PDA

View Full Version : Film questions



macandal
28-Oct-2013, 11:45
Rather than posting two separate threads, I hope it is okay that I post my questions in one, in the interest of saving bandwith!!

1. About reciprocity failure (adjusting for)
I use Arista EDU Ultra 100 film. When I tested this film (for "Zone System" purposes), it turned out that my personal ASA was 25, and that's how I shoot it. So, to adjust for reciprocity failure, when an exposure is over one second long, do I do my meter reading at the stated (box) ASA of 100, or at my personal ASA of 25? The picture below was shot at f/5.6 for 1 minute, which adjusted for RF (according to the Fomapan 100 Classic information that I used, since that's what the Arista film is) should be extended to 987 seconds or 16 minutes 27 seconds. Did I do it right or was I supposed 100ASA to take my reading and then adjust according to that ASA?

103753

2. About "Stand Development"
Right now I'm using Arista EDU Ultra with HC-110 (B) and I want to try stand development. Does anyone have the times and proportions I need for my film/developer combo (I realize that I am not going to use dilution B for this). Also, this kind of development is probably not suited for Zone System type of shooting, so, what would you recommend I go out and shoot? What is stand development best suited for?

And related to the above question, when taking a light measurment, do I do it at my personal ASA (25) or the box ASA (100)?

Thanks.

StoneNYC
28-Oct-2013, 16:07
Get the reciprocity timer app for iPhone, a LFF member made it and it works GREAT! And also adjusts for bellows extension, etc.

As far as the image, looks like you did it right to me, assuming you want it exposed that much, show another image of how you normally shoot a non-long-exposure image.

Regular Rod
28-Oct-2013, 16:17
1) Make your adjustment for reciprocity failure based on what you calculate your exposure to be. If you are arriving at your exposure based on 25 ASA (or ISO) then continue so to do and make your adjustments on that.
2) Stand and semi-stand are simply other types of agitation regime. If you use stand development or semi-stand development a compensating developer can give the best range of tones without blocking the highlights. For predictable results you will need to carry out the same tests you did for the Zone System but using your proposed stand or semi-stand development routines. Stand and semi-stand agitation are both very suitable for the Zone System.

RR

StoneNYC
28-Oct-2013, 16:24
Just a note (it's not super important but good to note) the film is ASA (ISO) 100, your shooting at EI 25 (exposure index) which are two different things, the films speed doesn't change, however how you expose it does.

And I agree, if you rate it at EI 25 on a normal exposure you should rate it that way for long exposures too, however I'm surprised it's so low for you, perhaps your metering is off somehow to be so off from the film speed? Although I dislike the emulsion of FOMA100, I haven't found the speed to be inaccurate.

macandal
28-Oct-2013, 16:37
Just a note (it's not super important but good to note) the film is ASA (ISO) 100, your shooting at EI 25 (exposure index) which are two different things, the films speed doesn't change, however how you expose it does.

And I agree, if you rate it at EI 25 on a normal exposure you should rate it that way for long exposures too, however I'm surprised it's so low for you, perhaps your metering is off somehow to be so off from the film speed? Although I dislike the emulsion of FOMA100, I haven't found the speed to be inaccurate.Well Stone, you could be right about my EI being so low. You're not the first person to mention this, but it's been said before. However, it was only at that EI that my testing for zone began showing the expected results. Perhaps it is true that HC110 is not suitable for Arista EDU Ultra. I want to change developers and retest (something I was trying to avoid). Can someone recommend a good liquid developer (one which, like HC110, you mix right out of the bottle to use only what you need) that it's proven to work with the Arista film I'm using? Thanks.

StoneNYC
28-Oct-2013, 16:50
Well Stone, you could be right about my EI being so low. You're not the first person to mention this, but it's been said before. However, it was only at that EI that my testing for zone began showing the expected results. Perhaps it is true that HC110 is not suitable for Arista EDU Ultra. I want to change developers and retest (something I was trying to avoid). Can someone recommend a good liquid developer (one which, like HC110, you mix right out of the bottle to use only what you need) that it's proven to work with the Arista film I'm using? Thanks.

I used it with Rodinal for all these images.

103768
103770103771

EDIT: it won't let me delete the girl with baloons, that was NOT FOMA100 it was Acros100

Sorry about that. The others are FOMA. Sorry!!

macandal
28-Oct-2013, 19:04
I used it with Rodinal for all these images.That's the one made by Adox, right? Adox Adonal (http://www.freestylephoto.biz/12054-Adox-Adonal-Agfa-Rodinal-Formula-Film-Developer-500ml)?

macandal
28-Oct-2013, 19:13
Get the reciprocity timer app for iPhone, a LFF member made it and it works GREAT! And also adjusts for bellows extension, etc.That sounds great, except: no iPhone (or smart phone of any kind)!


As far as the image, looks like you did it right to me, assuming you want it exposed that much, show another image of how you normally shoot a non-long-exposure image.I didn't want the exposure that long (especially since it was freezing cold on the evening I shot that) but that's how long it had to be in order to compensate for reciprocity failure. If you saw my original post, I shot that at the widest opening available and it still was a minute long!

macandal
28-Oct-2013, 19:17
Just a note (it's not super important but good to note) the film is ASA (ISO) 100, your shooting at EI 25 (exposure index) which are two different things, the films speed doesn't change, however how you expose it does.Thanks Stone for clarifying that. As I still consider myself a newbie after a couple of years of shooting LF, every bit helps. Thanks.

StoneNYC
28-Oct-2013, 20:03
That's the one made by Adox, right? Adox Adonal (http://www.freestylephoto.biz/12054-Adox-Adonal-Agfa-Rodinal-Formula-Film-Developer-500ml)?

Yes it's the Adox Adonal version, they are all "essentially" the same, but there are tiny usually unnoticeable differences between the Adonal version and R09 versions by other companies. They used to be all the same but Adox got the official rights to make it now or something, I won't get into details because I forget them, but yes Adox Adonal (Rodinal).

Also, if you don't want to stand in the cold as long, you shouldn't use FOMA, it has the WORST reciprocity ever... (Not ever but of current films probably the worst). A lesser expensive alternative that's high quality with decent reciprocity rates but also at a good price, would be ilford FP4+ And if you want the BEST reciprocity (or lack of failure) then you have to spend the big bucks for Fuji Acros100 or kodak Tmax400 (there are others but those are the best of the lot).

