I forgot to mention that I have NOTHING against RODINAL at all.
I happen to use it a lot at the time when AGFA was still alive, but I am convinced that it works at it best combined with the famous (and beloved) AGFAPAN (not really APX), for which these two seems to be meant.
But this is, of course, a personal opinion...
Originally Posted by phdgent
The sodium bicarbonate was something I read about somewhere, but I don't recall where, so I can't offer a reference. I use about a half a teaspoon in 32 ounces of water for the pre-rinse. If my memory of the article serves correctly, this helps break down the antihalation backing -- which is apparently quite robust on BP400 and is more difficult to dissolve. I mixed up about a quart of 1% solution and it'll probably last me the rest of my life. I only add 5 drops of the solution to a quart of developer. The image below is a medium format image, but it was from a negative developed using this process. While the grain is certainly quite visible, I do not find it objectionable. Don't think I'd want to develop 35mm this way, though.
I think you can be pretty certain that the unpleasant skin tones are the result of severe under exposure. Pancro 400 actually has a bit extra red sensitivity, in my experienceThis is what I got from this past weekend. Please forgive the less-sharp-than-it-should-be handheld DSLR scan:
Bergger Pancro 400 5x7, metered the scene at ASA160 and settled on an exposure time of 4 minutes. Lens was a CZJ Tessar 135mm,f/4,5 with the aperture set to f/22. There was some front rise. Camera was my big n' clunky B&J View.
Developed in Barry Thornton's Divided D-23 recipe in a Poilot rotary tank (Jobo knockoff). 3m30s in each bath at a temp of 75F. Don't usually have temps that hot in my developers, but it's a hot summer... Stopped with plain water. Fixed with Ilford Rapid Fixer for 5 minutes.
Whatever is going on with its reciprocity seems to be fairly forgiving of long exposure times without needing to stretch into hours. This was shot in quite dim room light from a single overhead florescent around the corner from the scene.
OK, here's a weird anomalous one:
This was underexposed by rather alot; the negative is very thin. Exposure time was about 2 seconds. I think I guesstimated very wrongly for the effective F value of the experimental stop I used in the lens (Waterhouse stop consisting of a 3x3 grid of holes, used in a Rapid Rectilinear). This was processed in the same tank along with the previous shot. This one got alot of uneven development. I think this is my fault because I was too slow getting the second bath poured in after getting the first one dumped out, and I think remaining developer pooled on the film. May also have been exaggerated because of the developer being so hot and extra active. Some shots got this fault, but others not so much, I think it depends on where it was arranged in the film holder in the tank. You do see a slight light horizontal line across the top of the first shot, which is the same fault.
Alright, with that out of the way, here is what I really want people to notice: Her skin tone is WAY off. It looks like it was shot with blue sensitive film, like a glass plate or x-ray film. Very weird! In comparison, the large metal plunger cylinder thing in the bottom left corner of the first shot is painted red and came out correctly rendered, so this film is obviously sensitive to red in normal circumstances. I know Bergger touts this as having a unique dual emulsion. So, is what I'm seeing here that one of those emulsions is only blue sensitive, and if you underexpose you'll potentially only get that one "energized"? Interesting phenomenon!
I’ve liked it in PyrocatHD, and I have a box of 4x5 that is half used, but I haven’t seen any for sale since the pandemic. I’d like to get some 5x7 or 8x10, but haven’t been able to find any. Are you all shooting sheets you bought years ago? Any idea if it will ever be in stock again? (I buy most of my film from Freestyle or B&H)
Your sharpening seems to be cranked up very high - I'd suggest that drawing any conclusions from the image about actual visual granularity is rather questionable.
I got my box of 5x7 from B&H almost exactly a year ago, and they short-dated me, expired in November 2021. It must have been sitting there a long time.
So, dear Michael, if I understand it correctly, you add sodium bicarbonate in the pre-rinse AND in in the developer?
What do you think of the suggestions by Pat Gainer?
BTW, that image of the truck looks good, and the grain isn't to be disliked, as a matter of fact, it's an essential part of analogue photography...
Last edited by phdgent; 15-Jun-2022 at 21:56. Reason: typo
No, the bicarbonate only goes in the pre-rinse. Benzotriazole goes into the developer. I haven't read Pat's article yet, but I just downloaded it and shall do so at my next opportunity. I'm with you on grain. If it isn't mushy or overly coarse, I think it enhances many images. And Rodinal never give mushy grain. Overly coarse...absolutely if you overdevelop, use it at too high a temperature or too strong a dilution. But I prefer the 1:100 dilution and agitate only every three minutes.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks