Olivinyl
Hello everyone,
I’ve been running my own kitchen darkroom for some time now.
I scan all my developed negatives using the RPS 3600 Pro and apply minimal digital editing, if any at all.
I read a lot on this and other forums to keep up to date, but also to gain my own personal experience through trial and error.
So far, I’ve only worked with Rodinal/Adonal and Caffenol.
I’ve settled on the Agfaphoto APX 100 in Adonal 1+50 for 17.5 minutes and have achieved excellent results that I’m very pleased with. I particularly like the quite pronounced grain and the sharpness this combination delivers.
Likewise, the Lucky SHD 100 @ 400 in Rodinal 1+50 for 21 minutes at 20°C produces a great effect and comes out looking creamy and rich...
I tried to soften the APX/Adonal grain a little by processing it in 1+50 for 21 minutes at 17°C. The result was that the sharpness diminished significantly, but the grain also took on softer edges. I didn’t like it – it was too soft!
So, what to do? Which developer can ‘reduce’ the grain of the Agfaphoto APX 100 a little, whilst retaining the impression of sharpness?
I’ve also acquired a large quantity of Kodak Tmax 100, which I’d like to develop to a fine grain.
I’d also like to continue developing films such as Efke 50 and Adox CHS 50/100 to a fairly fine grain in future.
Which developer is recommended for Tmax and for the aforementioned 50 ASA range?
For me, however, it makes no sense at all to prepare powder developers, such as Xtol, as I’ll never use up the 5 litres.
I’ve also got a large quantity of Tura Professional P400 from a friend’s freezer.
Can I assume that this is the old Agfa APX 400? So Rodinal/Adonal 1+50 for 11 minutes at 20°C
There’s also an Agfa APX 400 listed, which requires 30 minutes in Rodinal 1+50 at 20°C.
Which one is the Tura 400?
So many questions...
Best regards, Oliver
Junkom
Hi Oliver,
I would have recommended Xtol to you; it keeps for quite a long time, and you don’t have to mix up the whole batch at once.
Powder developers last forever, provided they remain in powder form; I myself still use A49 from stocks left over from the GDR.
Top results with classic grainy films; personally, I find the slight softness extremely flattering in most cases. If you’d prefer something different, you can always try something else.
I personally think the APX 400 is the best black-and-white film ever made at that ISO. The APX 100 is also in a league of its own.
I’ve always developed both with A49 at a 1:1 ratio; Rodinal works too, though I usually performed dilution at a ratio of 1:100 to keep the grain from coming through too strongly. It also tends to be rather creamy and soft, which really does justice to the film’s tonal range.
I hope this helps a little with your many questions.
bernhardmangelsgmxde
In my experience, almost all developers produce a finer grain than Rodinal.
I’ve had good results with Xtol 1+1; D76 1+1 should also produce a significantly finer grain than Rodinal. The APX also works quite well with A49, though some people find the results from this developer a bit ‘washed out’.
hallertauBW
Hi Oliver,
I love the APX/Rodinal combination too (precisely because of the grain and the sharpness).
Developing at 1:50, 20°C and 17 minutes has also been my favourite so far.
Generally speaking, with Rodinal, you need to increase the dilution to suppress the grain.
I did that last time with ADOX CHS50. Rodinal at approx. 1:83, 20°C, but in a larger
development tank (500ml) to keep the minimum amount of developer at 6ml. Otherwise
I would have opted for 1:100. And subjectively, compared to my 1:50 developments,
the grain was finer.
Regards, Guido
hallertauBW
Here are two examples of Adox CHS50. Only the negatives have been scanned. The lake image was developed at a dilution of 1:50 and the ruins at 1:83.
Olivinyl
Thanks in advance for your replies
I thought it wasn’t advisable to prepare partial batches of powder developers, as some chemicals are used in such small quantities that circulation across the five 1-litre batches cannot be guaranteed.
I’ve been considering Kodak Tmax developer, Adox Atomal49 and Tetenal Ultrafin Plus.
How do these perform with Tmax 100, Adox CHS and Efke 50?
I’ve also been thinking about a 1+100 stand development in Adonal/Rodinal (no less than 5 ml) to keep the grain fine.
Does anyone have any idea which APX film the Tura Pro P400 corresponds to? There’s a difference of almost 15 minutes in development time!
Cheers, Oli
Gast
Hello,
Have you ever considered the Moersch Eco Film developer?
Liquid concentrate, extremely long shelf life, high sharpness.
http://www.fotoimpex.de/shop/fotochemie/black-and-white-filmentwickler/moersch-eco-film-developer-750ml-2xa-1xb-250ml-with-dosing-pipettes-and-flask-adapter.html
Best regards,
Wolfgang
Gast
Hello,
Have you ever considered the Moersch Eco Film developer?
