Semi Stand Rodinal Disaster
I have recently aquired a Leica lllc and thought I'd try to do semi stand development with Rodinal. I thought this would be a great way to get in the ballpark so to speak with 36 exposures/roll not always having the same lighting situations. I am coming from Large Format work in 8/10 where I use BTZS to expose each sheet individually for the given range of light.
Anyhow, I used Fomapan 200 rated at 100 (wanting to insure good shadows) exposure read with an incident meter and developed the film for 1 hour at 1:100. I agitated for 15 seconds initially and then 15 sec. at 1/2 hour. 70 degrees throughout. The result ...... impossible to print! These things are so contrasty that even after one full minute @ f/4 on my enlarging lens my shadows go to ink and the highlights don't even start to come up yet! So.......... thinking of the old adage, expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights am I safe to assume that I simply developed to long or perhaps should of been 1:200? Or maybe I should use the box speed of 200? I would appreciate any help anyone could offer. Inspecting with a loupe shows me good shadow detail so should I perhaps cut the time in development or rather just increase dilution?
Thanks in Advance,
"EVERY film and paper is good .......... for something"
Mike, IMHO you developed too long. I would try semi-stand for 25 to 30 minutes with the 1:100 dilution of rodinal at 72F. I have not used the 1:200 dilution myself but I know others have reported good results with it.
Originally Posted by mikepry
I developed my last 2 rolls of Fomapan 200 for 16 minutes at 72F, Semi-Stand in Pyrocat-MC diluted 1 part A plus 1 part B plus 100 parts water. I got excellent results with great shadow and highlight detail.
Everything is analog - even digital :D
Most recipes I've seen for semi stand call for 1:200. The thing about semi stand is it depends on the developer approaching localized exhaustion to control the contrast and Rodinal is so active in needs a fair amount of dilution to kill it.
Try some grade OO VC contrast on it and see if anything comes up.
it's really quite simple; forget the exotic developing procedure, halve the ISO, expose for a mid tone in the subject and process using the developer and procedure recommended by the film manufacturer, if the light is contrasty reduce dev time by 20-30%
why test? after all the manufacturer has tested the materials already, far better than any amatuer photographer could or should
why use exotic developers and or procedures? if this is to better render tones in the subject maybe you need to reconsider your metering technique
don't make it more complex than it needs to be
Last edited by Ray Heath; 12-04-2007 at 02:53 PM. Click to view previous post history.
[I agree with the others: keep it simple. No need to be too terribly exotice. BTW, if you need to make the negs more easily printable, try Farmer's Reducer.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Various exposure settings on a single film.
I write to suggest the chromogenic black and white films to you. According to Roger Hicks, in his 1992 book "Successful Black and White Photography", this type of film has huge intolerance to exposure settings.
here's a paragraph, from pg. 70:
"Chromogenic films have a greater recording range than conventional films, perhaps as much as nine stops or 512:1, and can therefore stand quite remarkable variations in exposure. Ilford's XP-2 is generally agreed to be around its rated speed of ISO 400 or even ISO 200, but quality does not begin to suffer significantly until you overexpose by about three stops [equivalent to rating the film at EI 50] or underexpose by two stops [equivalent to rating the film at EI 1600]. What is most remarkable is that all these exposures can be intermingled on on the same roll, and anything in the EI 100-800 range [two stops over to one stop under] is likely to be first class. There is a compression of the tonal range, it is true, but this can be accommodated by choice of contrast grades in printing."
This time of year is awfully dark where I live, so I've ordered some of the Kodak chromogenic stuff [BW400CN] to use in my Rolleicord. One drawback: I don't look forward to having to take in to my local shop for developing - since I really enjoy developing my film at home.
I anticipate being able to expose at EI 800 when the light is weak, and at EI 100 when bright, or at times I desire a limited depth of field.
So - I thought your desire to expose at various EI values on any single film might warrant experimenting with the chromogenic films [developed in C41 process]. The negatives look like colour negatives and print in perfect monochrome.
Your dilution was too strong, and your time was to long. You have over developed. As others have suggested, cut the time by half, or 1:200.
If you are just learning developing, I'd say keep it simple, but it sounds to me like you have a good handle on what you are doing, and will be perfectly able to master semi stand development. You just need better information, (which you now have) and a little bit more shooting to find your speed. If you enjoy the hunt, experiment, one variable at a time.
Last edited by JBrunner; 10-29-2007 at 08:58 PM. Click to view previous post history.
That's just, like, my opinion, man...
Thanks all, and JB, I love the hunt. I figured I overdeveloped and will tweek one varible at a time. I'm just spoiled using BTZS with sheet film...... and the reason behind my interest in semi stand was that I wanted to have a tool that will will yield "acceptable" prints from all the different lighting situations found on a 36 exposure roll. I wasn't by any means a Fred Picker groupie but I certainly agree with him (and you) on eliminating, or changing only one thing at a time.
"EVERY film and paper is good .......... for something"
I use Foma 200 (Rated 160) in Rodinal 1:100 for 16mins. 1 Hour is WAY over the top cut your time back to 16-18 mins with minimal agitation, say one inversion every other min.
You'll get negs that are very printable even in very different lighting conditions.
Above is Foma 100 developed for 13mins 1:100
I have some Foma 200 tests here:
Last edited by Mark Antony; 10-30-2007 at 01:48 AM. Click to view previous post history.
"why test? after all the manufacturer has tested the materials already, far better than any amatuer photographer could or should"
In which case why are you rating the film at half iso?