Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,940   Posts: 1,557,445   Online: 807
      
Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Prague, e.g. Europe
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    287
    Images
    43

    Rollei RPX 400 shot at 250 - what dev/time?

    Hello folks,

    I recently purchased some Rollei RPX 400 for occasions when I need something faster than Ilford Delta 100 wich is nowadays my main film in 120. However, I forgot to take with me the information sheet on a trip and when wondering how to expose it, I treated it similarly as I used to treat TriX and shot it at ISO 250 (or 320 for one roll). Now that I looked at the charts on Maco's website as well as in the Massive Dev Chart, there are only times for films shot at iso 400 and higher and I am wondering how shoudl I develop my rolls...

    I have currently at hand Rodinal, D76, Perceptol (I think) and some Beutler. And Moersch Tanol which I use for my LF negatives.

    Could you please help me with any suggestions?

    Thanks very much!

    A.
    | website | ipernity thing |

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    376

    Rollei for Dev

    I used Rodinal and Xtol for this film, fine grain with Xtol stock and Rodinal 1:25 for strong contrast.

    times were about what the mfg calls for, but your water will determine that, IMHO.

  3. #3
    Richard Sintchak (rich815)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    San Francisco area
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,069
    Images
    1
    Pull times back about 15-20% if lighting was normal, 30% if contrasty, develop at 400 speed times if it was really flat.
    -----------------------

    "Well, my photos are actually much better than they look..."

    Richard S.
    Albany, CA (San Francisco bay area)

    My Flickr River of photographs
    http://flickriver.com/photos/rich815...r-interesting/

    My Photography Website
    http://www.lightshadowandtone.com

  4. #4

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Daventry, Northamptonshire, England
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    7,049
    If you decide to use Perceptol at stock I'd say that EI 250 is very close to being the right speed. I am surprised that neither Ilford nor the MDC offer times for RPX for Perceptol at 250.

    Have a look at other films such as Tri -X and HP5+ at 250 in Perceptol and check these times against APX 400 at box speed and see if a 10-15% reduction gets you close to the suggested Ilford and Kodak film times.

    I'd be surprised if the two figures are not close. Perceptol tends to be a slow working developer with quite long development times so if you are in the 10 mins or more period then a minute either way isn't going to make a critical difference.

    pentaxuser

  5. #5

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Daventry, Northamptonshire, England
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    7,049
    P.S. Ilford shows a 320 time for APX of 14 mins and a 250 stock for HP5+ at 13 mins. Unless Rollei RPX is a lot different from either of these then these times get you close

    pentaxuser

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Prague, e.g. Europe
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    287
    Images
    43
    Thanks for all your suggestions. I've just mixed a new batch of D76 so I think I'll use that, will post some results when it's done (printed).
    | website | ipernity thing |

  7. #7
    polyglot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    South Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    3,293
    Images
    12
    +1/2 to +2/3 of a stop is nothing to a negative. Just develop it as normal and it'll be fine, you'll get slightly more shadow detail.



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin