Rodinal: Finally putting all the rhinos if what's "real" and what's "clone" etc [Archive]

StoneNYC

14-Feb-2014, 21:35

I've posted a few times here about how Adox Adonal is the only true latest formulation of Rodinal, and been questioned and couldn't find the threads I had read, anyway, I also said Adox would soon officially be called Rodinal and now it's all happening so for those that wanted proof...

http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/02/15/mynemusy.jpg

Se the article from the Adox representative Mirko on this APUG thread.

http://www.apug.org/forums/showthread.php?t=127337

Pawlowski6132

15-Feb-2014, 05:39

What do mean "rhino"?

BetterSense

15-Feb-2014, 05:51

I've been using a developer called "R09 one shot". Where does that fall on the Rodinal authenticity scale?

StoneNYC

15-Feb-2014, 06:11

I've been using a developer called "R09 one shot". Where does that fall on the Rodinal authenticity scale?

READ THE THREAD it's all explained there lol. Mostly within the first page or two (depending on if you is the Tapatalk app or the website as the page counts are different.

StoneNYC

15-Feb-2014, 06:12

What do mean "rhino"?

Crap... RUMORS.... It's supposed to say rumors... Can a mod fix this please?

mihag

15-Feb-2014, 06:26

I've been using a developer called "R09 one shot". Where does that fall on the Rodinal authenticity scale?

Could be either genuine Rodinal or not, depending on when it has been manuactured, according to Mirko of Fotoimpex.

vinny

15-Feb-2014, 06:29

I checked my original stash of rodinal for rhinos. None there. Can someone with a new bottle verify?

StoneNYC

15-Feb-2014, 06:39

Could be either genuine Rodinal or not, depending on when it has been manuactured, according to Mirko of Fotoimpex.

Yes, maybe 2-3 years ago it all changed and Adox's version became the only true last made Rodinal, however it's ALWAYS been, where others are hit or miss.

mihag

15-Feb-2014, 06:43

Yes, maybe 2-3 years ago it all changed and Adox's version became the only true last made Rodinal, however it's ALWAYS been, where others are hit or miss.

True.

sepiareverb

15-Feb-2014, 06:49

StoneNYC

15-Feb-2014, 09:26

It can only be called Rodinal if it contains powdered rhino horn. This is news?

And, I read that whole thread again and am still not sure if this new bottle of Adox Rodinal is the identical liquid as Compard's R09 One Shot. I've asked Mirko to answer the question, as he seems to be the only one who might actually know for sure.

It depends on the YEAR of R09 one shot, I believe, so depends which version you are talking about. Either way who would want to use Compard anything when when you can use RODINAL!!! :)

ROL

15-Feb-2014, 10:34

Who uses Rodinal for sheet film. Really, it used to be my favorite for roll films, but I've never found it useful for sheets.

Andrew O'Neill

15-Feb-2014, 10:38

I have. Works nicely with xray films, too. The bottle that I have is 11 years old.

IanG

15-Feb-2014, 14:12

StoneNYC

15-Feb-2014, 14:13

Who uses Rodinal for sheet film. Really, it used to be my favorite for roll films, but I've never found it useful for sheets.

Really? How come you think it's different somehow, I mostly have been using it for everything lately, all of my sheet film, and yes including the x-ray ultra large-format stuff.

Only recently I've switched to a rotary processor, and I kind of want to switch it for that, but that's more again all films, I don't really see a difference between sheet film and roll film when it comes to how road and all handles either, film is film

StoneNYC

15-Feb-2014, 14:16

The confusion won;t stop because only RO9/Rodinal sold via Fotoimpex/Adox in the US will carry the old Agfa Rodinal trade name. It'll still be sold under different names in the US and the rest of the world.

Ian

Yes but when I tell people that Adox sells the real Rodinal and they question me I can just show them be bottle.... Lol

Tony Evans

15-Feb-2014, 14:30

In Canada it is Blazinal, named (I believe) after the bulk importer.

ROL

15-Feb-2014, 16:29

Really? How come you think it's different somehow, I mostly have been using it for everything lately, all of my sheet film, and yes including the x-ray ultra large-format stuff.