Hope that helps.

PS I once stood at the edge of the Grand Canyon in -15 degrees Fahrenheit (yes NEGATIVE 15) for over an hour to get this shot...

103779

(Warning that's 6x7 Medium format not LF but still, the exposure was only a few minutes but I shot a bunch of different frames just to be sure ;)

Also my battery died mid way and had to switch it with the one I my warm chest pocket, try unscrewing the bottom of your camera with a coin slot in bare hands at -15 degrees... Haha

Suffer for the art! :) you're off to a good start ;)

Regular Rod
29-Oct-2013, 01:54
Well Stone, you could be right about my EI being so low. You're not the first person to mention this, but it's been said before. However, it was only at that EI that my testing for zone began showing the expected results. Perhaps it is true that HC110 is not suitable for Arista EDU Ultra. I want to change developers and retest (something I was trying to avoid). Can someone recommend a good liquid developer (one which, like HC110, you mix right out of the bottle to use only what you need) that it's proven to work with the Arista film I'm using? Thanks.

Try 510-PYRO. You make it from raw chemicals but it is easy to do and results in a syrup that will remind you of HC110 but you use tiny amounts of it and the syrupy stock solution keeps for years. Dilute anything from 1:100 to 1:500 and this really is a fine developer for stand and semi-stand agitation regimes. This has a very clear description of making 510-PYRO up: http://www.pictorialplanet.com/advanced_photography/510_pyro.html


If you want to see a wide variety of examples of photographs developed in 510-PYRO try a search on Flickr or visit the group page (http://www.flickr.com/groups/1453269@N25/)

For tonal range it is just about unbeatable.

RR

aruns
29-Oct-2013, 02:31
Hi Mario,
I use Arista Edu Ultra 100 too, and my personal film speed is 25 ish (I don't have a densitometer). I don't always shoot in broad daylight, so the film's reciprocity characteristics make it very difficult to shoot (think plants in a shaded forest with intermittent wind). So I have been thinking of faster films. It seems Arista Edu Ultra 400 shall be available from January @ Freestyle and its' cost is comparable to the Ultra 100. If that film is anything like the 100, then we should be able to use that film @ EI 100 assuming we get acceptable grain.

I currently use Rodinal (1+50, 7 minutes @ 68F), but I haven't found my personal development time yet.
Rodinal is great for stand development but I haven't found much info on N-1, N-2, N+1 development with Rodinal. So as a Zone System enthusiast, despite my reluctance I am looking for a developer that is liquid, keeps well, economical, non-toxic and versatile (allow N-1/N-2/N+1/N+2, stand).

Hi Rod
Thanks for the Pyro 510 link.
Quick question - does it support n-1, n-2, n+1 and n+2 development.. thanks.

Regards,
Arun

Regular Rod
29-Oct-2013, 02:52
Hi Mario,
I use Arista Edu Ultra 100 too, and my personal film speed is 25 ish (I don't have a densitometer). I don't always shoot in broad daylight, so the film's reciprocity characteristics make it very difficult to shoot (think plants in a shaded forest with intermittent wind). So I have been thinking of faster films. It seems Arista Edu Ultra 400 shall be available from January @ Freestyle and its' cost is comparable to the Ultra 100. If that film is anything like the 100, then we should be able to use that film @ EI 100 assuming we get acceptable grain.

I currently use Rodinal (1+50, 7 minutes @ 68F), but I haven't found my personal development time yet.
Rodinal is great for stand development but I haven't found much info on N-1, N-2, N+1 development with Rodinal. So as a Zone System enthusiast, despite my reluctance I am looking for a developer that is liquid, keeps well, economical, non-toxic and versatile (allow N-1/N-2/N+1/N+2, stand).

Hi Rod
Thanks for the Pyro 510 link.
Quick question - does it support n-1, n-2, n+1 and n+2 development.. thanks.

Regards,
Arun

Absolutely yes it does. That is how I use it.

RR

StoneNYC
29-Oct-2013, 05:16
Absolutely yes it does. That is how I use it.

RR

Be careful with pyro developers as a newbie, understand they are the opposite of non-toxic, very dangerous chemical if used improperly.

That said, I'm a Newb in the world of developing, I've only been at it for 3 years now.

And in saying that, what the heck is n-1 n-2 n+1 n+2? I feel like I've seen someone say that before but I have no clue what it means.

macandal
29-Oct-2013, 09:53
Also, if you don't want to stand in the cold as long, you shouldn't use FOMA, it has the WORST reciprocity ever... (Not ever but of current films probably the worst). A lesser expensive alternative that's high quality with decent reciprocity rates but also at a good price, would be ilford FP4+ And if you want the BEST reciprocity (or lack of failure) then you have to spend the big bucks for Fuji Acros100 or kodak Tmax400 (there are others but those are the best of the lot).I use it because it's very inexpensive, and since I'm a newbie, I'm prone to making lots of mistakes. So, I'll make my mistakes with the inexpensive stuff and then I'll move on to another film. On my list of films to use is Ilford Delta 100. I'll take any other suggestions too, if you have them.

StoneNYC
29-Oct-2013, 10:16
I use it because it's very inexpensive, and since I'm a newbie, I'm prone to making lots of mistakes. So, I'll make my mistakes with the inexpensive stuff and then I'll move on to another film. On my list of films to use is Ilford Delta 100. I'll take any other suggestions too, if you have them.

Nope all my suggestions are above. I've only used the 3200 delta (in smaller formats) and since I prefer the film look I stick to traditional emulsions mostly. Personally I like FP4+, HP5+, Acros100(when I can afford it in 4x5) and in color Provia100f or Velvia100(also when I can afford it), I don't really shoot much C-41 (CN) films so I can't comment on those.

I just don't see the point of shooting T-emulsions on LF, there's already so much detail. And there a little more flexibility with FP4+ in terms of exposure.