Liquid concentrate, extremely long shelf life, high sharpness.
http://www.fotoimpex.de/shop/fotochemie/black-and-white-filmentwickler/moersch-eco-film-developer-750ml-2xa-1xb-250ml-mit-dosierpipetten-und-flaschenadapter.html
Personally, I use Xtol 1:1 for all films. If you decant the 5 litres into small bottles, you can use the developer for at least 6 months.
You can then get it for €8.18
Olivinyl
Here are two examples using Adox CHS50. Just the negatives have been scanned. The lake was developed at 1:50 and the ruins at 1:83.
So at 1:83 you can still see the grain quite clearly, at 1:100 less so in the bright parts of the image. How long did you develop it for?
@ Wolfgang: the Moersch isn’t exactly the cheapest developer either. At 200 ASA, though, that’s the limit according to the instructions, so push processing doesn’t seem to be possible.
I’ve already thought about dividing the A49/Atomal into 4 bottles of 250 ml each. The Xtol would then be 5 bottles of 1 litre each. 6 months... mmmmmh. The price is really good. Mmmmmh.
& months with inert gas at room temperature?
Best regards, Oliver
Gast
So I decant Xtol into 250ml bottles. I fill them right to the brim, so I don’t need any headspace.
I use up the 5 litres within 6 months, but I reckon the developer will keep for even longer.
However, I play it safe and don’t use any developer that’s more than 6 months old (except Rodinal/R09).
Regards,
Wolfgang
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bundesphotograph/
bernhardmangelsgmxde
The safest approach is not to use it for longer than 6 months. X-Tol remains usable for much longer than that (provided it is stored correctly and mixed with demineralised water). I didn’t have any problems even after 18 months; I should give it a go to see if it’s still any good – it would have been 2 years by now. Although 8 euros for 6 months really isn’t expensive...
ultra8
Hello!
I cut my teeth on APX 100 and 400 in Rodinal 1+50. And I wouldn’t say the results are grainy. The images have a lovely, sharp grain.
The Tura400 is an APX400. Here’s a tip: use an exposure of 200 ASA. I use the APX100
@100ASA in Rodinal 1+50 with an 18-minute development time and a development temperature of 19°C. I wouldn’t call it a ‘softener’.
Recently, however, I’ve been using Moersch ECO, which has a slightly finer grain but is as sharp as Rodinal. Pushing doesn’t make sense with 100 ISO film anyway. The APX100 is really fine-grained yet extremely sharp in XTOL 1+2 at 80 ASA and a development time of about 12 minutes.
I’d highly recommend my XTOL field report. And 5 litres isn’t as much as you might think:
Kodak XTOL.
Here’s a scan of a negative from an APX, developed in XTOL 1+2:
Olivinyl
Hello everyone, hello Jörg
I think I’ll be buying five 1-litre pharmacy bottles and some Xtol over the next few weeks...
The sample image has convinced me. It looks really great. I’ve now also got the hang of processing Agfa APX 100 in Rodinal, although I’d already been developing Double Super 8 reversal film (Fomakit) and E6 in my kitchen with no trouble at all.
I think the APX 100 @ 100 in 1+50 Rodinal/Adonal for 17.5 mins at 20 °C is absolutely brilliant. Just so crisp!
[ATTACHMENT NOT FOUND]
I also processed the Agfa for 21 mins in a 1+50 Rodinal bath at 17.5 °C; the grain was visibly smaller but also softer at the edges and the sharpness was weaker. The APX 100 wasn’t crisp enough anymore.
[ATTACHMENT NOT FOUND]
I had good results with the Lucky SHD 100 @ 400 ISO. However, 15 mins / 20 °C 1+50 Rodinal wasn’t enough. Next time, 22 or 23 minutes.
[ATTACHMENT NOT FOUND]
[ATTACHMENT NOT FOUND]
The Kodak Technical Pan @ 50 ASA in Caffenol C-C-L for 12 mins / 20 °C without bromide salt. Instead, 4 grams of iodine salt without fluorine in 250 ml gave me great pleasure – no grain! However, the film has a very scratch-sensitive emulsion!
[ATTACHMENT NOT FOUND]
[ATTACHMENT NOT FOUND]
[ATTACHMENT NOT FOUND]
The day before yesterday I performed the exposure and development of the first Tura P400 @ 400. Rodinal 1+100 for 90 minutes at 20 °C.
Considering the film is 14 years past its sell-by date and has only been in the freezer for the last 6 years, the results are quite nice. Unfortunately, I had to discover that the cassettes are ideal for refilling, as a cap fell off on its way into the changing bag and the first few frames got a ‘bit of’ stray light...
