Stand Develop Pan-F in Rodinal 1:100?
Old 01-31-2012   #1
Teuthida
-
 
Teuthida is offline
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 638
Stand Develop Pan-F in Rodinal 1:100?

Anyone tried?
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-31-2012   #2
kdemas
ʎlʇuǝɹǝɟɟıp sƃuıɥʇ ǝǝS
 
kdemas's Avatar
 
kdemas is offline
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,629
Yup, done it many times. I pre-soak for a minute in water before development. Turns out well (1 hour stand, agitate first minute then park it). If I can find a sample I'll post it later.

Kent
__________________
------------------------------------------------------------
Open Iris. Life, Captured.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-31-2012   #3
ChrisN
Striving
 
ChrisN's Avatar
 
ChrisN is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 4,402
I've got a few sample images in the big Rodinal stand dev thread, at post #131.

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/foru...&postcount=131
__________________
Chris


"The mission of photography is to explain man to man and each to himself. And that is the most complicated thing on earth."
Edward Steichen

RFF Gallery

Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-31-2012   #4
gb hill
Registered User
 
gb hill's Avatar
 
gb hill is offline
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: North Carolina
Age: 54
Posts: 5,000
I've got 3 rolls left of Pan F to shoot. I like what Chris had done with his 1:200 stand method with Rodinal. Saving it for this spring/summer but our winters have been so mild I just might have to shoot a roll soon.
__________________
flickr
ipernity
blog
CanonetChronicles
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-31-2012   #5
Mablo
Registered User
 
Mablo is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,853
PanF+ is quite unpredictable in Rodinal IMO. It's very nice when everything goes well but then suddenly you will find your negs with strong contrast for seemingly no reason at all. The other thing I don't like about is it doesn't seem to respond well when you decrease agitation or shorten dev time. Sometimes it helps, sometimes it doesn't.
__________________
Mablo
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2012   #6
Teuthida
-
 
Teuthida is offline
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 638
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mablo View Post
PanF+ is quite unpredictable in Rodinal IMO. It's very nice when everything goes well but then suddenly you will find your negs with strong contrast for seemingly no reason at all. The other thing I don't like about is it doesn't seem to respond well when you decrease agitation or shorten dev time. Sometimes it helps, sometimes it doesn't.
First, thank you everyone for your reponses. This forum is a great resource.

As for the above response, I've heard this elsewhere, thus my question to the forum.

I've decided to use the remaining Pan-F I have for a documentary assignment I'm doing. Not time sensitive, but need to know the results will be acceptable from a technicl standpoint. It's all daylight shooting, hence the low ISO. But I'd like to develop it myself instead if farming it out.

If not Rodinal, what would you suggest for results that will eventually be scanned i.e. not crazy grain or contrast?
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2012   #7
Austerby
Registered User
 
Austerby's Avatar
 
Austerby is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Fircombe
Posts: 950
I've had good results using both Perceptol and ID11 1+1. I tend not to use long development times as I've had problems with bromide drag in the past, so Rodinal 1+25 or 1+50 has been fine too.
__________________
Austerby
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-05-2012   #8
---f
one day at a time
 
---f is offline
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 267
I'll have to give this 1:200 a shot. I've got a couple hundreds roll of PanF 50/120 format in the freezer. Worth testing a few rolls.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisN View Post
I've got a few sample images in the big Rodinal stand dev thread, at post #131.

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/foru...&postcount=131
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-06-2012   #9
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
 
Trius's Avatar
 
Trius is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Rochester, NY & Toronto area
Posts: 7,746
As far as I have been able to discern, stand development in Rodinal is a waste of time. At 1:100, I highly doubt there is any benefit to develop longer than about 19 minutes. This dilution develops to exhaustion. The shot below is PanF+ at 1:100 for 19 minutes, with initial 30 seconds agitation, then no agitation afterward. Further sitting in liquid doesn't help the grain or emulsion stability, IMO. And it wastes my time.


__________________
My Gallery Flickr
Fine grain is a bourgeois concept

Happiness is APX100 and Rodinal 1:100

A bunch o cameras. Does it really matter?
http://weedram.blogspot.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-06-2012   #10
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
 
Trius's Avatar
 
Trius is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Rochester, NY & Toronto area
Posts: 7,746
Same treatment here, though with Hexanon 40/2 as opposed to Zuiko 28/2.8 above.



