วีดีโอ

Maybe next time you should try 5 ml of the grain reducer instead of 10 ml?

I had heard of one way of reducing Rodinal grain which I haven't yet tried but not this one so thanks for trying this out. The operative word for me is "punch" and sadly the grain reducer does seem to remove some of Rodinal's punch and at 8x10 I couldn't see enough counterbalancing effect from the reducer to make it worthwhile at 8x10 at least but clearly it works. However I was really amazed at how unobtrusive the grain still seemed to be at 12X16. There may well be instances where grain reduction is more imperative and this reducer is a handy one to know about Thanks for all your efforts in this and all the other videos

This is an interesting experiment. I like the Rodinal with the additive, the tonal range is much longer than straight Rodinal and it seems just as sharp. I think what is happening here is that the salt - sodium chloride - Boric acid and the Borax are dropping the pH of Rodinal which will slow the developing action enough to prevent the excessive grain by 'under developing' the negative in comparison to straight Rodinal. Borax, being a much milder alkali than sodium hydroxide also acts as a buffer to hold the pH at a constant level. It would be interesting to see if longer development produces the same level of grain reduction. I'm not a fan of Rodinal, it's a very one dimensional developer, but the softer version does look nice.

boric acid and borax used in all classic developers as a fog reducer. It dissolve metal silver and remove's silver from unexposed areas. The cost is anemic images without contrast.

On the initial comparisons, it looked like there was some shouldering of the characteristic curve with the grain reducer. It was less obvious in the later prints, however I still think the windowsills vs. the walls still show a little compression of highlights. I have come to think that highlight separation is one of the big reasons people like Rodinal. However the reduction in grain is very pronounced - what a nice option to have, if you want to adjust the character depending on subject ( easier with 120 ! )

I think this is an interesting idea. For me rodinal is my go to developer. It's ideal for my use as I only get round to a developing session twice a year. As rodinal lasts for decades it suits me. With 120 film I'm not to concerned with the grain, but once you introduce Ilford 3200 35mm, stand development and pinhole photography, it can become problematic. This looks like an interesting solution

❤

Another nice video ❤, I like the one without Filter.

I've been trying to really explore Rodinal recently, (inspired by your great work!) different dilutions, different ISO, different development times. All towards getting negatives which will print well in my darkroom. So, this video is particularly interesting to me. Yes, I see a decrease in grain size, but it also reduces that great sense of illumination (the glow that you refer to?) that straight Rodinal imparts. The result, while nice, is more ordinary and eliminates what makes Rodinal special to me. FP4 is now my default film stock and I prefer Rodinal 1:25.

Thanks for this! During the video you compare the results of the augmented Rodinal to D-76. Is there an advantage of using the augmented Rodinal instead of just using D-76?

It certainly looks like the grain has been reduced, but I much prefer the straight Rodinal print. To my eye, the grain reduced image has lost much of its dimensionality vs the straight print. Additionally, I'm left wondering how the grain would compare if the grain reduced snip was developed to the same contrast as the non-reduced version.

John mate can you do a review on your rh timer I am thinking about buying one

I need that Moriyama grain

Hmmmm, it looks to me that the sky on the Rodinal print is a lot more interesting. Your comment on developing for an extra minute would be my next test and I might like the results for the sky. I used Rodinal 1:50 this weekend and the cloudy sky was really nice with a little extra burning in. I could be too fixed on clouds (have been all my life), the grain reduction and wider tonality of the test developer is very nice. Thank you for the test and formula!

I prefer the straight Rodinal however due to the difference in contrast on the negatives it would be interesting to see how they compare if the grain reduced version was given extra development so both were printed on grade 2.

Very interesting additive and impressive results indeed. I'm fairly new to developing (though I've been photographing since 1971) and I only use Rodinal as a developer. I think I would like to try this additive on higher ISO film some time, but for 100 ISO or lower I feel reluctant to reduce grain on the expense of glow and contrast.

Hello John, love your videos., clear instructions with a common sense approach. Have you read the article about Rodinal on the unblinkingeye Web site? There is a suggestion that Rodinal can be developed with addtives to achieve finer grain.

Your doing film photography a great service. Thanks.