Anyway I thought the same as you, I only just got into LF, I traded some 35mm for a box of FOMA and can't wait to be rid of it haha, I really like it's look for portraits but the emulsion issues are annoying

Shootar401
29-Oct-2013, 11:10
I've always shot Fomapan 100 at 50 or 64 for best results. Shooting at 100 left me with a negative that was too thin and lacking shadow detail

Andrew O'Neill
29-Oct-2013, 12:32
macandal, use one film/developer combo and stick with it. If 25 is your EI, then use that always for your N development time. I have never used that film but I have used HC-110. Learn everything you can about that combo in many situations (including reciprocity effect) before you switch developers. Run your own tests for reciprocity. Just like a fine craftsman, know your tools well.


And in saying that, what the heck is n-1 n-2 n+1 n+2? I feel like I've seen someone say that before but I have no clue what it means.

Zone system parlance. N-1 = a development time less than your normal time to move say, a zone IX tonality, a zone VIII tonality. N+1 = a development time more than your normal time to move say a zone VII tone up to zone VIII.

macandal
29-Oct-2013, 12:45
Learn everything you can about that combo in many situations (including reciprocity effect) before you switch developers. Run your own tests for reciprocity. Just like a fine craftsman, know your tools well.Yeah, but what am I looking for? What am I testing for? Truth be told, I know there is reciprocity failure because this film's infomation tells me so, otherwise, I wouldn't have known.

StoneNYC
29-Oct-2013, 13:27
Yeah, but what am I looking for? What am I testing for? Truth be told, I know there is reciprocity failure because this film's infomation tells me so, otherwise, I wouldn't have known.

He means, how does it react to say, lowering the temp you dev at by 2 degrees, or bringing it up 2 degrees, or how you invert it, do you shake it like a madman, or gentile like a baby, do you agitate with a swirl, or a full inversion, do you agitate every 30 seconds, or every 2 minutes. When you shoot and push FOMA100 to EI 400 how does it look? When you shoot and pull it to EI 25 etc etc. This changes the characteristics of your image, learn what works and what doesn't before you change to a new developer.

However you will certainly see more of a difference with Rodinal, but test out HC-110 more before switching.

Andrew O'Neill
29-Oct-2013, 13:29
Play with it more like like StoneNYC suggests and you will know.

macandal
30-Oct-2013, 09:20
It seems Arista Edu Ultra 400 shall be available from January @ Freestyle and its' cost is comparable to the Ultra 100.It's available now. (http://www.freestylephoto.biz/190445-Arista-EDU-Ultra-400-ISO-4x5-50-sheets)

macandal
30-Oct-2013, 09:25
So now that we've taken care of my first question, how about #2? I would like to try stand development with Arista EDU Ultra 100 (Fomapan) and HC110. Does anyone have times for this? Also, since I know now that stand development can be used for zone system, how do I do that? Thanks.

StoneNYC
30-Oct-2013, 09:39
So now that we've taken care of my first question, how about #2? I would like to try stand development with Arista EDU Ultra 100 (Fomapan) and HC110. Does anyone have times for this? Also, since I know now that stand development can be used for zone system, how do I do that? Thanks.

I think (in my small 3 years as a home developer) Rodinal is a more commonly used stand developer.

1:100 for one hour :) gentile agitation every 20 minutes :)

Works every time ;)

macandal
30-Oct-2013, 10:24
1:100 for one hour :) gentile agitation every 20 minutes :)

Works every time ;)With Arista EDU Ultra 100 (Fomapan)?

C_Remington
30-Oct-2013, 10:29
And in saying that, what the heck is n-1 n-2 n+1 n+2? I feel like I've seen someone say that before but I have no clue what it means.

You're kidding right??

StoneNYC
30-Oct-2013, 11:50
You're kidding right??

I never learned the Zone system, I never went to school for photography, I've been shooting since I was 12 (31 now) and just never learned it, not everyone has to use it to make good photographs, it's simply one method to arise at an image you feel is worthwhile, but it's not the only way to do things.

StoneNYC
30-Oct-2013, 11:52
With Arista EDU Ultra 100 (Fomapan)?

Hmm, I don't recall, certainly with C-41 x-processing which would be much more at risk for deviation than standard B&W film.

I think I've got two sheets waiting to be done, I'll stand those just for you ;) I'll post them Satuday.

macandal
30-Oct-2013, 13:16
I think I've got two sheets waiting to be done, I'll stand those just for you ;) I'll post them Satuday.Thanks Stone, you're a great guy. As they used to say in the playgrounds of my youth, you just let me know if someone's looking to beat you up...

StoneNYC
30-Oct-2013, 20:29
Thanks Stone, you're a great guy. As they used to say in the playgrounds of my youth, you just let me know if someone's looking to beat you up...

Most people on APUG and LFF probably want to beat me up (at least a little) I'm outspoken and say dumb things sometimes. Lol

HT Finley
30-Oct-2013, 20:54
I'm sure I'm becoming an annoyance for continually beating the drum on actual shutter speeds. Anybody who is rating their film that much off of box speed has an accuracy problem on their shutter, and quite possibly is also dealing with an inaccuracy in their light meter. I'm not buying ASA 25 on a 100 speed film.

aruns
30-Oct-2013, 21:12
It's available now.[/URL]

Hi Mario,
Not sure where you are getting the availability from. Here's an email I got from Freestyle today evening:

"Item #190445 EDU ULTRA ISO 400 4X5/50 is currently OUT OF STOCK. Current ETA is January 10, 2014.

We do not charge for items that are out of stock at the time of ordering. When the product becomes available, your credit card will be charged and then shipped.

I suggest you wait until the product becomes available before placing an order for it. We will be receiving a relatively large order."

BTW, their website lists both Arista 200 and 400 sheet films as out of stock.

Hope that helps. Cheers.
Arun

aruns
30-Oct-2013, 21:53
With Arista EDU Ultra 100 (Fomapan)?

Hi Mario,
I have tried HC-110 Dilution H. with Arista Edu Ultra 100 (and FP4+).
I don't know if HC-110 Dilution H (or 1:63) counts as stand development because, even with Dil H., @ 70-72F, the required time for development is in 7-8 minute range. (In comparison, with Rodinal 1:100 stand development is done for 45 minutes to 1 hour, and the temperature of developer (within reason) does not skew the results).