You've mistaken my intention to learn who uses Rodinal and for what sheet films. I didn't say it was different, although its use and desirability in certain panchromatic films certainly is. I prefer other developers in the tray for their physical and aesthetic capabilities as regards my goal of enlarging (e.g., making prints). Please post comparisons or let me know where your next show is, if you would like to pursue the course of your intent.

StoneNYC

15-Feb-2014, 17:03

ROL, I'm not sure that I fully follow what you're asking me as far as posting my comparisons, for future show dates and locations, for what reason in particular does me posting to you about my shows help my own interest?

Pawlowski6132

15-Feb-2014, 17:21

Who uses Rodinal for sheet film. Really, it used to be my favorite for roll films, but I've never found it useful for sheets.

I use it. It develops my film. Just as useful as any other developer.

William Whitaker

15-Feb-2014, 18:24

Anybody can buy a name. Look at Deardorff.

I hope my cynicism is not warranted. I'd like to start using what's-its-name again

evan clarke

15-Feb-2014, 18:51

Who uses Rodinal for sheet film. Really, it used to be my favorite for roll films, but I've never found it useful for sheets.

I use it for Delta and for FP4..Also on spare sheets of Tri X

vinny

15-Feb-2014, 19:23

Who uses Rodinal for sheet film. Really, it used to be my favorite for roll films, but I've never found it useful for sheets.

Me. I use it for 4x5 and 8x10 tech pan.

StoneNYC

15-Feb-2014, 19:41

Anybody can buy a name. Look at Deardorff.

I hope my cynicism is not warranted. I'd like to start using what's-its-name again

If you read the linked thread you would know it's the right stuff... He (the ADOX rep) explained this...he couldn't make it up or lie or he would be sued...

MrFujicaman

15-Feb-2014, 20:01

I think the bottle should be marked "The REAL Rodinal!"

Eric Biggerstaff

16-Feb-2014, 09:30

ROL-

Rodinal / Adonal / R09 has been my primary developer for about 6 years with TriX, Delta 100, Foma 400, FP4+ and HP5+. I get excellent results from it and have been happy. I have also used at times Tmax RS, DDX, D76, etc. Probably the DDX is my favorite in terms of grain size but it is expensive. I have grown to where I know what the various versions of the old Rodinal formula will produce and I am happy with my prints from it thus far.

I have not noticed much, if any, difference from the various versions but hey, I am not a great big tester so perhaps there is some slight difference, I just know I like the prints. That said, if Adox can label it's "Rodinal" then heck, might as well get that one.

Sal Santamaura

4-Apr-2014, 13:11

...Rodinal / Adonal / R09 has been my primary developer for about 6 years with...Delta 100...I have not noticed much, if any, difference from the various versions...That said, if Adox can label it's "Rodinal" then heck, might as well get that one.Eric, I've been poking around the forum archive and found that you expose Delta 100 sheets at EI100 and process them in Rodinal 1+50. I'm about to perform some trials with that combination and would appreciate a ballpark starting time/temperature. I'll be using Expert drums on a Jobo CPA-2 at around 45 rpm with a pre-rinse. Thanks in advance.

Kevin J. Kolosky

4-Apr-2014, 13:40

Who uses Rodinal for sheet film. Really, it used to be my favorite for roll films, but I've never found it useful for sheets.

Could you show some examples to show why you "never found it useful for sheets", and describe the particular characteristics in the examples that show what you mean.

Leigh

4-Apr-2014, 15:58

Only recently I've switched to a rotary processor, and I kind of want to switch it for that ...
Rodinal is a compensating developer when used per the instructions (gentle infrequent agitation).

When using a rotary processor that compensating effect is lost.

I've used Rodinal for many decades on a variety of fine-grain (slow) films, and have been very pleased.
It works fine in both trays and tanks. I never (? almost ?) use it in the Jobo.

Regardless of processing method, you must use 10ml of concentrate per 8x10 sheet equivalent.