Full size here
__________________
My Gallery Flickr
Fine grain is a bourgeois concept

Happiness is APX100 and Rodinal 1:100

A bunch o cameras. Does it really matter?
http://weedram.blogspot.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-06-2012   #11
ChrisN
Striving
 
ChrisN's Avatar
 
ChrisN is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 4,402
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trius View Post
As far as I have been able to discern, stand development in Rodinal is a waste of time. At 1:100, I highly doubt there is any benefit to develop longer than about 19 minutes. This dilution develops to exhaustion. The shot below is PanF+ at 1:100 for 19 minutes, with initial 30 seconds agitation, then no agitation afterward. Further sitting in liquid doesn't help the grain or emulsion stability, IMO. And it wastes my time.
Mike Johnston (The Online Photographer) recently had a very interesting post about sensitometry and the use of the densitometer. He relates the advice from guru Phil Davis:

"When I first tried extended development in dilute Rodinal—1:100 or 1:150 for 45 minutes or an hour, I think it was—I mentioned in an email to Phil that I'd gotten very pretty negatives but that I'd nearly driven myself out of my gourd with boredom. "Anyway, it works," I concluded. About half a day later Phil emailed me back and told me to try the exact same technique, but for 18 minutes or whatever it was. I did, and the negatives were...to my amazement, essentially identical with the first ones. He had run some quick tests in the intervening time and determined what I conveyed to you above."
__________________
Chris


"The mission of photography is to explain man to man and each to himself. And that is the most complicated thing on earth."
Edward Steichen

RFF Gallery

Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-06-2012   #12
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
 
Trius's Avatar
 
Trius is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Rochester, NY & Toronto area
Posts: 7,746
Chris: It's nice with the Interwebs agree with me.

I came to the conclusion a couple of years ago, but didn't publish. Oh, if only I had; I'd likely be filthy rich now. And the object of flickr scorn.
__________________
My Gallery Flickr
Fine grain is a bourgeois concept

Happiness is APX100 and Rodinal 1:100

A bunch o cameras. Does it really matter?
http://weedram.blogspot.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-06-2012   #13
Freakscene
I've chosen darkness
 
Freakscene's Avatar
 
Freakscene is offline
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Zone I
Posts: 1,112
About 20 minutes is the maximum that dilute Rodinal needs under normal circumstances. The only exception is if you use a larger volume than minimum - e.g. if you develop a single roll in a litre of 1+100 or 1+200. In that case you have about as much stock per roll as you would if you developed 4 rolls in a litre of 1+25 or 1+50 and it takes longer to exhaust. I have some test results somewhere that showed that Rodinal used this way exhausted in (I think) about 35-40 minutes. Any more is probably hurting more than it helps, and as Mike said, will drive anyone who is short on patience to distraction.

Marty
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-06-2012   #14
kdemas
ʎlʇuǝɹǝɟɟıp sƃuıɥʇ ǝǝS
 
kdemas's Avatar
 
kdemas is offline
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,629
Quick side note... If you're shooting a project with Pan F make sure you develop it in a reasonable time period. I have left a few laying around for a couple months and the images degraded to the point they weren't usable, or visible!

Ilford mentions it in the documentation, they mean it. Inside a month is their recommendation, a few weeks max is mine.

Beyond that...great film and thread!
__________________
------------------------------------------------------------
Open Iris. Life, Captured.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-06-2012   #15
Freakscene
I've chosen darkness
 
Freakscene's Avatar
 
Freakscene is offline
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Zone I
Posts: 1,112
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdemas View Post
Quick side note... If you're shooting a project with Pan F make sure you develop it in a reasonable time period. I have left a few laying around for a couple months and the images degraded to the point they weren't usable, or visible!

Ilford mentions it in the documentation, they mean it. Inside a month is their recommendation, a few weeks max is mine.
Absolutely. Pan F has an even shorter latency than TMZ or Delta 3200, which I've always found physico-chemically baffling considering how much light an ISO50 emulsion has strike it to make an image, but it's demonstrably true.

Develop right away.

Marty
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 21:55.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.