gerald C Koch Member

    Messages:
    6,323
    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2010
    Location:
    Southern USA
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Kodak designed HC-110 to produce results as close to D-76 as possible. The following site quotes from a Kodak document describing the developer and lots of other information With HC-110 you have the convenience of a concentrate that lasts practically forever and a one-shot developer for consistent results. On the other hand D-76 lasts for only about six months and its action varies measurably with time.

    http://www.covingtoninnovations.com/hc110/
     
  22. mrred

    mrred Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,128
    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2009
    Location:
    Montreal, Ca
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I would like to mention a couple things I have found out, to help things along....

    1) use a drop of photoflo in a quick pre-soak. It doesn't need much, and you can re-use this in the short term. It goes a long way to even out development.

    2) hi key / low key / normal. I generally use 1:100 for normal scene content. For higher key, you would need a higher concentration as there is more film surface to develop. I would use 1:50. Likewise, I would use 1:200 for low key as there is much less development. The darker your film needs to be, the more developer needs to be there.

    I found with the photoflo added to the regime, the less I needed semi stand vs full stand. I use tanks for development and have no idea if this would be helpful for tray usage.

    I only did 35/120. YMMV with larger formats.

    If I ever get my rodinal bottle top unstuck, I may even try a few rolls again.
     
  23. markbarendt

    markbarendt Subscriber

    Messages:
    7,578
    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Beaverton, OR
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    One thing that stands out for me in your examples, is the very significant differences in DOF and subject matter in the compositions. This can be very misleading when trying to compare films.

    What happens is that our eyes try to focus on something. If the content is sharp we tend to ignore the grain, when the content is out of focus the grain stands out.

    The photo with the dog would IMO look grainier regardless of which of these two films you used, the choice of developer isn't going to fix that.

    Your choice of scene, background, content, and DOF really does matter.

    Try stopping down the lens some, frame tighter around your subjects, ...... these kinds of choices can make a huge difference in the look.
     
  24. Xmas

    Xmas Member

    Messages:
    6,459
    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2006
    Location:
    UK
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    Well for mono film I just invert five or so times to move bubbles and set the alarm for 60 minutes.
    Rodinal 1+100 20C

    followed by 2 mins in water at 20C

    If I have underexposure 120 mins.

    If you agitate you get more grain or so it is said.
     
  25. macandal

    macandal Member

    Messages:
    157
    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2009
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    That's nice. So, after the initial minute of agitation, you do it two more times. These last two times, you also do a minute each or you turn it upside down and up and that counts as one inversion?

    Thanks.
     
  26. NB23

    NB23 Member

    Messages:
    1,073
    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2009
    Shooter:
    35mm
    No. Grain is not a function of agitation.

    And no, if you agitate in a "S" motion you won't get "S" shaped grain. But this myth might well start if I push it a little. A few daily posts, a few badly scanned phony examples and there it is: the S grain is born.

    Let's stop the bad myths once and for all. If we want this forum to be serious we have to stop spreading misinformation.