- Leigh

Sal Santamaura

4-Apr-2014, 16:47

...Regardless of processing method, you must use 10ml of concentrate per 8x10 sheet equivalent...Only if one wishes to do things right and avoid exhaustion regardless of scene content. Prepare for an onslaught of posters who'll report that they "use less and it works fine." :)

StoneNYC

4-Apr-2014, 16:48

Eric, I've been poking around the forum archive and found that you expose Delta 100 sheets at EI100 and process them in Rodinal 1+50. I'm about to perform some trials with that combination and would appreciate a ballpark starting time/temperature. I'll be using Expert drums on a Jobo CPA-2 at around 45 rpm with a pre-rinse. Thanks in advance.

I've had excellent results recently with this and have settled on this combo as my main combo.

Delta100 EI100, Rodinal 1:50 at 12 minutes is my happy time for JOBO rotary.

http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/04/05/tuhy2u6u.jpg

http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/04/05/2ary4y7y.jpg

http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/04/05/etetymyd.jpg

Sal Santamaura

4-Apr-2014, 16:54

I've had excellent results recently with this and have settled on this combo as my main combo.

Delta100 EI100, Rodinal 1:50 at 12 minutes is my happy time for JOBO rotary...Thanks. Temperature? Rotation speed? Pre-rinse or not? If known, what contrast index do you get?

Leszek Vogt

4-Apr-2014, 17:04

I've seen Sergei uses Rodinal with excellent results....yes, developing sheets. I've seen others use it also w/similar results. I've used it back in early 70's with Panatomic-X....and nothing stands in my way to do it again (OK, maybe rhino ?). Anyway, it's good to know.

Les

Ginette

4-Apr-2014, 17:17

Thanks. Temperature? Rotation speed? Pre-rinse or not? If known, what contrast index do you get?

Stone, also are you in Expert drum 5 sheets in a drum or in regular Jobo drum?

ROL

4-Apr-2014, 17:18

Could you show some examples to show why you "never found it useful for sheets", and describe the particular characteristics in the examples that show what you mean.

To clarify, when I did my last round of film/developer testing well over 10 years ago, I found no particular advantage over other developers in terms of my preference of larger straight grained (125 – 400) LF sheet films and tray process workflow. Since that post I have gone back into my archives and given another look at the negs and proofs, and frankly have decided that I may patch that relationship up and give Rodinal another try. As I indicated, for slow speed 120, it was indeed my favorite, relatively bombproof, developer. If Stone's images are accurate representations of actual physical prints, I may fall in love again, though I am no aficionado of tabular grain films.

BTW, Kevin, I hope that the request to post examples wasn't intended as (laying down of) gauntlet. I post pix and direct link examples to my own work regularly enough here, when appropriate, probably in the top 5% at least. My only presence in this thread was legitimate inquiry and to appreciate what others were doing with a previously loved developer.

Eric Biggerstaff

4-Apr-2014, 17:32

Here is what I use:

Rodinal / Adonal/ whatever - 1+50, 68F

Rotary - Use a Beseler motor base with the Jobo 3010 drum, not sure of rotation speed, will check next time I am developing (this weekend)

Film: Delta 100

Rated ISO: 100 (with my meter, yours will likely be different so you need to test for correct ISO)

Normal: 6 minutes

+1: 7.5 minutes

+2: 8.75 minutes

-1: 5 minutes (This is pushing it a bit, I do all right with it, but not the best combination for minus development)

-2: Don't do

I do a 4 minute pre-rinse in the drum with it rotating, I have always done it and see no reason to stop despite what Ilford says.

If I can dig up my old curves and densities I will post them, just not sure where they are at the moment and I have had a couple of Margarita's so probably won't look tonight! :-)

Sal Santamaura

4-Apr-2014, 17:40

...Rated ISO: 100 (with my meter, yours will likely be different...Not likely. Yours, mine and Arne's seem to read pretty much the same. :) See this thread:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?36251-New-Tmax-400-in-XTOL

But I'll be testing anyway. Looking forward to any additional data you post.

Eric Biggerstaff

4-Apr-2014, 17:42

Almost forgot, I use 750 ml in a 3010 drum to develop 5 sheets of 5X7. Have fun!

Off to watch a movie and have another Margi!

StoneNYC

4-Apr-2014, 17:59

Thanks. Temperature? Rotation speed? Pre-rinse or not? If known, what contrast index do you get?

