Fomapan 400 + Rodinal Problem

S

sidxms

Messages
991
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi,

I am having issues with the above combination and I am unable to trouble shoot whats going wrong.
Camera is a Leica M6 with fresh batteries.
The first roll was exposed for 400 iso and developed 1+25 for 5.5 minutes with rodinal. The negatives were poor, either a case of underexposed or overdeveloped.
The second roll was exposed 200 iso ( apparently the film is 200iso anyways??) and developed for 1+25 for 5 minutes. The whole film was completely blank. This is bizzare as the film markings were completely gone too! (these were visible on roll #1)

Questions
Is it possible for Rodinal single shot to go off? It is about a year old and the last from a big bottle.
The second roll is consistent with no development and fixing right??
 
sidxms said:
Hi,

I am having issues with the above combination and I am unable to trouble shoot whats going wrong.
Camera is a Leica M6 with fresh batteries.
The first roll was exposed for 400 iso and developed 1+25 for 5.5 minutes with rodinal. The negatives were poor, either a case of underexposed or overdeveloped.
The second roll was exposed 200 iso ( apparently the film is 200iso anyways??) and developed for 1+25 for 5 minutes. The whole film was completely blank. This is bizzare as the film markings were completely gone too! (these were visible on roll #1)

Questions
Is it possible for Rodinal single shot to go off? It is about a year old and the last from a big bottle.
The second roll is consistent with no development and fixing right??
Click to expand...

Rodinal was famous for lasting forever, indeed Silverprint sing its praises for this on their website's product description. However in my experience the Agfa R09 which I've used does go off and like a switch too; one day it's fine, the next it gives blank negatives. In my mind, the myth of the long shelf life is now completely busted
 
Depends on the formulation. I'm still happily using a bottle started about 10 years ago with no issues - but this was the Agfa made one. R09 is known for NOT having the keeping properties of Agfa Rodinal.

If there were no edge markings at all, I'd go with the "no development took place" as 5 minutes should be enough to reveal them. The first - well, there is a difference between underexposed (little or no shadow detail) and overdevelopment (high contrast, black highlights).

Which Rodinal variant were you using?
 
It is the R09 single shot 500ml bottle so its developed 35 files at 1:25 conc
I got great results with the ilford pan 400 just a month ago with the same developer...so this is really pointing to a film fault...??
 
If it's R09, then the experience NickT had has been reported by others. My best guess (and it is only a guess) is that the developer was inactive for the second film. To be honest, I'm mildly surprised that the R09 lasted a year from what I can recall being said. There is at least one other Rodinal available, which claims to be the same as the final Agfa formulation, and this (if still available) will be what I switch to when my remaining bottles are exhausted/emptied. I stockpiled when I heard about Agfa going under...
 
I chickened out when I first read of Nick's problems and binned my basically empty bottle of RO9 and swapped to something with, apparently, better keeping power at least until more data is available on the various rodinals.
 
I know of three Rodinal variants - R09, APH-09 and Adonal. According to the Ag web site, APH-09 isn't the same as R09, and Adonal is the same as the final version of Rodinal as sold by Agfa (and therefore the only one I've used). I have no idea if they are all different other than what the Ag site says; and as I won't need to buy any more for a while (I have at least 4 unopened bottles of the Agfa one plus the one I'm using). I estimate I'm OK for the next 1,500 sheets or so of FP4. By the time I need to buy more, things may have changed.

One reason I picked Rodinal years ago was that the formula was published, so I could make my own if the worst happened.

If the formulae for the different versions are available, it may give a clue as to their keeping properties.
 
NickT said:
On Silverprint's current webpage, http://shop.silverprint.co.uk/Rodinal-R09-120-ml/product/71365/AFRO12/ they're still saying:

Amazing keeping properties - although the colour gets darker as it ages it keeps on working. We have a 1977 bottle which was still working ok when tested in 2002!

I wish they wouldn't say this, as it's just not true anymore.
Click to expand...

At least misleading, since what they would have that has kept well is Agfa Rodinal, rather than R09. I don't doubt that if they were still selling the same chemical that they have from 1977 it would be true.
 
I think after my cachecol stuff is finishes I may have a look at home brewing some rodinal.
 
There's some interesting information on R09/Adonal/Rodinal here. The information on the Fotoimpex site is interesting (if you read German - I haven't checked to see if there's an English page. I may do so tomorrow).
 
Since you're using 35mm film, you should always end up with a leader that won't be loaded into the tank (I'm assuming that 35mm film still has a leader, I haven't seen any for years). That means that you can test whether the developer works before committing a film to it by using the leader. I used to use the oddments from a bulk pack of HP3 to test fixer, but the method should work with developer as well. My Rodinal (which is the Agfa one) was bought in 2005 - I just checked back on the email from my supplier.
 
I am confused stephen.

how would the leader tell you if the developer is good? It is bit that is exposed you mean yeah?
I use the leader to tell if the fixer is good as it will go clear in the fixer
The developing it before will make it go black? Is that what you mean?
I guess that would confirm if its totally dead or not
 
That's what I meant. As the leader is exposed, it should go black if you use active developer. A few drops should work (of working strength solution) to see whether the developer is safe to use. I'm assuming that R09 really does have a binary working fine/totally inactive response to aging; but even if it doesn't, I'd guess that the "blackening time" should indicate the level of activity. If you try this, make sure that it's warm enough though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top