Olivinyl
Hello everyone,
Has anyone worked with Rollei Retro 400S or AGFA ASP 400S (Belgium) and could please confirm or add to the development times?
I’ve already had a look online, but the times vary quite a lot in some cases.
Development method: Continuous agitation for the first minute + one shake every 30 seconds
Rodinal/Adonal:
@ 400 ASA 1+25 10.5 mins 20°C
@ 800 ASA 1+25 16 mins 20°C
@ 1600 ASA 1+25 24 mins 20°C
@ 400 ASA 1+50 22 mins 20°C
@ 800 ASA 1+50 31 mins 20°C
@ 1600 ASA 1+50 90 mins 20°C stand development
Xtol:
@ 200 ASA 1+2 14 mins 20°C
@ 400 ASA 1+2 21 mins 20°C
@ 800 ASA 1+2 25 mins 20°C
Does anyone else have Xtol times for 1+1 or stock?
Best regards, Oliver
Gast
The Rollei data sheet specifies 17 minutes at ISO 400 and 20°C for Xtol 1+1: http://www.maco-photo.de/files/images/TA_Rollei_RETRO400S_dt.pdf
Olivinyl
Hello
Oh, I’d missed the times on the data sheet.
I exposed a test film at 400 ISO and developed it with Adonal 1+50 for 22 minutes at 20°C.
It looks really good.
The grain is relatively fine and the grey tones are rendered quite nicely.
The film also scans up well.
Best wishes, Oliver
ultra8
This film is definitely not 400 ISO in XTOL. I expose this film at 200 ISO and develop it in a 1+1 XTOL solution for 12–13 minutes, depending on the contrast.
Olivinyl
Hi Jörg,
Well, I suppose that means it’s already pushed by about one stop at 17 minutes in X-Tol 1+1.
With a factor of 1.2–1.3 for one stop in X-Tol, that’s almost spot on, isn’t it? Or am I completely off the mark?
Best wishes, Oliver
Olivinyl
I have carried out the first tests with the ASP 400S.
I photographed a greyscale chart and a grey card with a Siemens star (for manually aligning the scanner) and developed them in Adonal 1+50 at 20°C.
I scanned the negatives and determined the black and white points using only the Silverfast AFL 6 densitometer.
I took the photos at 100, 200, 400, 800 & 1600 ISO. I developed the first exposure series for 22 minutes according to the data sheet, which in my opinion was too long. I had also taken a few outdoor shots which had hardly any grey gradations, so they were far too high in contrast.
The next roll was developed for just 20.5 minutes. 1 min continuous agitation – 1 shake every 30 seconds.
It looks very good at 200 ISO; the lower grey tones are clearly visible in the scan. However, the white tones/highlights have high density.
At 400 ISO, the highlights are more visible, but the grey tones are slightly steeper, though absolutely fine. The film grain is very pleasant and the film scans well. Even the exposures at 800 and 1600 ISO still scan very well.
Images 1–3: 400 ISO, 1/60 sec, f/5.6 (cloudy sky), 22 mins, Adonal 1+50, 20°C (Voigtländer Vito CL Color-Skopar 2.8/50)
[ATTACHMENT NOT FOUND]
[ATTACHMENT NOT FOUND]
Detail from Image 2
[ATTACHMENT NOT FOUND]
Images 4–7 Various ISO and aperture settings 20.5 mins Adonal 1+50 20°C (Yashica FX 103 Yashica 1.4/50)
[ATTACHMENT NOT FOUND]
[ATTACHMENT NOT FOUND]
[ATTACHMENT NOT FOUND]
[ATTACHMENT NOT FOUND]
thomas_l
Oh, I see… and why did you want to clock up some development time?
ultra8
Unfair promotion of other films :)
Well, I stand by my opinion: these are a special kind of film and can’t be compared to classic films.
Best regards, Jörg.
thomas_l
Yes, those who still write what they actually think do think and write that :-)
ultra8
A few examples from the Agfa ASP400S
@200 developed in Xtol 1+2
Printed on MCP
Olivinyl
Oh, I see... and why did you want to collect development times?
How about a guess?
I’ll explain:
For myself and for anyone else who wants to use this type of film or simply wants to see how it looks, and how different development times and developers affect this type of film. That’s why I posted the initial thread about development times with different developers.
Unfortunately, not all the times listed on Digitaltruth are correct, or the lists are incomplete.
That’s why I’ve now put together my own list.
@ Jörg: It looks nice. Did you use a filter on the top picture with the radio tower?