I have a JOBO CPE (original) it has only 1 speed so I'm not sure what speed that would be on the newer processors, it's ABOUT the same speed as my Beseler? BUT I've never actually compared them side by side.

I always pre rinse for about 2 minutes, dump, and pre rinse another minute.

Temp is standard 68 degrees. The CPE isn't all that accurate, but I use a separate thermostat and it stays between 68-70 the whole time. I do a quick water wash and dump after development and before the stop, I find it SLOWS the development so that the stop doesn't cause any uneven-ness to the images, never had streaking, drag, or unevenness with this process...

StoneNYC

4-Apr-2014, 18:02

Stone, also are you in Expert drum 5 sheets in a drum or in regular Jobo drum?

2551 drum with 1 or 2 2509n reels (or sometimes I mix and match 120 and 35mm in there, same film.

I always use 1L for the Rodinal, it's so cheap and easier to use 20ml then 17ml or 16ml for various coverage minimums....

StoneNYC

4-Apr-2014, 18:06

Leigh

4-Apr-2014, 18:37

StoneNYC

4-Apr-2014, 18:38

Here's one Agfa Rodinal time chart:
113308

It shows 9 minutes for Delta 100 in a drum (10 minutes in a tank) at 1:100.

- Leigh

Full doc here: http://www.atwaterkent.info/TechData/Agfa%20Rodinal%20times.pdf

That's Delta100 not Delta100pro I believe? It also shows an EI of 80 not 100, so you're slightly over exposing it and then pulling the time. In essence...

Leigh

4-Apr-2014, 18:50

...so you're slightly over exposing it and then pulling the time. In essence...
Nope.

"I'm" not using that film at all. Never have, never will. "They" are perhaps adjusting the EI.

- Leigh

StoneNYC

4-Apr-2014, 18:57

Nope.

"I'm" not using that film at all. Never have, never will. "They" are perhaps adjusting the EI.

- Leigh

Hah! :) you should it's wonderful!!

doogie

10-Apr-2014, 23:31

StoneNYC

11-Apr-2014, 04:19

So I have a question. Just starting out in the Advanced B/W and LF classes at school.

Has anyone used this combination?
Foma Fomapan 400ISO 4x5 paired with Adox Adonal Agfa Rodinol. [OR]
" " with Foma Fomadon R09

Trying to make a decision for class as we have to select a Film and developer combination. Would rather make an informed decision rather than a blind educated guess.

Thanks in advance.

FOMA is a classic emulsion, it is not as fine grained and is a little higher in contrast (in my opinion) naturally, and Rodinal is over 100 years old, so it's also very classic, you will get a higher grained image that will be sharp but grainy, if this is what you want (and yes it can be pleasing) then this combo would work.

You really have to try and see what you personally like.

For one, these days I've been enjoying ilford best, Delta100 with Rodinal and HP5+ with DD-X

But that's me....

Leigh

11-Apr-2014, 05:01

Has anyone used this combination?
Foma Fomapan 400ISO 4x5 paired with Adox Adonal Agfa Rodinol.
Rodinal is designed and intended for use with slow films (iso 100 and slower).

It does not do well with 400-class films... producing results that are generally too grainy.

YMMV, but that's been my experience with using it for about 55 years, and other folks agree.

- Leigh

StoneNYC

11-Apr-2014, 09:02

Has anyone seen the new label yet?? I want one!

jnantz

11-Apr-2014, 09:38

Anybody can buy a name. Look at Deardorff.

I hope my cynicism is not warranted. I'd like to start using what's-its-name again

Yes but when I tell people that Adox sells the real Rodinal and they question me I can just show them be bottle.... Lol

i was under the impression they are all rodinal
there are differences between them because
between the 1890s and 2014 the formulation of the developer has changed ..
( i think the link to mirko suggests this )
some may be the formulation from 1899, 1920, others from 1940 and others from 1989 ...

like film .. i am sure if all the formulas for tri x was readily available someone could
make tri x from 1980 or 1950 or 1940 or 2014

would they all be tri x or is there only one authentic one ?
... or have i read the entire post from mirko wrong ...

