I bought some of this stuff just to try, and also curious because some people are guessing this is what the Leica Monopan truly is. Soliciting any advice on how to shoot and develop this.
I want to slosh this around in Rodinal. Datasheet says don't do it. A couple people on the internet have successfully used Rodinal, so that makes me want to do it even more. Anybody here done this?
Looking for advice because this stock wasn't particularly easy for me to get and I'd rather not mess up.
I also bought a few rolls of this and haven't used it yet. I'm anxious to give it a try.
Let me do some digging. A friend of mine in TN was shooting it a few months back and developing his own. I think he posted somewhere along the way what developer he used and the develop times. I planned to use XTOL on the first roll I shoot as a starting place.
Adox recommends HR DEV, which I'm not about to buy just to develop my two rolls.
I'm looking for a way to be able to use the chemicals I already have. Or evidence that using the chemicals I have is such a bad idea that I should use a lab. Worst case scenario, I find a lab that offers HC110, because that's not a developer I'm familiar with and have no intention of buying.
I realize I am not helping with the present problem, perhaps I am even stating the obvious. Always do a test roll. After all, how would you know the ISO without a test roll? It's pretty unwise to shoot film without knowing what the ISO is. Alternatively, if you are willing to take a leap of faith by shooting without knowing the ISO, you should have no issue taking another leap of faith and use the developer you have.
You could put your important roll aside, buy another roll, use it as a test roll, and if it all looks good you can then develop your important roll.
The massive dev chart has plenty of entries for Adox HR-50 + Rodinal, so I think you'll be fine, but that's easy for me to say.
Whatever you do, if you do end up using Rodinal, whatever the outcome, please post your results.
theHUN wrote:
I realize I am not helping with the present problem, perhaps I am even stating the obvious. Always do a test roll. After all, how would you know the ISO without a test roll? It's pretty unwise to shoot film without knowing what the ISO is. Alternatively, if you are willing to take a leap of faith by shooting without knowing the ISO, you should have no issue taking another leap of faith and use the developer you have.
You could put your important roll aside, buy another roll, use it as a test roll, and if it all looks good you can then develop your important roll.
The massive dev chart has plenty of entries for Adox HR-50 + Rodinal, so I think you'll be fine, but that's easy for me to say.
Whatever you do, if you do end up using Rodinal, whatever the outcome, please post your results....Show more →
Honestly, that needed to be said. Now that I think about the problem this way, I may just make my peace with the risk and use my Rodinal.
“ADOX HR-50 is especially suitable for street and landscape photography.
In Portrait photography we recommend our dedicated HR-50 developer.
The film´s speed is enhanced to 50 ASA using ADOX´s new SPEED BOOST- technology.
The gamma is reduced so it becomes perfectly usable for pictorial photography in regular developers.“
So, two claims are made. One, the film can be rated at ISO 50 when using ADOX developer and that the gamma is reduced with their developer. The advantage then makes using this film for portrait photography possible. So, we can expect a higher ISO and better tonality using ADOX developers. At least, that is the claim. I’m interpreting “regular developers” as referencing their developers, otherwise I can’t make sense of their statement.
So does enhanced mean this a natively 25 ISO film being pushed to 50 or a 100 ISO being pulled to 50? Why not simply state increased or decreased?
I'm not sure what "street" use that is, but it must be a sunny one.
I have yet to get bad results from any lower-speed film (ISO 100 and lower) with Rodinal at 1:100, semi-stand for an hour. It's worth a try.
I usually use Rodinal at 18°C because several people whose experience I respect told me so (and because the original Rodinal "recipes" were at that temperature) but I've also done semi-stand with Rodinal at 20°C and gotten similar results with the same films.
For semi-stand, I presoak for a few minutes (while I prepare the developer), pour out the water, pour in the developer and set the timer, and agitate gently for one minute. Then I let it sit til the 30 minute mark, give it three more gentle agitations, and let it sit til the 1 hour mark. Pour off the developer and proceed with stop bath and fixer as usual.
I've found with this method that the graininess that many people associate with Rodinal is less apparent, but sharpness is still excellent. I've never experienced bromide drag (which can sometimes happen with stand development), likely due to those three agitations at 30 minutes.