I’ve got Xtol 1+2 for 14 minutes at 200 ISO. Is that right? Do you have different times?
Nah, Jörg, if I were to advertise third-party films from FOTOIMPEX, it would probably read something like this:
“Take your car, have a series of photos taken of you and your vehicles. Speed camera systems are capable of taking 5 pictures per second. Organise a high-speed motorcade. Drive through red lights, smiling as you do so.
The city will be delighted with your financial injection, and the manufacturers of traffic surveillance film will also be pleased with the increased demand for film. Ensure the production of film stock, drive fast!"
There’s no question that the ASP 400S doesn’t offer the same qualities as a Tmax 400 or FP5+. It’s a very affordable film (sold by the metre) that comes on a clear base and is also easy to scan. The value for money is good.
The same applies to the PolyPan F 50, which has been thrown onto the market at an incredibly low price (I haven’t used this film yet). This film isn’t comparable to other 50 ASA films either; it’s thin and has no antihalation coating – neither does the Lucky, and yet these films are still bought and exposed because they have character...
Best regards, Oliver
Olivinyl
Major problem with Xtol
I’ve already listed a few development times for AGFA ASP 400S above, which I’ve gathered from the internet, but I’m very unsure about the Xtol times, as they vary considerably. In some cases, the same times are given for 1+1 and 1+2, and that can’t be right!
Also, the 17 minutes listed on the Rollei 400S data sheet at @400 for Xtol 1+1 don’t match the times given on ‘Digital Truth’! There, 1+2 for @400 ASA is 17 minutes!
Who has actually developed Agfa ASP 400S, Rollei Retro 400S or GP 27 Surv. in Xtol and can provide some reliable times?
The Adonal/Rodinal times are correct; I’ve even reduced them to 20 mins in 1+50 at 400 ASA.
Best regards, Oliver
Edit: Transposed numbers & text amended
KlausWehner
Hello Oliver,
I tested the Rollei 400S quite some time ago.
The reason there are no reliable development data for this film is that the manufacturer designed it for purposes entirely different from standard black-and-white photography.
The film has a relatively high base contrast and a usable speed of approx. 21–24 DIN for standard photography.
If you want to use this film on a long-term basis, you’ll need to test it yourself to ensure it meets your requirements. Development data from other photographers won’t be of any help to you.
If you already realise that this film is not intended for high-end photography, a rough calibration will suffice. It really isn’t that time-consuming!
In any case, you will then have reliable values (for your own use).
Best regards
Klaus
Olivinyl
Hi Klaus
I developed this film using Adonal/Rodinal at 400 ISO with good results (more than adequate for scanning).
I’m aware that I’ll need to adjust the exposure times to suit my preferences or intended use.
The various exposure times doing the rounds online are confusing me now, and I have to start with one.
I’m just looking for a guideline I can build on.
Best regards, Oliver
Otto
The original Agfa data sheet can be found here:
http://www.maco-photo.de/files/images/Retro400S_Infrared_aviphot_pan400S_2006_01_09_en.pdf
This clearly shows that, with the specified developers and a gamma of 0.57 (average gradient, page 4), the film achieves a speed of 200 ASA. A gamma value of this magnitude corresponds to a standard photographic application. Aerial films are developed at higher gamma values to compensate for the lower contrast of subjects in aerial photography. Depending on the developer used, the achievable ISO sensitivity for standard photographic applications may also be significantly lower than 200 ASA, as Klaus Wehner has already reported. The film is certainly not a 400 ASA film for standard photographic purposes, but rather a specialised film.
Best regards,
Otto!
Olivinyl
Hello everyone.
I’ve already had a look at the datasheet, but I didn’t pay it much attention. It’s very superficial.
A gamma of 0.57 at 200 ASA is actually quite good, and the speed extending to almost 750 nm is also worth considering for the odd red filter or IR filter experiment.
The purchase price for the film (sold by the metre) was just very low, and that’s what makes the film interesting to me.
How can you explain that the gamma value with Gevatone 66 developer at 30 °C is 0.90 at 400 ASA, but at a higher temperature (37 °C) it’s 0.73 at 370 ASA?
Does the reduction in development time caused by the increased temperature alter the gamma value so significantly, even though the ASA value achieved is higher?
It is well known that shortening the development time lowers the gamma value, whilst lengthening it raises it. This is very noticeable with push processing. But does increasing the temperature and shortening the time alter or increase the film’s sensitivity? Is this a characteristic of ASP film, or does it apply to other film types as well? I have now understood, however, that the ASP gamma value rises very steeply.