Since we are talking about HC-110 and Arista, I can share another problem I have seen with this combo.
a) It appears Arista tends to gain contrast at the highlights very quickly (and thus needs very careful control of development, to retain highlight details and maintain planned contrast levels). A quick search would get some hits on this topic.
b) I learned that HC-110 tends to develop thick negatives and blow out highlights if one is not very careful about the temperature and agitation technique.
So with this combo, it is very easy to blow out the highlight details.
(Sorry my scanner is broken, can't get any sample scans now).

So after a couple bad results with HC-110, I reverted back to Rodinal (1:100 stand or 1:50 normal development).
I have some samples images taken on Arista EDU Ultra 100, with Rodinal 1:100 stand development here:

Negative and print scans:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/suspended-animation/10002835876/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/suspended-animation/9712047549/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/suspended-animation/9715278764/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/suspended-animation/10586206246/

I have more but can't scan now.

I understand it is not exactly what you are asking for, but hope this helps get an idea about stand devt. with this film.

Cheers,
Arun

aruns
30-Oct-2013, 22:18
I'm sure I'm becoming an annoyance for continually beating the drum on actual shutter speeds. Anybody who is rating their film that much off of box speed has an accuracy problem on their shutter, and quite possibly is also dealing with an inaccuracy in their light meter. I'm not buying ASA 25 on a 100 speed film.

Hi Finley,
Please recall this discussion started off with determining the personal film speed test for Arista EDU Ultra 100 film.

As I understand it, doing the personal film speed test (and the development time test and the printing tests) allows a photographer to record a zone 0 or zone I subject as zone 0/I subject on film, develop it correctly so the Zone VII / VIII subjects are recorded on the film as Zone VII/VIII subjects. The whole point of doing this is when printing (wet / darkroom prints) one gets the planned details in appropriate zones in a predictable manner.

(If my articulation is incorrect, LF / ZS Gurus please correct me).

I recently did the personal film speed test for this film myself, and was surprised when the actual speeds seemed below ISO 50: See here. http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?107387-Film-speed-testing-Help!-am-doing-something-wrong
So when the LFF site was out, I did complete the film speed testing, and I ended up with ISO 25 as the correct speed for this film.
A quick search will show that with this film, an EI of 25 is about right, and we are not alone in that conclusion.
(And yes, I have compared my sekonic with my D700 and they match, and no, I haven't tested the shutters) :)

(Lastly I plan to compare this same film exposed at ISO 100 and EI 25 by making some prints, and see if it is worth all the trouble. I hope to share my findings here when I am done).

Cheers,
Arun

HT Finley
30-Oct-2013, 22:30
Thanks. I am not up to speed on the previous exchanges. I stand informed, if not corrected. Still, you have to admit that such a deviation from published speed bears skepticism. You'll certainly agree that many people are walking around with cameras and shutters so far out-of-whack, they are "salvagers" in the darkroom. Salvaging negatives, and lucky to get good prints without a bunch of test stripping, VC filter exchanging, and a knot in their stomach wondering if they're going to get a decent print. I've spent too much time working blind myself like that. But I know better, and when somebody tells me a tale of 25 on a 100 film, I HAVE to question the credibility. Understandable, I hope you'll agree.
Your testing is impressive. And I have arrived at results on X-Ray film that are slower that the claims I see. Good work. Thanks.

Edit: I did not join the thread to be a busybody. I have a stash of these Arista 100 rolls in 120 that I keep hearing are slower than box printing. Good to know. I'm going to start at ASA 50 with known calibration. I run a calibrated shutter and a meter I modified with a 2.7V ± .2V voltage regulator. I KNOW where I stand.:)

aruns
30-Oct-2013, 22:44
Hi Finley,
I completely understand your skepticism and appreciate you sharing your thoughts here. :)
and thanks for your kind words.
Best,
Arun.

aruns
31-Oct-2013, 08:21
Absolutely yes it does. That is how I use it.

RR

Hi Rod,
Good day! I checked out the flickr group and am very interested in 510 Pyro and Portrait Pyro (and amazed at Jay DeFehr's portraits!). Thanks for sharing. I have couple questions.

1. Can you please explain your approach for N-1 / N-2 / N+1 / N+2 processing with this developer (i.e., dilution, time, agitation scheme, etc.).
2. Reg. toxicity: Is the initial mix toxic or are the 1:100+ dilutions toxic too. How about disposing the diluted developers. I use my bathroom as my dark room and the ventilation is 'okay' (not very great) - Would I have problem with the vapors. Is there anything else that I should know about, if I am mixing it up in my kitchen microwave.

Thanks much in advance.

Regards,
Arun

macandal
31-Oct-2013, 09:06
Hi Mario,
I have tried HC-110 Dilution H. with Arista Edu Ultra 100 (and FP4+).
I don't know if HC-110 Dilution H (or 1:63) counts as stand development because, even with Dil H., @ 70-72F, the required time for development is in 7-8 minute range. (In comparison, with Rodinal 1:100 stand development is done for 45 minutes to 1 hour, and the temperature of developer (within reason) does not skew the results).

Since we are talking about HC-110 and Arista, I can share another problem I have seen with this combo.
a) It appears Arista tends to gain contrast at the highlights very quickly (and thus needs very careful control of development, to retain highlight details and maintain planned contrast levels). A quick search would get some hits on this topic.
b) I learned that HC-110 tends to develop thick negatives and blow out highlights if one is not very careful about the temperature and agitation technique.
So with this combo, it is very easy to blow out the highlight details.
(Sorry my scanner is broken, can't get any sample scans now).

So after a couple bad results with HC-110, I reverted back to Rodinal (1:100 stand or 1:50 normal development).
I have some samples images taken on Arista EDU Ultra 100, with Rodinal 1:100 stand development here:

Negative and print scans:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/suspended-animation/10002835876/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/suspended-animation/9712047549/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/suspended-animation/9715278764/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/suspended-animation/10586206246/

I have more but can't scan now.

I understand it is not exactly what you are asking for, but hope this helps get an idea about stand devt. with this film.