I've used this for Pan-F, FP4, some of the Rollei Retro and RPX films, Fomapan 100, and plenty of others, everything came out fine. People say you lose speed with Rodinal but with stand development I don't think that's an issue. With a 1:100 dilution you just need to be sure you have enough Rodinal in there to fully develop the film; for a two-reel Paterson tank I do 6 mL of Rodinal and top off to 600 mL, which makes the tank very full, but I've read that anything less than 6 mL can be risky in terms of the developer exhausting before the film is fully developed. And I only process one roll at a time. If you do two rolls I don't know if 6 mL of Rodinal would be enough to do them both.
bjhurley wrote:
I have yet to get bad results from any lower-speed film (ISO 100 and lower) with Rodinal ...
Same here. Besides the usual B/W films from Ilford/Kodak/Fuji, Rodinal has also given me perfectly fine results on Agfa Copex Rapid, Tech Pan, and Kodak 2422. There is plenty of margin as long as one digitizes their negatives and embraces the imperfections of film.
DougVaughn wrote:
I also bought a few rolls of this and haven't used it yet. I'm anxious to give it a try.
Let me do some digging. A friend of mine in TN was shooting it a few months back and developing his own. I think he posted somewhere along the way what developer he used and the develop times. I planned to use XTOL on the first roll I shoot as a starting place.
Update: I developed one roll yesterday.
Rodinal 1+50, 20C, 15:00
Tank inversions for the first 45 seconds, two inversions at 8:00
Highlight density came out rather bulletproof. My common practice is to expose to the right. That is not a smart idea with this film. I found that my shots at box or even slightly under exposed seem to have better tonal separation. It's easier to get on a computer and lift shadows from this than to pull highlights.
You are welcome to look at these and tell me what you think. This was very much the experimental roll. When I do this again, it will be 1+100 for an hour, I think. I need to lower the contrast. https://app.box.com/s/35qqp8qjphrfd1huy8yydcsu7s7frt2v
It's viable, as long as you're aware of how easy it is to burn your highlights. Let us know how it goes. I haven't been able to get any of the Leica Monopan.
It's likely that I pushed my roll on accident. Adox says this is 50 speed at 18C, and I developed at 20C. I have no idea how much speed that added.
Unrelated: my HR-50 cartridge is a Fortecolor SP100 metal cartridge that got plastered over with Adox's HR-50 sticker. Anyone here used Fortecolor SP100? I looked it up and apparently it went extinct years ago. I'd never heard of it.
Oscarsmadness wrote:
Update: I developed one roll yesterday.
Rodinal 1+50, 20C, 15:00
Tank inversions for the first 45 seconds, two inversions at 8:00
Highlight density came out rather bulletproof. My common practice is to expose to the right. That is not a smart idea with this film. I found that my shots at box or even slightly under exposed seem to have better tonal separation. It's easier to get on a computer and lift shadows from this than to pull highlights.
I understand why you want to lower the contrast, but I will say the crushed blacks and super-clean mids and highs of your night shots have their own kind of beauty.
freaklikeme wrote:
the crushed blacks and super-clean mids and highs of your night shots have their own kind of beauty.
Night shoots may be the reason I choose HR-50 in the future. I almost like this better than what I got with Acros II. In daylight, however, I'd fully expect the film to retain either highlight detail or shadow detail, but not both.
Or, you can take Adox's advice and not use Rodinal like I did. Maybe the HR-DEV or one of the other recommended developers offer more conventional contrast.
I know I'm repeating myself, but I do think semi-stand development with Rodinal at 1:100 for an hour is worth a try with this film.
You can read a lot of conflicting information on the benefits/drawbacks of stand development but one fairly consistent observation is that the long times between agitations in semi-stand (you do a minute of gentle agitation at the beginning, and then three agitations at 30 minutes, nothing after that) lead to compensation effects that reduce/eliminate blown highlights, maximize shadow detail, and increase overall tonality. I've certainly seen that in my own semi-stand development, which coaxes more shades of gray out of films that are often described as high-contrast (Pan-F, for example). The graininess that people associate with Rodinal seems less evident than with conventional dilutions and development times, but you still get that nice Rodinal edge sharpness.
I don't use semi-stand for everything (it is certainly a time commitment), but I always use it when I'm not sure I exposed everything well, and I also use it for B&W films that have little information on development times or ideal developers (e.g., Foma Ortho 400). I have a roll of Rollei RPX 25 that I plan to develop semi-stand later today or tomorrow.
Yeah next roll is going to be semi stand, or stand. This first roll being a test roll, I know now what happens when I develop in a normal amount of time using a developer I'm not supposed to use.
In a few weeks I'm going to put some of these under an enlarger and see what comes out...