StoneNYC

11-Apr-2014, 10:46

i was under the impression they are all rodinal
there are differences between them because
between the 1890s and 2014 the formulation of the developer has changed ..
( i think the link to mirko suggests this )
some may be the formulation from 1899, 1920, others from 1940 and others from 1989 ...

like film .. i am sure if all the formulas for tri x was readily available someone could
make tri x from 1980 or 1950 or 1940 or 2014

would they all be tri x or is there only one authentic one ?
... or have i read the entire post from mirko wrong ...

The current Tri-X is "400TX" not "Tri-X" and not "Tri-X 400" it's only us that call it the wrong thing....

Same for Rodinal, they are all different, things get updated, the newest isn't always "best" but often an improvement in some fashion even if the buying public don't think so.

jnantz

11-Apr-2014, 11:56

they are all sold as tri x, whether or not they are the same formulation as 1970 400 tri x pan
is a moot point .. by saying none of them are tri x might be more accurate, just like saying
that none of the things now are actually rodinal because they aren't the first formulation ...

in the end, it's not like it really matters that much
they all process film very much the same
they all last a while and they are all sort of the same ... 6 of 1 half dozen of anther

StoneNYC

11-Apr-2014, 12:59

No they are sold as 400TX now..... That's what it says on the box... And that's how it should be labeled by resellers, some mislabel or double label them for search reasons.... But it's sold as 400TX "sold" being what is put on the box.... It doesn't say "Tri-X" anywhere on the box...

cowanw

11-Apr-2014, 13:23

It's nice when everybody's right. depending on format.
http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/f4017/f4017.jhtml?id=0.1.18.14.23.16.14&lc=en

StoneNYC

11-Apr-2014, 13:26

It's nice when everybody's right. depending on format.
http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/f4017/f4017.jhtml?id=0.1.18.14.23.16.14&lc=en

Tri-X Professional (the 320 ASA stuff) is NOT the same either.... Entirely different film from the rest and only shared the name "probably" for comfort and sales reasons... I don't know Kodak's reasons for sharing the name but it's an entire different emulsion, curve, latitude, etc..

cowanw

11-Apr-2014, 13:36

If you look at the 35mm packaging it specifically says "TRI-X 400 FILM"
If you look at the 120 packaging it does not.

StoneNYC

11-Apr-2014, 14:10

If you look at the 35mm packaging it specifically says "TRI-X 400 FILM"
If you look at the 120 packaging it does not.

Fair enough, I looked, but you get my point... It's different than it was, but is the current and most updated version, if ilford starred selling "Classic FourHTex" or something and sold it, you would say The current 400TX is the "real" stuff and the ilford stuff is a clone/aftermarket brand...

So that's how I'm relating the R09 vs true Adox RODINAL "The Developer formerly known as Adonal" (in the USA) as the most updated and truest to the AGFA product sold before it's demise...

Even is kodak went under and ... I dunno, Film Ferrania took over the latest emulsion, we would still say that Film Ferrania's was the true-er "Tri-X".

Anyway none of this is very relevant to the thread topic...

I just want to know when the Adonal gets all bought up and the Rodinal label starts being sold! :)

jnantz

11-Apr-2014, 14:37

If you look at the 35mm packaging it specifically says "TRI-X 400 FILM"
If you look at the 120 packaging it does not.

thanks bill

exactly, its just packaging ...

plus x || px125
tmax 100 || tmx
tmax 400 || tmy
tmax 3200 || tmz

clever new packaging
new / improved formulations, same film

doesn't mirko's post say
they couldn't use the name rodinal
because of trade mark name ownership
but it was the same thing just sold as a different name ...
they could have probably just have called it the developer formerly known as rodinal
but i guess the marketeers weren't as clever as prince ...
unlike the developer, he wasn't the same person seeing soon after he was able
to use his name again ( prince ) all of the cells in his body had exchanged out for new ones ...
the developer was the same, just a different name.

StoneNYC

11-Apr-2014, 14:49

thanks bill

exactly, its just packaging ...

plus x || px125
tmax 100 || tmx
tmax 400 || tmy
tmax 3200 || tmz

clever new packaging
new / improved formulations, same film

doesn't mirko's post say
they couldn't use the name rodinal
because of trade mark name ownership
but it was the same thing just sold as a different name ...
they could have probably just have called it the developer formerly known as rodinal
but i guess the marketeers weren't as clever as prince ...
unlike the developer, he wasn't the same person seeing soon after he was able
to use his name again ( prince ) all of the cells in his body had exchanged out for new ones ...
the developer was the same, just a different name.

John, AGFA Rodinal and ADOX Adonal (soon to be called Rodinal in the USA) are identical....

Tri-X and 400TX are different grain structure all together... That's why kodak put the 400 first to indicate the change in film design...

jnantz

11-Apr-2014, 14:56

John, AGFA Rodinal and ADOX Adonal (soon to be called Rodinal in the USA) are identical....

Tri-X and 400TX are different grain structure all together... That's why kodak put the 400 first to indicate the change in film design...

to the regular person who buys the film, it doesn't matter at all.
and if you say so about the box design ... personally i think it is
so people wouldn't have to search the box to figure out the asa
( since 3 other films have both a t and an x in their name ( see previous post ) )

peter k.

13-Apr-2014, 08:06

StoneNYC:

John, AGFA Rodinal and ADOX Adonal (soon to be called Rodinal in the USA) are identical....
Just want to verify.. I've wanted to try this developer for some time, but it was just to confusing... on what was and what was not... soooo ...
Freestyle has this in stock, and your saying its the 'authentic' Rodinal.
So if I get it and do the testing.. and like it... the contents will be the same, with only the label changed, when the Aconal stock runs out and, and the Rodinal stock comes in.
Boy it will be fun and a relief, to finally have this issue settled.

Sal Santamaura

13-Apr-2014, 08:25

...So if I get it and do the testing.. and like it... the contents will be the same, with only the label changed, when the Adonal stock runs out and, and the Rodinal stock comes in...Having corrected your typo (should be Adonal), the answer is yes, developer formulation will remain identical. This information came directly from the manufacturer.

StoneNYC

13-Apr-2014, 08:47

What Sal said. Yes, it's the same stuff, enjoy!

Leigh

13-Apr-2014, 10:05

The Adonal/Rodinal confusion was the result of somebody registering a trademark in the US on Rodinal.
I don't know why that happened.

That trademark is no longer valid... again I don't know why.
Therefore, the real maker can now sell the real product in the US under the Rodinal name.

You can certainly find threads on that subject if you want to pursue it.

- Leigh

Ken Lee

13-Apr-2014, 12:06

Can someone provide a link to a side-by-side comparison of negatives developed in Rodinal and other developers ?

Leigh

13-Apr-2014, 12:10

Can someone provide a link to a side-by-side comparison of negatives developed in Rodinal and other developers ?
How would one go about doing so?

Every developer produces different results. That's why there are different developers.

- Leigh

Ken Lee

13-Apr-2014, 12:14

How would one go about doing so? Every developer produces different results. That's why there are different developers.

I apologize if my question was vague or confused. I'm interested in those "different results".

One would make a series identical exposures, then develop one series in one developer, and another series in another developer. Then one could compare contrast, tonality, grain, acutance, etc.

StoneNYC

13-Apr-2014, 13:36

I apologize if my question was vague or confused. I'm interested in those "different results".

One would make a series identical exposures, then develop one series in one developer, and another series in another developer. Then one could compare contrast, tonality, grain, acutance, etc.

There's a huge problem with this, in that everyone shoots and develops differently, this would mean an almost infinite amount of combinations you have to do an order to compare all the different developers and all the different agitation schemes and development styles, Times and temperatures used, exposure values used etc.

Leigh

13-Apr-2014, 14:26

There's a huge problem with this, in that everyone shoots and develops differently, this would mean an almost infinite amount of combinations you have to do an order to compare all the different developers and all the different agitation schemes and development styles, Times and temperatures used, exposure values used etc.
My concern exactly.

Every developer (chemical) is different, and every developer (human) is different.
That results in an almost infinite number of combinations.

The fundamental problem is that any developer's (human) results are valid only for the individual doing the work.
His neighbor could use exactly the same process, following the instructions to the letter, and get different results.