Cheers,
ArunArun, thanks for all this info. Long story short, I'm going to retest Arista EDU Ultra 100 but this time with Adox Adonal ("Rodinal"). I've come to the conclusion that HC110 and Arista EDUU are not a good combo. It can probably be made to work, but it will probably require more testing than I'm willing to do. I'm not a photography "techie." All this testing, though useful, is an annoyance to me and I fight it like hell, but since I've concluded that I don't like HC110 with the film I'm using now, well, then, I need to retest with my new developer. Arista is not my film of choice. I use it because it is very inexpensive ($0.61 per sheet at current prices!) and, as I said before, since I'm a beginner, I'm prone to making lots of mistakes. I recently accidentally exposed a box of film, so most of my exposures were fogged. Imagine if I had done that to a box of Ilford or Kodak or another film? I would've wanted to kill myself!! Anyway, Arista is inexpensive and therefore, in my view, appropriate for the novice out there. So I'm off to retesting again. I'll post my results once I'm done to compare them with HC110(B). Once I'm done with all my screwing up, once I master my view camera and all its movements, once I have a better handle on exposing and processing film, I'll move onto better film. So far, my list is short, Ilford Delta 100, so, I'm taking requests--but maybe that's a topic for another post, "Which film do you guys recommend?"

Oh, boy!!

:(

Regular Rod
31-Oct-2013, 09:11
Hi Rod,
Good day! I checked out the flickr group and am very interested in 510 Pyro and Portrait Pyro (and amazed at Jay DeFehr's portraits!). Thanks for sharing. I have couple questions.

1. Can you please explain your approach for N-1 / N-2 / N+1 / N+2 processing with this developer (i.e., dilution, time, agitation scheme, etc.).
2. Reg. toxicity: Is the initial mix toxic or are the 1:100+ dilutions toxic too. How about disposing the diluted developers. I use my bathroom as my dark room and the ventilation is 'okay' (not very great) - Would I have problem with the vapors. Is there anything else that I should know about, if I am mixing it up in my kitchen microwave.

Thanks much in advance.

Regards,
Arun

1) You should really work out your own N- and N+ times but mine are as follows with Fomapan 100 rated 80 ASA and FP4 Plus at box speed of 125 ASA (all at 1:100 and 20 deg. Celsius and after a pre-soak in tap water at the same temperature):

N = 8' 15" (agitate constantly for 60" then for ten seconds every two minutes thereafter)
N-1 = 8' (agitate constantly for 60" then for ten seconds every two minutes thereafter)
N-2 = 7' 30" (agitate constantly for 60" then for ten seconds every two minutes thereafter)
N+1 = 8' 30" (agitate constantly for 75" then for ten seconds every two minutes thereafter)
N+2 = 9' 15" (agitate constantly for 90" then for ten seconds every two minutes thereafter)

Stop bath is plain tap water at 20 deg. Celsius.

Fixer is Ilford Rapid Fixer.

Wash routine is based on the Ilford recommendations (a good reason to use the Paterson Orbital Processor (http://freepdfhosting.com/f640343f29.pdf))

2) Toxicity of Pyrogallol.

It is poisonous even in 1:500 dilutions. The risk is in continued skin contact. Wear rubber gloves when handling tanks or trays containing the developer. Wash it off anything it comes into contact with as soon as possible.

There are no fumes to speak of. Skin contact is to be avoided at all dilutions, which is another reason I use the Paterson Orbital Processor (http://freepdfhosting.com/f640343f29.pdf) as a tank cum tray. Lots of hot water down the sink with the used solution is how I dispose of it and the local water services company are satisfied that the quantities are so tiny and in such large dilutions that they reckon I am doing no serious harm. (A modern cleaning product with poly surfactants in it is far more harmful to riverine invertebrates...)

When you mix it, wear rubber gloves, a mask and goggles and add the Pyrogallol powder carefully to avoid any dust clouds, these would be very bad to inhale. Avoid spilling it. It will stain anything brown if left un-wiped up.

When dissolving the ingredients the temperature you need the TEA to be at, for easier dilution, is around 68 deg. Celsius.

I use a stove as we do not possess a microwave.
:)
RR

StoneNYC
31-Oct-2013, 10:03
Arun, thanks for all this info. Long story short, I'm going to retest Arista EDU Ultra 100 but this time with Adox Adonal ("Rodinal"). I've come to the conclusion that HC110 and Arista EDUU are not a good combo. It can probably be made to work, but it will probably require more testing than I'm willing to do. I'm not a photography "techie." All this testing, though useful, is an annoyance to me and I fight it like hell, but since I've concluded that I don't like HC110 with the film I'm using now, well, then, I need to retest with my new developer. Arista is not my film of choice. I use it because it is very inexpensive ($0.61 per sheet at current prices!) and, as I said before, since I'm a beginner, I'm prone to making lots of mistakes. I recently accidentally exposed a box of film, so most of my exposures were fogged. Imagine if I had done that to a box of Ilford or Kodak or another film? I would've wanted to kill myself!! Anyway, Arista is inexpensive and therefore, in my view, appropriate for the novice out there. So I'm off to retesting again. I'll post my results once I'm done to compare them with HC110(B). Once I'm done with all my screwing up, once I master my view camera and all its movements, once I have a better handle on exposing and processing film, I'll move onto better film. So far, my list is short, Ilford Delta 100, so, I'm taking requests--but maybe that's a topic for another post, "Which film do you guys recommend?"

Oh, boy!!

:(

Understand that HC-110 is a very "fast" developer, a 5 minute dev time for HC-110 can easily be 12 minutes in Rodinal.

In addition Rodinal is much more sensitive to agitation schemes, so as an example a "rigorous" inversion agitation will result in size able grain, where a gentile inversion will show much less grain and perhaps better shadow detail? But each developer is different and there's "no shortcuts to the top" so to speak. If you don't want to spend so much on sheet, test films in 35mm.

Take a 36 frame roll, split and re-roll it into 3 10-ish frame rolls and develop each differently in Rodinal (it's about 10 CENTS per development at 1:50 dilution for Rodinal.

Be consistent with your frames, heck shoot the same frame 36 times and cut the film into 4 section and do 2 in Rodidnal and 2 in HC-110 and dev opposite extremes to see the reactions and differences, for $4 of arista premium + dev you I'll have solid answers.

