Rodinal 1+25, 1+50, 1+100 & 1+200 test on Ilford FP4+

[L&Scape]

I have long thought about making a more controlled test to see the effects of developer dilution. I normally process my FP4+ in Rodinal 1+50, but here I wanted to see all dilutions from 1:25 to 1:200.

I exposed 4 sheets of 8x10 on a sunny day with no clouds and no change in light. I metered with Minolta Autometer V and my exposure was 1/15 s f:22. It took max 2 min to expose all four sheets.

Back in the lab I used Jobo 3005 drum with CPP processor with continuous rotation at 20 degree Celsius. I mixed 500ml of developer for each bath and developed the 8x10 sheets as follows:
Dilution Devel. time
1:25 8 min
1:50 16 min
1:100 32 min
1:200 64 min

After drying I made contact prints of each negative using identical exposure and development. I used Multigrade paper with no filtering. The contact sheets were then scanned with flatbed scanner using Vuescan. As I am no expert with this software, the scans were all quite dull/gray/contrastless and did not resemble the contact prints. I used PS autocontrast which gave looks quite a similar to the original contact prints.

All four negatives are easy to print on #2 paper or with no filter on Multigrade paper. The 1:25 negative is slightly more dense than the others and has slightly higher contrast, but only marginally. I was surprised that even with 1:200 dilution the negative came out very similar to the others. My personal EI for all four developer dilution combinations is around EI 32, which gives dense enought negatives so that the unexposed negative border reaches maximum black.

[Tin Can]

I think very few use/like Rodinol

Except me

I use it for nearly everything and have for at least 9 years

Thanks for posting!

[Michael Graves]

...I think very few use/like Rodinol. Except me...

Not true...I defended Rodinol staunchly in the Bergger 400 thread. This is a great comparison of dilutions. I may try the same with with 120 so that grain can come into play.

[Michael R]

One of my favourite photographers and printers, Mark Citret, has never used anything but Rodinal for his LF film development.


I think very few use/like Rodinol

Except me

I use it for nearly everything and have for at least 9 years

Thanks for posting!

[diversey]

Nice comparison! I visited this park before :o.

[L&Scape]

Nice comparison! I visited this park before :o.
My darkroom is next to Jean Sibelius's park, a famous Finnish composer.

[diversey]

Good for you to have a darkroom nearby this nice park. My son played cello in his school symphony orchestra and they played Sibelius’s Finlandia in one semester. We went to visit this park in 2010 and it is very impressive.


My darkroom is next to Jean Sibelius's park, a famous Finnish composer.

[Willie]

Now you can do them with Sodium Ascorbate and see if the reported/claimed benefits are real.

[Andrew O'Neill]

I've never been a big fan of Rodinal. Sorry. :o
Out of curiosity, what EI did you use, and did you use the same EI for all dilutions?

[L&Scape]

I've never been a big fan of Rodinal. Sorry. :o
Out of curiosity, what EI did you use, and did you use the same EI for all dilutions?

I exposed at EI32 using Minolta Autometer V. All four sheets were exposed identically to reveal any differences when developer dilution is changed.

[letchhausen]

This is interesting. I'd used Rodinal in the past, but stuck with HC 110. Then a couple years ago switched to Rodinal. I've done a lot of zone testing at 1:50 and 1:100 for contraction and expansion. But I never thought about doing a straight up dilution test. I'll have to test it out with Tri-X and see what I think. Mainly, I'd be interested to see where it gets grainier. Since that's the way, uh-huh, uh-huh, I like it.