I've recently been experimenting with 35mm Agfa APX 25, rating it normally and developing it in Rodinal 1:50 for 8 minutes @ 75 F. But I find that the shadow detail is rather poor and that there seems to be very little latitude. Can anyone make any suggestions?

-- Peter Hughes (leonine@redshift.com), October 02, 1998

Answers

I have found the same problem with Rodinal (1:50) and Delta 100. I thought at the time that it was due to the concentrated developer being too old and have not been willing to use it since then.

-- Andy Laycock (agl@intergate.bc.ca), October 04, 1998.

Try diluted Xtol.

-- Tim Brown (brownt@ase.com), October 04, 1998.

Thanks for your suggestions. I have since been told that the "real" speed of APX 25 is closer to 10 or 12, which would certainly explain the poor shadow detail. (Judging by my experience with finding the "true" ISOs of films, 6 or 8 would be more like itwhich would make it too slow for my purposes, since I want to shoot hand-held.) I am now experimenting with Ilford Pan F. I would try other developers, such as Xtol, but, for the time being, I am committed to sticking with one film developer. And Rodinal suits by techinque perfectly.

-- Peter Hughes (leonine@redshift.com), October 04, 1998.

Rodinal - one developer fits all? (was: APX25...

> Thanks for your suggestions. I have since been told that the "real" > speed of APX 25 is closer to 10 or 12, which would certainly explain > the poor shadow detail. (Judging by my experience with finding the > "true" ISOs of films, 6 or 8 would be more like itwhich would make > it too slow for my purposes, since I want to shoot hand-held.) I am > now experimenting with Ilford Pan F. I would try other developers, > such as Xtol, but, for the time being, I am committed to sticking > with one film developer. And Rodinal suits by techinque perfectly.

I've got a couple of questions. Why are you just believing what people tell you about APX25 and not running a test, even a very informal one, yourself? I'm happy to believe that APX25 indeed works best at EI 12 in some developers, but I also suspect that APX25 in Xtol is closer to the ISO rating of 25.

Why are you committed to using one developer, and why is it Rodinal? Have you experimented with several, or have you just decided you like what you've seen from Rodinal so far - so therefore, it is The One?

I've used a number of different developers, including Rodinal and Xtol. As a direct result, I ended up regarding Rodinal as something of a specialty developer, and using Xtol as my One Developer. Why? For the most part, Xtol gives me very good sharpness, good emulsion speed and excellent grain, and does this with every film I've tried.

Perhaps Rodinal is The One for you, but I'm curious how you've come to conclude this.

Dana K6JQ Dana@Source.Net

-- Dana H. Myers K6JQ (Dana@Source.Net), October 12, 1998.

How about using a more dilute solution of Rodinal, more time, and less agitation?

When developer comes into contact with the film, it starts reacting with the emulsion. The highlights exhaust the developer faster than the low values do. The more dilute a developer is, the faster the highlights will exhaust it.

I have started experimenting with Kodak Tmax 400 at 3200. I developed my first roll in D-76 1:1, 68F, 20min, with agitation once every minute. The shadows came out reasonably well, if slightly thin. For my next trial, I am planning 30min and agitation once every two minutes.

-- Brian C. Miller (a-bcmill@exchange.microsoft.com), October 06, 1998.

Obviously, I am running tests, or I wouldn't have come to the conclusion that the "true" speed of APX 25 in Rodinal is closer to 6 or 8. I use Rodinal because I like the tonal scale and the sharpness it produces. Highlights don't block up and shadow detail is generally excellent. It is also very convenient and quite malleable, as well as extremely suited to N-minus development. Of course, grain is less of a problem on sheet film than with 35mm, so I'm open to suggestions regarding other developers. I used to use Xtol with T-Max 400 8x10 film. I was very pleased with the results, but I eventually came to the conclusion that T-Max wasn't worth the effortscratched too easily, took an eternity to fix, etc.so I switched to Tri-X. Rodinal is a superb developer for Tri-X sheet film.

-- Peter Hughes (leonine@redshift.com), October 12, 1998.

Unfortunately, there is still confusion about 'emulsion speed' and developers. Everyone should remember the first rule of B&W: Expose for the shadows; develop for the highlights. No developer can increase shadow detail. Xtol is an excellent developer for several reasons, but mainly because it doesn't block up the highlihts (due to rapid local exhaustion.) Rodinal is an excellent developer, but it results in high grain when used with anything but slow film. You should always perform your own personal film speed and development time tests. They are quite easy. See Ansel Adams' book The Negative for how to do these tests. If you don't have a densitometer, all one hour labs have one and are usually willing to measure your speed test form a small fee.

-- Michael D Fraser (mdfraser@earthlink.net), October 13, 1998.