I'm cheap, I basically only use those two because they are inexpensive with high dilutions, if I NEED fine grain sharpness or I'm shooting D3200/P3200 I use ilford DD-X because it's awesome, just "expensive" in comparison. I also like Ilford Ilfsol 3 which is highly overlooked, it's really great but also more than HC-110.

It's all a balance.

Personally at $1.25/sheet I don't mind spending a bit more for ilford sheet film, it's worth it.

Also, "learning" a film just to switch when you get "better" means having to waste more money learning a new film after... Penny wise-pound foolish...

macandal
31-Oct-2013, 11:08
Understand that HC-110 is a very "fast" developer, a 5 minute dev time for HC-110 can easily be 12 minutes in Rodinal.Not really. Development times for Arista with Rodinal are at 1:25 3.5 minutes and at 1:50 7 minutes.

And as far as using inexpensive film, it works because I don't have to worry that I wasted a sheet of film (presumably a more expensive film) because a certain camera movement didn't yield the expected results. This has happened quite a lot in the process of learning to operate my camera but I don't worry too much and I don't hold back trying new things because I am worrying too much about keeping expenses (i.e., "film") down. That's how I feel. Using the film you plan on using (presumably a better, and more often than not, and a more expensive film) or using 35 mm film may work for some but not for me. To each his own, right?

StoneNYC
31-Oct-2013, 11:55
Not really. Development times for Arista with Rodinal are at 1:25 3.5 minutes and at 1:50 7 minutes.

And as far as using inexpensive film, it works because I don't have to worry that I wasted a sheet of film (presumably a more expensive film) because a certain camera movement didn't yield the expected results. This has happened quite a lot in the process of learning to operate my camera but I don't worry too much and I don't hold back trying new things because I am worrying too much about keeping expenses (i.e., "film") down. That's how I feel. Using the film you plan on using (presumably a better, and more often than not, and a more expensive film) or using 35 mm film may work for some but not for me. To each his own, right?

Ahh, please understand Rodinal at 1:25 will yield much different results than 1:50. Again Rodinal is a VERY versatile developer, different dilutions and agitations change it's look a lot, it's great it gets you a lot with one dev, but you need to know how to use it. I've actually never used it 1:25 so I don't have any examples. I'll add that to the list of things I still have to try (after 3 years of hand processing with Rodinal) lol

Taija71A
31-Oct-2013, 14:32
Ahh, please understand Rodinal at 1:25 will yield much different results than 1:50...

I've actually never used it 1:25 so I don't have any examples...
____

Hmmmm...

Question???

@StoneNYC...
How can you so 'emphatically' state that the use of Rodinal Film Developer @ 1:25 Dilution, will yield *** 'Much Different Results' *** than 1:50 Dilution... When You have 'Actually Never Used It' ???

Just saying...

Did you read this in a book or magazine somewhere?
--

On another note... 3.5 Minutes is 'Way Too Short' of a Developing Time (*To be Establishing Upon) -- If you want any kind of 'Consistent Results' (*Other of course... Than perhaps with Automated Machine Processing)...
--
Best regards,

-Tim.
________

StoneNYC
31-Oct-2013, 14:52
____

Hmmmm...

Question???

@StoneNYC...
How can you so 'emphatically' state that the use of Rodinal Film Developer @ 1:25 Dilution, will yield *** 'Much Different Results' *** than 1:50 Dilution... When You have 'Actually Never Used It' ???

Just saying...

Did you read this in a book or magazine somewhere?
--

On another note... 3.5 Minutes is 'Way Too Short' of a Developing Time (*To be Establishing Upon) -- If you want any kind of 'Consistent Results' (*Other of course... Than perhaps with Automated Machine Processing)...
--
Best regards,

-Tim.
________

Hey Tim,

Any development at a different dilution will yield different results because the sensitized silver reacts differently depending on the strength of a developer, etc, on top of the 3:30 is a TERRIBLE time for developing film and is not recommended by anyone, it's too short, too much chance of uneven development etc.

I've done many films in many combos of dev concentrations and they are always different from each other.

If you've had done this you would know what I'm talking about.

This isn't meant to be snide or anything, I know my typing can come off harsh, it's not meant to, just practical experience and reading and researching a lot.

Here's some info from a Flickr discussion

"Rodinal is a para-amino phenol developer, original receipture from 1891. 1+20 or 1+25 it's a depth developer, up from 1+50 a semi-compensating surface developer and up from 1+75 it gives even some staining effect. How more the dilution how sharper the negatives and a more acutance effect but the grain will be slightly bigger especially when there is too much agitation. Therefore SLOW agitation with Rodinal. Talking for 35mm and 120 roll film, most combinations will be fine at 1+50. Some specific films are better with 1+25, especially when grain is involved (APX400) or films with multilayer emulsion technique (Rollei R3).
One of the best combination for APX100/Rollei Retro 100 at E.I. 80 is Rodinal 1+50. One of the advantages of Rodinal is the storage time which is very long (> 10 years) for this unique liquid developer and it's almost impossible to have bromide drag with this developer and that's why you can also use it for semi-stand development. Further an 35mm example from APX100 (new)/Retro 100 with Rodinal 1+50 10:00Min. at 20 degrees C. Rodinal is also not suitable for higher temperature development."

Link: http://www.flickr.com/groups/rodinal/discuss/72157600245966695/

Also here's some info that is relevant ...

"The alkalinity of developer solutions tends to increase the clumping of grain. Because Rodinal is a high alkaline developer, higher dilutions reduce the alkalinity of the solution and hence reduce clumping of grain (what we perceive as increased grain). Note however, that a higher dilution also increases the development time, which for some films can increase grain clumping. The more modern emulsions are generally less susceptible to increased grain clumping with increased development time.
The Rodinal dilution effect is different than most other developers (D76, XTOL, and many others) that contain sodium sulfite, a grain- reducing chemical (via its solvent action on the grain). For these developers, a higher dilution increases apparent grain due to the lower concentration of the sodium sulfite solvent action.

As with almost all developers, increasing the dilution of Rodinal has a compensating effect (decrease) on the contrast of the negative. However this compensating effect assumes normal agitation procedures. The use of overly vigorous or continuous agitation can offset or eliminate this compensating effect.