Very granular, but it has a certain something.
[ATTACHMENT NOT FOUND]
An old Kodak Tmax 100 (5052) in 1+50 Rodinal for 15 mins at 20 °C didn’t really convince me, which is why I asked about a “fine-grain developer”
[ATTACHMENT NOT FOUND]
Now an Adox CHS 100 is hanging on the line to dry, and we’ll see what it can do in Rodinal 1+50 for 11 mins...
The APX/Xtol Portrait has won me over. I’m curious to see what Xtol does with Efke 50 or the Lucky SHD 100.
What about Xtol’s push capability? What dilution is best for using Xtol?
What multiplier for Xtol? Level 1 x 1.2 / Level 2 x 1.44 / Level 3 x 2.1
I’ve cobbled these values together a bit.
Best regards, Oliver
@ Jörg: Funny, I’d already printed out your Xtol practical report on Monday and it was my bedtime reading yesterday.
TR
Even though Xtol seems to have ‘gained the upper hand’ now, here’s my experience:
I use three developers: A-49, D-76 and Rodinal
I only use Rodinal for formats 6x6 and larger, as I find the grain far too pronounced on 35mm film. A-49 is the opposite – here the grain is ‘suppressed’, but the developer isn’t as sharp as Rodinal! The term “muddy” has already been mentioned, though this is somewhat of an exaggeration. High-contrast subjects still produce good sharpness here, provided the optics are good. I use this developer for portraits and “delicate” subjects (insofar as I can separate the films by subject). A snowy landscape streaked with grey grain does look rather ghastly.
D-76: The compromise between sharpness and fine grain in 35mm: My tests showed that this developer produces sharper results than A-49, but the grain is by no means as pronounced as with Rodinal! My favourite developer (1+1) for 35mm and available cheaply as a 1-litre powder.
Is there actually a visual difference between D-76 and Xtol?
Oh, and my experience with developers relates to ‘classic’ films (no Tmax / Delta) at 100 ASA.
Rollei Retro 100 in A-49 stock
[ATTACHMENT NOT FOUND]
hallertauBW
So at 1:83 you can still see the grain quite clearly, whereas at 1:100 it’s less noticeable in the bright areas of the image. How long did you develop it for?
Well, the 1:50 CHS50 in Rodinal for 9 minutes (as specified by Digitaltruth)
and the 1:83 CHS50 in Rodinal for 18 minutes because I wanted a harder negative.
And my favourite APX100 Rodinal combination is also 17.5 minutes
Regards, Guido
Olivinyl
Hello everyone
I scanned my first roll of Adox CHS 100 today and I’m disappointed.
I’ve no idea what else I might have expected, but I assumed it would perform with a bit more nuance than the Agfaphoto APX 100.
The grain is similar but doesn’t have the same level of sharpness as the APX.
Underexposure doesn’t go well with the CHS 100, even slightly. There were 2–3 shots that I underexposed by 1.5 stops, and they were unusable.
ADOX CHS 100 @ 100 11 minutes / 20°C in Adonal 1+50
Midday 1/60 5.6
[ATTACHMENT NOT FOUND]
Afternoon 1/60 8
[ATTACHMENT NOT FOUND]
The butterfly was photographed in the late afternoon at sunset/twilight. 1/30 sec f/2.8
[ATTACHMENT NOT FOUND]
Should I perform the exposure on the CHS at 80 ISO for 11 minutes, or develop it for 12–13 minutes at 100–125 ISO?
What does ADOX say about A49, Xtol or D 76?
@ TR: The Rollei Retro 100 in A-49 is quite similar to the APX in Rodinal. Do you have a few exposure times to hand?
Best regards, Oliver
ultra8
The APX/Xtol combination has really won me over. I’m curious to see how Xtol performs with Efke 50 or the Lucky SHD 100.
Definitely achieve a dilution of more than 1+1!! With classic films, only 1+2 or 1+3 works. And make sure you test the film beforehand. That saves a lot of frustration!
What about Xtol’s push capability? What dilution is best for Xtol?
What multiplier for Xtol? Level 1 x 1.2 / Level 2 x 1.44 / Level 3 x 2.1
I’ve cobbled these values together a bit.
There’s no set multiplier. The more diluted it is, the better the shadow detail. Pushing works well, but you won’t be able to avoid testing it.
TR
[..]
I’ve no idea what else I might have expected, but I assumed
[..]
Should I perform exposure on the CHS at 80 ASA for 11 minutes, or develop it for 12–13 minutes at 100–125 ASA?
What does ADOX say about A49, Xtol or D 76?
@ TR : The Rollei Retro 100 in A-49 is quite similar to the APX in Rodinal. Do you have a few exposure times to hand?
