Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,287   Posts: 1,535,335   Online: 829
      
Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 74
  1. #51
    BradS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    S.F. Bay Area, California
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    4,005
    Seeing the title of this thread immediately reminded me of our old friend Morten...from whom we've not heard in a long while. Now, I see that he is still here. Feels like home.

  2. #52
    Jerevan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Sweden
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,859
    Images
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by BradS View Post
    Seeing the title of this thread immediately reminded me of our old friend Morten...from whom we've not heard in a long while. Now, I see that he is still here. Feels like home.
    That's APUG, really. Home away from home.
    “Do your work, then step back. The only path to serenity.” - Lao Tzu

  3. #53
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,862
    Quote Originally Posted by M. Lointain View Post
    Rodinal is one of the classic developers. It was the first developer I ever used and still is my main developer. It is practically foolproof unless you do stand developing (sorry). Looking back over all of the images I have made with it over the last two decades I have found that it produces the best negs at 1+25. I even recently started using it with 4x5 at 1+50 rotary processing in a Jobo and the negs are great. That is after years of using various Pyro formulas that are long on promise but short on delivery. If Rodinal is a cult then I am definitely a member.
    So used at normal-for-developer dilutions, using normal means (rotary or normal inversion) for the usual times produces good results, and that makes it worthy of cult status?

    I must be a member of the church of T-Max RS and the church of D76 then, and if we expand to "use as directed even if that's unusual" to produce good results then I'm a high priest (because I've used it for many years) of the Church of Diafine.

    Not knocking Rodinal, I'm really not. But as others have said other developers work well too. The biggest potential advantage I see in Rodinal, as someone who doesn't get to do darkroom work NEARLY often enough, is the keeping quality of the concentrate. But HC110 concentrate keeps remarkably well too. And for the ultimate, D76 and, even more so, D23 are silly-simple to mix at home and the constituents keep superbly too.

  4. #54
    michaelbsc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    South Carolina
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,106
    Images
    5
    At this stage I'm just happy we have members of the church of film!
    Michael Batchelor
    Industrial Informatics, Inc.
    www.industrialinformatics.com

    The camera catches light. The photographer catches life.

  5. #55

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Chicago area
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    8
    I have found that each developer and their various dilutions have distinct personalities and when matched with different films can create a significant array of styles. That's the beauty of silver. Rodinal can make Tri-X terribly harsh and can extend Panatomic-X's tones to levels it was probably not designed to reach. Of course the converse is true as well. If you consider all the possible permutations with the variations of developer, film, dilution, temperature, time, agitation (and yes, lack of agitation if you must) there is a lot of experimentation to be done. That's why most photographers settle on just a few combinations of their favorites. Rodinal is the least expensive if used at its most dilute. More than anything that's probably why I used it a lot. I probably used D76 1:1 more than anything else, however.

    I'll always keep the old brown bottle with its corroded rubber stopper as a reminder of those days.

  6. #56
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,862
    Quote Originally Posted by michaelbsc View Post
    At this stage I'm just happy we have members of the church of film!
    +1!

  7. #57
    John Austin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Southern Forest Region, Western Australia
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    521
    Blog Entries
    3
    RODINAL AS PART OF NEW MIX

    In one of my books I have a formula wherein Rodinal is used as part of the formula - I have had a quick look in the Barnet Book of Phot' 1898 editon; AGFA Berlin book on neg' proc' 1938 and the BJ Almanac for 1956 - But it may be in one of my older books - However, now is good gardening weather so I will look for that formula this evening, there is only crap on Australian TV tonight

  8. #58
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    14,241
    Images
    296
    Rodinal adds texture, and yield sharp prints. It has its place, for sure, and depending on how you use it many different results can be had with the same film and developer.
    Ask Ralph Gibson why he shoots Tri-X overexposed and then overdevelops. Have you seen his prints? Someone said harsh. Well, I beg to differ. His prints are lucious!
    "Often moments come looking for us". - Robert Frank

    "Make good art!" - Neil Gaiman

    "...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera". - Yousuf Karsh

  9. #59

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    148
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Cole View Post
    So used at normal-for-developer dilutions, using normal means (rotary or normal inversion) for the usual times produces good results, and that makes it worthy of cult status?

    I must be a member of the church of T-Max RS and the church of D76 then, and if we expand to "use as directed even if that's unusual" to produce good results then I'm a high priest (because I've used it for many years) of the Church of Diafine.

    Not knocking Rodinal, I'm really not. But as others have said other developers work well too. The biggest potential advantage I see in Rodinal, as someone who doesn't get to do darkroom work NEARLY often enough, is the keeping quality of the concentrate. But HC110 concentrate keeps remarkably well too. And for the ultimate, D76 and, even more so, D23 are silly-simple to mix at home and the constituents keep superbly too.
    Well Roger, I don't know what to say to this. Passive aggressive maybe? I find your comment a little bizarre. I simply like Rodinal. You seem to not like what others like for whatever reason and that is legitimate. This thread is about someone discovering the properties of Rodinal, not T-Max or whatever else. There is a reason a great number of photographers use Rodinal, and have for a hundred years. I don't know anyone that is religious about T-Max RS. Maybe you should start a thread about what you like about T-Max developer? To say that D76 is the ultimate is a stretch. It is a standard, but the ultimate? I find it an incredible boring developer and haven't used it for years. But this is what makes the world go round. Everyone has their own opinion. I have used an incredible number of developers in my life and Rodinal has always stood out because of its ease of use and the quality of the negatives it produces. It also is great in other regards, like it doesn't produce much fog, if any. I recently shot some old T-Max from '93 to test out some new holders for leaks and the film was splotchy and fogged horribly in Pyrocat but was clean as a whistle in Rodinal. These are some of the reasons people love it and are religious about it.

  10. #60
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,862
    I think I was misunderstood too then. In fact I'm sure of it if you found my comment in any way bizarre. I just don't understand why "I use it in the normal way and it works well" merit cult/church status. It DOES merit "I like this developer" status and that is fine. But why does it merit cult status? Is there something truly unique about the results? And the bigger question now, in my mind, is how on earth anyone could find these questions bizarre or "passive-aggressive" or indicating that I don't like anything? Huh??

    Now I do understand your other points and I actually have some Rodinal to experiment with, and I understand Thomas's comments - agreeing would require my duplicating or at least seeing the results, which I may, but I do understand. My prior reply though was in regard to, basically, "it works well." Well ok, but "religious?" and I thought it was obvious but I am far from religious about the three developers I mentioned. They just work well and predictably for me. That's all, but it's all I ask of a developer.

Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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