Instructions for films and developers all include a statement that the parameters given are only starting points.
Each individual must tailor the numbers and processes as needed to achieve the desired results.

- Leigh

Ken Lee

13-Apr-2014, 14:42

Perhaps my question was wrongly worded. I will try again:

Can someone provide a link to a side-by-side comparison of negatives developed in Rodinal and any other developer(s) ?

emh

13-Apr-2014, 16:30

Ken- If you mean any of the other versions of Rodinal, I never saw a difference. Granted, it was never my regular developer, but I have used it over the last 3 decades. In fact, I didn't realize I had used differing versions until I was doing a darkroom purge, last week. There were nearly empty bottles of Rodinal, Adonal, and RO9 on the back of a shelf. I know I never changed times/temperatures/procedures with any of them, and my films all came out as expected. Bear in mind, I didn't do any extensive, scientific testing but, I would have noticed any tonal variations in the prints.
I think this whole Rodinal/clone thing is like arguing whether you ate a hotdog, frankfurter, or wiener...

Ken Lee

13-Apr-2014, 16:55

Never mind: I found a few myself. They are not comparisons of Rodinal with substitutes, but with other developers: any other developers.

Here's one: A comparison of Rodinal, HC110, and D23 film developers (http://chazmiller.com/projects/devtest.html). I find it particularly interesting because I currently use D-23.

Here's another: http://static.photo.net/attachments/bboard/00U/00U1lV-157751784.jpg

Another: http://www.digitaltruth.com/products/product_tests/silvermax_filmtest_001.php

Another: http://www.rollaweek.com/2010/10/kodak-hc-110-vs-agfa-rodinal/

Are they perfect tests ? Are they scientifically rigorous ? No, but I find them helpful.

peter k.

14-Apr-2014, 09:36

Thanks Ken, that really helped.. use HC110 H, now ... and like the tonal change that the first and last showed, will get some Rodinal on my next order to finally try. ;-)

Tin Can

14-Apr-2014, 09:53

Yes, thanks Ken. The links are a big help.

I was using Rodinal and have recently added HC110, but I only sensed a difference as I did not do the tests.

I will continue to use both and now it's time to use the Silvermax I have been sitting on, however on miniature format...:(

Leigh

14-Apr-2014, 09:59

Never mind: I found a few myself.
Here's one: A comparison of Rodinal, HC110, and D23 film developers (http://chazmiller.com/projects/devtest.html).
Here's another: http://static.photo.net/attachments/bboard/00U/00U1lV-157751784.jpg
Another: http://www.digitaltruth.com/products/product_tests/silvermax_filmtest_001.php
Another: http://www.rollaweek.com/2010/10/kodak-hc-110-vs-agfa-rodinal/
Rodinal is generally considered appropriate only for slow films, like 100ASA and slower.

Of the four tests you linked, only the DigitalTruth test was done at that speed.
The other three all used Tri-X at 400, which would accentuate the grain significantly.

IOW, those three tests are highly biased against Rodinal.

- Leigh

Rolfe Tessem

16-Apr-2014, 12:24

This thread has certainly drifted!

I don't care how it works with lions or tigers or bears! How does it work with rhinos?

Leigh

16-Apr-2014, 14:54

I don't care how it works with lions or tigers or bears! How does it work with rhinos?
The problem with rhinos is that they're very deep (i.e. long), requiring significant DoF.

That means a very small aperture, which requires a long shutter speed.

That in turn requires use of a head clamp.

Finding one large enough and strong enough for a rhino is a challenge.

- Leigh

Rolfe Tessem

16-Apr-2014, 16:01

The problem with rhinos is that they're very deep (i.e. long), requiring significant DoF.

That means a very small aperture, which requires a long shutter speed.

That in turn requires use of a head clamp.

Finding one large enough and strong enough for a rhino is a challenge.

- Leigh

Okay, I searched Ebay for head clamps and I'm overwhelmed by the variety! So many choices, although admittedly many too small for a rhino.

How many inches (or centimeters if you're an old world person) of flex do you think a rhino head clamp would require? I'm scratching my head because so many of these head clamps appear to be identical!