Be careful
when testing films with different subjects or under different lighting conditions! Such ‘tests’ are hardly meaningful to evaluate.
To compare different films and developers, you need the same subject under the same lighting, and all other factors should be kept constant. You should simply set aside a day for this. Then, in the end, you’ll really know where you stand.
35mm films can easily be cut in the dark, or you can remove the exposed section from the camera and develop it after just two shots. You don’t have to wait for or sacrifice a whole roll of film every time!
Whether you should expose for longer is easy to tell: do the deepest shadows still show detail? If so, the exposure is sufficient.
Whether you should develop for a shorter time can also be determined by looking at the negative: is it too high-contrast, do the highlights ‘clip’ during scanning, or do you always have to use soft paper when enlarging? If so, the development time is too long.
[size="1"]If you decide to shorten the development time, you should expose about 1/2 stop more, as the shorter development also ‘flattens’ the deepest shadows slightly – but mainly, of course, keeps the highlights that are too dense reproducible[/size].
- The exposure time controls the shadow detail. The development time controls the contrast.
Oliver, I agitated the Rollei Retro for a full 10 minutes in the A49 as follows: the first minute continuously. Then only for about 10 seconds every minute. However, 10 minutes still seems a bit long to me – too high in contrast for my taste (not evident from the image, as the contrast is naturally adjusted in the positive process); I prefer soft, well-defined negatives and control the contrast via the photographic paper. I still need to do some testing myself here.
Olivinyl
Hello everyone
@ T.R.
You’re quite right that you shouldn’t treat developing a roll of film as a matter of life and death.
But first impressions count. The Tura P400, which had been out of date for 14 years and was bathed in a 90-minute stand development, had more charm than the Adox CHS 100, which was exposed and developed according to the instructions.
I’ve got two more rolls of Adox CHS 100 to help me make up my mind...
As I said, I stuck to the instructions: 100 ISO, 11 mins in 1+50 Adonal at 20 °C.
A roll of Lucky 100 SHD exposed at 400 ISO, quickly developed for 17 mins at 20 °C in 1+50 Adonal, appealed to me more. It’s all a matter of taste, after all. I’ll bathe the next CHS for 12 mins in 1+50 and the last Adoxin in Xtol 1+1 or 1+2.
Then I’ll decide whether the Adox CHS will be back in my basket next time I shop.
The Tmax 100 in Adonal 1+50 was just ‘nice’ for me, which is why I asked about Xtol or a fine-grain developer.
It’s certainly important and instructive to expose a film differently (under the same conditions) and develop it differently to get to know its strengths and weaknesses.
But things might look different again with the next emulsion number...
If you don’t like the basic character, why keep buying and using it?
I’ll be testing the Kentmere in 100 and 400 in the near future, as well as the Polypan (if only because of the price).
If I’m visually satisfied, I’ll stock up my film loaders with 30.5 metres to ensure consistent results.
Without much experimentation, the Agfa Photo APX 100, Lucky 100 SHD and Technical Pan (unfortunately only 9 rolls left) managed to win me over on the first try.
I’m also very glad that forums like this one exist. You look at pictures whose look appeals to you and usually have the chance to find out the shutter speed, exposure and developer, so you can use those settings yourself. That’s how I’ve done it so far and I’ve always got it right. The film loaded into the camera should also be versatile. After all, at the start of a spontaneous ‘photo safari’, I don’t know what subject will come into view. I very rarely plan a photo outing and take the right film with me. Whatever’s in the camera just has to do.
I’d also like to have a bit of fun...
At the moment, an old Tura P400 @ 1600 ASA is waiting for its Adonal 120-minute 1+100 or 1+150 stand development.
I’d therefore be grateful for any sample images and details on the development process. Tips and tricks are welcome too!
Best wishes, Oliver
michael-kielgmxnet
Should I perform exposure of the CHS at 80 ISO for 11 minutes, or develop it for 12–13 minutes at 100–125 ISO?
What does ADOX say about A49, Xtol or D 76?
@ TR: The Rollei Retro 100 in A-49 is quite similar to the APX in Rodinal. Do you have a few exposure times to hand?
Best regards, Oliver
My opinion on the CHS 100: for 35mm, the worst choice from the CHS or Efke range. It didn’t impress me in either Rodinal or A49, though I actually preferred the coarse Rodinal grain to the mushy grain in A49. For larger formats, however, the film might have its charms.
The Rollei Retro is the APX 100. However, I found the results in A49 and Rodinal to be quite different. I develop APX 100 in A49 at a dilution of 1+2 for 16 minutes, which works well for my condenser enlarger. The grain is even finer than with Spur HRX and the sharpness is good.