Best regards, Oliver
Otto
The starting point is always the contrast in the subject. With normal subject contrast, a film is developed to a gamma of around 0.57. Anyone who has ever taken slides from an aeroplane whilst on holiday will surely have noticed that these were rather flat compared to their other holiday slides. If the subject contrast is lower than normal, this is compensated for by conducting a development to a higher gamma value.
The subject contrast in aerial photography depends on the weather and the time of day. The data sheet specifies how to compensate for the reduced subject contrast by using a longer and/or warmer development process, i.e. development to a higher gamma. As results are required very quickly in aerial photography, special developers are used at higher temperatures (development times under 1 minute). In other words, the adjusted development is intended to influence the contrast of the negatives so that they exhibit normal contrast even with flat subjects. The fact that this alters the speed is merely a side effect.
As one does not normally photograph flat subjects, general photography typically uses a development process resulting in a gamma of 0.57. Hence the note that, under normal circumstances, one is unlikely to achieve 400 ASA with the film in question.
Best regards,
Otto!
Addendum to the images above:
I assume that the prints of the test negatives are on the ‘Normal’ gradient of paper and that the film was exposed to mid-grey. The light meter setting must now be adjusted so that the dark areas on the test chart in the bottom left are clearly distinguishable. The film development time must be selected so that the light areas are clearly separated. Once both criteria are met, the film has been tested and the print will show the full grey scale with normal subject contrast (similar to screen calibration using brightness and contrast controls). Any deviation in subject contrast during exposure can now be compensated for by selecting a suitable paper grade.
There are many guides available for testing, designed to help you achieve the desired result with as few test develops as possible. These take into account that the ISO sensitivity may change if the development time is altered. As the weather is set to be poor over Easter, I wish you every success with your testing.
Happy Easter to all.
Best regards,
Otto!
Olivinyl
Hello
Thank you for the detailed information.
The images I’ve uploaded are scans of the negatives, created using a Reflekta RPS 3600 Pro scanner and Silverfast AFL6 software.
Best regards, Oliver
Otto
Hello Oliver,
Are the scans of the test charts inverted (black => white and vice versa)?
If so, the explanations given above apply in principle. As can be seen in Figure 4 for 200 ASA, the last two black fields are no longer separated. This means that the ISO sensitivity would clearly be below 200 ASA during development with Adonal 1+50. Normally, density measurements are taken directly on the negative; either under the enlarger using a suitable lab light meter or with a densitometer. This generally yields more reliable results, as the scanner’s characteristic curve is no longer an intervening factor.
I myself have tried using the film with two different developers. However, the test results were such that the film could not be used as a substitute for, say, the classic APX 400. I’m sorry I don’t have any better news on this.
Best regards,
Otto!
Olivinyl
Hi Otto,
Yes, the scans are inverted. When I scan the negatives, I only set the brightest and darkest points. I set the contrast and brightness to zero using the Silverfast scanning software!
I’ve also used these scans as a guide. For every type of film I’ve exposed, I’ve photographed this test chart (+/- 1 f-stop). I always noted down the developer, time and dilution for these negatives/scans.
I used these test charts and the recorded data to adjust the development time.
I’ve just picked out the relevant ASP 400S negative, from which I made the scans, and had a look at it.
At 200 ASA in Adonal, this gradation is still quite clearly visible; in the scan, it is lost. At 400 ASA, it is only minimal! At 800 ASA, it is no longer present.
I think that if one were to print the negative rather than scan it, the results would probably be considerably more meaningful.
What about the highlights, i.e. the areas that are black on the negative and appear white on the scan (highlights – is that correct?)
For the streak I’m holding, I performed an exposure on the test chart from 100 to 1600 ASA, but developed the film in Adonal 1+50 for 20.5 minutes. So, theoretically, it’s over-developed at 100 ISO and under-developed at 1600 ISO. The negative at 100 ISO is therefore quite high-contrast, and at 1600 it’s very thin. Logical. However, I can still clearly make out the differences in the black areas across all exposure levels (i.e. the areas that are then white in the positive).
So if I were now to extend the development time by a factor of XY, expose the film at 800 ISO and push it to 800 ISO during development, what would happen?
My understanding is this: the contrast becomes stronger through underexposure and overdevelopment, meaning the gamma increases. The shadow detail disappears, so there are no longer any black and grey gradations. On the negative, there are no longer any gradations in the bright areas.
What then happens to the dark areas on the negative, i.e. the areas that will appear black on the positive?
Best regards, Oliver