As mentioned in the post above, the higher dilutions can also increase apparent acutance by increase the edge effect of adjacent areas of contrasting density. There is some controversy as to whether this occurs because of the higher dilutions (the highlight areas of the negative exhaust the developer more quickly than the shadows), or whether it is a characteristic of developers (e.g., Rodinal) that exclude grain-dissolving agents such as sodium sulfite. Obviously, if the first theory is true, this effect will be negated by over agitation.

I would recommend that if using slow to medium speed films (ISO 25- 125); dilutions of 1:75 and 1:100 can be used for high contrast scenes; and dilutions of 1:25 and 1:50 can be used for low to moderate contrast scenes. I have no experience with dilutions more than 1:100. "

Link: http://greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=006Cgm

both of the above support my statement and are made by those that understand the chemistry and science much better than I do, I just know what I see when I look at the film. :)

macandal
31-Oct-2013, 15:07
On another note... 3.5 Minutes is 'Way Too Short' of a Developing Time (*To be Establishing Upon) -- If you want any kind of 'Consistent Results' (*Other of course... Than perhaps with Automated Machine Processing)...3.5 minutes is what's listed for Arista EDU Ultra + Rodinal on the Arista development times sheet (http://www.freestylephoto.biz/pdf/product_pdfs/aristaedu_ultra/AristaEDU_Ultra_100.pdf).

Taija71A
31-Oct-2013, 15:39
3.5 minutes is what's listed for Arista EDU Ultra + Rodinal on the Arista development times sheet (http://www.freestylephoto.biz/pdf/product_pdfs/aristaedu_ultra/AristaEDU_Ultra_100.pdf).

____

Hi Mario!

The fact that that short Film Developing Time (3.5 Minutes) may be listed on a Data Sheet... Is not in dispute here.
--
Just because Arista lists that short of a 'Recommended Developing Time', does NOT MEAN of course... That it is necessarily 'Good Established Practice' -- For producing 'Consistent Results'. :)
--
However, if you want to use Rodinal at 1:25 Dilution for that time... That of course is your 'perogative'! :D

Thank-you!
--
Regards,

-Tim.
________

aruns
31-Oct-2013, 21:50
Hi Mario,
First off, I am on the same boat as you. I am using Arista because I can make 2 exposures for the cost of one sheet of the next expensive product.
I am still learning, so please take my inputs here as a suggestion, and not advise. (These discussions and counterpoints help me expand my understanding too, that's why I am here).

My recent images on Flickr are made with Arista, dev. with Rodinal at 1:50 or 1:100.
When it works, I love the combo. (Else I end up scratching my head trying to figure out what went wrong. as someone (Stone?) said above, there's no shortcut to the top. We do need to know our tools well and master our techniques).

Tim is right. You can do 3.5 minutes, etc. But even on this forum, many Gurus advise against development times of <5 minutes because it is difficult to adjust or control. Also, the developers are more potent at lower saturations, so even a small mistake or delay can cost the image. (for ex., Given the normal devt. time for 1:25 dilution is 3.5 minutes, an error of few seconds, or a bit of extra agitation could mess up an image).

By going with 1:50 and controlling the temperature, time and agitation, you can get more predictable, consistent results (and if you process by tray you don't have to stand in darkness for very long). At 1:100, you have much more control over temp and time, but my experience is it is more of a compensating developer (and full stand devt takes more time).

Lastly, seeing that you are in the Bay area, please do lookup the Large format photography group on Meetup.
The group has several cool photographers, and I learned much from the meetups and from the Gurus there (I still have a long way to go, but that's another story).

Hope it helps.
Cheers,
Arun

HT Finley
31-Oct-2013, 22:13
Whenever the Rodinal fanboys run a thread, I step out. With cordiality, but complete disinterest. Indeed, Kodak came up with simpler formulas for high quality developers 40-50 years after Rodinal. D-23 springs to mind. Dependable, simple, versatile, and long-lasting in that you can mix upon demand or for an anticipated short-term need, simpler than the recipe for scrambled eggs. The dry ingredients lie dormant for ages until needed. The more I read the stories of the Rodinal crowd, it's the never-ending saga of experimentation and comparison.

Taija71A
31-Oct-2013, 23:47
Whenever the Rodinal fanboys run a thread, I step out. With cordiality, but complete disinterest. Indeed, Kodak came up with simpler formulas for high quality developers 40-50 years after Rodinal. D-23 springs to mind. Dependable, simple, versatile, and long-lasting in that you can mix upon demand or for an anticipated short-term need, simpler than the recipe for scrambled eggs. The dry ingredients lie dormant for ages until needed. The more I read the stories of the Rodinal crowd, it's the never-ending saga of experimentation and comparison.

____

I personally, did not take note of any Rodinal 'Fan Boys' here in this thread.
Forum members who are using it... 'Most Definitely', *** REAL *** Fan boys... 'I don't think so!'. LOL. :)
--
'For the Record'... I have to say that Rodinal and D-23 (*With it's 50 g/L of Sodium Sulfite @ 1:1 Dilution) -- Look Nothing Alike (*Other than the fact... That they both are/or can be (*When Rodinal is used at 'Higher Dlutions' of course) -- Excellent 'Compensating Developers'.

NO, before you ask... I am not a Rodinal 'Fan Boy'. :)
But if 'Push Came To Shove'... I could make use of either Rodinal or D-23...
--
Perhaps, Ken put it best when he so eloquently stated on his Website (With respect to D-23 Film Developer)... "Not Perfect, Not Best, Not New. Very Simple."

http://www.kenleegallery.com/html/tech/D-23.php

--
*I can't help but think... That this approppo statement also perhaps? applies to Rodinal (*Although of course it is usually purchased and not mixed up 'from scratch'... As per D-23).

Rodinal too... Is definitely "Not Perfect, Not the Best and Not New"...
But it is 'Very Simple' for many to use... And thus it's popularity up until today. :D
--
But, as per your excellent points... D-23 definitely still has it's uses and IMNSHO was always 'Under Appreciated' and never quite given the attention -- That it perhaps thus deserved.

As you have stated... It still has great 'merit' -- When used for the proper application!

'With cordiality... But not complete disinterest for the topic'.
--
Best regards,

-Tim.
________

StoneNYC
1-Nov-2013, 07:42
Whenever the Rodinal fanboys run a thread, I step out. With cordiality, but complete disinterest. Indeed, Kodak came up with simpler formulas for high quality developers 40-50 years after Rodinal. D-23 springs to mind. Dependable, simple, versatile, and long-lasting in that you can mix upon demand or for an anticipated short-term need, simpler than the recipe for scrambled eggs. The dry ingredients lie dormant for ages until needed. The more I read the stories of the Rodinal crowd, it's the never-ending saga of experimentation and comparison.

Funny,

What I like about Rodinal is that it does different things depending on how you treat it. I think you are saying D-23 basically is like sprint dev where no mater what you do the results come out the same?

I don't know what's simpler than 1:50.... You don't have to buy a lot and the math is simple and you don't use a lot, looks like D-23 is a powder? So you have to worry about the airborne dust and it getting all over the place as powders do. Also 1:1 or 1:2 seem to be the mixtures? Seems like a lot of dev per run, I would be buying 2 cans/bags a month of that stuff instead of 1-2 bottles of Rodinal per YEAR. (If I had the money I would probably use DD-X over Rodinal but Rodinal is too cheap to pass up).

Just my cordial thoughts on that :)

HT Finley
1-Nov-2013, 10:58
I guess I ought to practice better tact, as in keeping my trap shut till I have something pertinent to say. It's just been my observation more times than once that an interesting subject will pop up and as the tread proceeds, someone brings Rodinal into it and a thread that started out about one thing turns to another Rodinal match. Alfred Hitchcock shared the same kind of attitude about "the sponsor", as I have about Rodinal.;)

StoneNYC
1-Nov-2013, 11:37
I guess I ought to practice better tact, as in keeping my trap shut till I have something pertinent to say. It's just been my observation more times than once that an interesting subject will pop up and as the tread proceeds, someone brings Rodinal into it and a thread that started out about one thing turns to another Rodinal match. Alfred Hitchcock shared the same kind of attitude about "the sponsor", as I have about Rodinal.;)

Lol,

Occam's razor would suggest that the simplest explanation that a majority of people use it and that it's preferred over others for x reasons (not all of which have to be about it being the BEST developer from a technical standpoint. Just that a majority use it for many purposes and that it has many uses...

So to infer, it's talked about more than others because more use it for more applications than other dev's ergo it's a good developer to learn to use, test, and get the results you want by knowing how to use it.

Have you used it much and tested it? What DON'T you like about it?

Curios...

Your answer will be pertinent as the OP will learn about another perspective ..

HT Finley
1-Nov-2013, 11:51
This is the large format forum, so for that I guess it's OK--no complaint. On the little films like 35 and 2 1/4 it's a grain factory. Use it with my blessing. A lot of people eat fish, but not me, brother.

Shawn Dougherty
1-Nov-2013, 12:33
Wow. I just read through this thread in complete amazement. There are a few solid suggestions here and the rest is mostly bull crap without any objective testing / knowledge/ experience behind it.

I think the OP and many others would be best served by getting a good book on film developing / printing (one of the standards, take your pick) and working from that. Maybe go to the Ilford or Kodak website and follow one of their excellent publications. Find one or two people (in the flesh or online) whose work, knowledge and experience you appreciate and trust then use them for trouble shooting.

Most of the people 'on the forums' are good-natured and trying to help but until you have a solid handle on the basics sifting out real facts can be a nearly impossible task.

Good luck!

StoneNYC
1-Nov-2013, 12:45
Wow. I just read through this thread in complete amazement. There are a few solid suggestions here and the rest is mostly bull crap without any objective testing / knowledge/ experience behind it.

I think the OP and many others would be best served by getting a good book on film developing / printing (one of the standards, take your pick) and working from that. Maybe go to the Ilford or Kodak website and follow one of their excellent publications. Find one or two people (in the flesh or online) whose work, knowledge and experience you appreciate and trust then use them for trouble shooting.

Most of the people 'on the forums' are good-natured and trying to help but until you have a solid handle on the basics sifting out real facts can be a nearly impossible task.

Good luck!

That's why I said test for yourself ;)

aruns
1-Nov-2013, 13:15
Hi Shawn,
Remember me from APUG Group..? (I had some question about how you use Rodinal in high dilutions)..
good to see you here! Cheers..
-Arun

macandal
1-Nov-2013, 17:23
Whenever the Rodinal fanboys run a thread, I step out.Not a Rodinal fanboy, and I'm neither a D-76 nor an HC-110 fanboy. Those are all the developers I've used. I'm just a photography fanboy.

Regular Rod
2-Nov-2013, 02:35
..... What DON'T you like about it?

Curios...

Your answer will be pertinent as the OP will learn about another perspective ..

It's okay but too expensive. There are developers able to deliver sharper results with finer grain and a full range of tones, which if that is what is wanted makes them better. For example, OBSIDIAN AQUA or its older sister 510-PYRO. Both are very low cost to make up and their shelf lives are so long they may as well be regarded as infinite. They are also both very good as compensating developers and lend themselves well to stand and semi-stand agitation regimes.


RR

StoneNYC
2-Nov-2013, 02:48
It's okay but too expensive. There are developers able to deliver sharper results with finer grain and a full range of tones, which if that is what is wanted makes them better. For example, OBSIDIAN AQUA or its older sister 510-PYRO. Both are very low cost to make up and their shelf lives are so long they may as well be regarded as infinite. They are also both very good as compensating developers and lend themselves well to stand and semi-stand agitation regimes.


RR

Here we go again with "obsidian aqua"... LOL

Regular Rod
2-Nov-2013, 04:15
Here we go again with "obsidian aqua"... LOL

Mentions of OBSIDIAN AQUA have a long way to go before they catch up with Rodinal... :)

Have you tried it yet?

RR

StoneNYC
2-Nov-2013, 07:13
Mentions of OBSIDIAN AQUA have a long way to go before they catch up with Rodinal... :)

Have you tried it yet?

RR

No, not because I'm snubbing it, because I have a few unused dev's already to try out when my HC-110 runs out soon, there's D-76 (even though I hate powder dev's), and DK-50, Polydol, and technidol :)

And those are just the ones I have already that I haven't tried.

Then I'll try obsidian maybe, and another pyro dev.