When doing the contrast and zoom in footage, how are you synching movement of the two images? What software is this?

It looks exceptional, the reduced version.

How "pure" does Borax need to be as you can get 99.9% which is used for laundry..

It's difficult to tell on my little tablet screen, but my initial reaction to the negatives was that the strip with grain reducer were underdeveloped by about a stop and as you said John another minute wouldn't hurt. My personal preference is for smooth pictures, so the grain reduced negs certainly appear to perform better.

IMHO, both are very nice prints, as you said in the video!! My first reaction was that with the grain reducer, it might take a longer development time. My "grain reducer" is called HC-110, which I use instead of Rodinal when I don't want so much grain, e.g. for an ISO 400 film in a 35mm film camera. I also generally love the look of Rodinal. Thank you for the very informative video!

I prefer the grain reducer version.

The grain-reduced version seems to have more shadow detail but maybe that is because of the lower contrast.

Thanks John! This is as close to trying it myself as can be. Looking forward to more Rodinal content, it is one of my go-to. How about an episode on Ralph Gibson Tri-X + Rodinal look :)

I prefer the straight Rodinal image. If I want less grain, my preference is to use a larger negative.

Hi John, thanks for the videos you provide, they are very interesting and I learned a lot from you. Some time ago I asked you if you could try the Germain 777 or Dupont formula for us that I read from some book on Enry Cartier Bresson. If you can do it I will be very interested. Thank you .

Dear John. I love watching your videos about black and white photography, and development. I'm still new to all this, and still struggle to understand, and read my negatives. I haven't enlarged anything yet. But I think it must be awesome to watch you over the shoulder, listen to your knowledge at the same time. Thank you so much for your videos. Kind regards from Switzerland Heinz

Sodium sulfite for shure, it "dissolves" the grain like in D76

This is the great thing about doing our own B&W developing and printing. Experiments are always educational. There aren't many "right" or "wrong" answers, only suitability to the task at hand. It depends on the desired results. Personally I like Rodinal for what it is and the look it gives, especially in medium and large formats. If we want reduced grain, another way to do it is to use a bigger piece of film. 😉

I like both, but the fantastic thing here is that with a single type of development you can obtain two very different effects, so you can use them as needed. Truly remarkable. Compliments! thank you!

I used to make my own.

Greetings from Gibraltar.....why would you want to change the characteristics of THE developer of all time haha

Thanks for this very interesting video, mr. Finch! I’ve been looking to get into mixing this developer from the Netherlands. In my search I found the RAW chemicals of Bellini. Is their dissolved Sodium Metaborate solution workable for this formula? Do I need to worry about oxidation of the liquid? Thanks for your time and help!

Hi, I have just bought your book, it is great and I am looking to start to use it in my new darkroom (shed). Could I ask you who are the suppliers you get your chemicals from? Many thanks, Simon

the d23 replenished seems to have more punch on my screen.

I was in the darkroom this morning trying out this technique along with F stop printing, on a particularly difficult negative, made it so much easier to get a fairly decent image. Better than my first attempts, bit like layering a cake. These videos are invaluable. Thanks

HI John. brilliant explanation, i get a cold sweat with white bland sky`s, what if there is say a tree or church spire in the sky part of the picture, how would you get around burning the sky and not inadvertently darkening the tree etc, another cold sweat !!

John, I am curious about your comment about “pictorial tonality”. Could you explain what that statement means to you?

Amazing results, pushing at 1+200 dilution! Thanks so much for testing this out and sharing the results. I have a lot of Fomapan 400 coming for a shoot next week, and will be pushing that to 800. Will definitely give this stand development a go and see what the results are!

I’m a few months late catching up… but fancy joining in on the fx55 journey too.

My post seems to have been repeated for some reason I cannot work out. Apologies for that

Funnily enough a comparison between these 2 developers was the thing that I was curious about and you have provided that very video. So very much appreciated. That extra bit of speed from FX55 may be just what is needed in certain cases but where it is not needed then D23 wins for me if only by a short head While replenished D23 is slightly below box speed of 400, can I ask if unreplenished D23 gets to box speed at stock and if not does either the 1+1 or 1+3 dilutions give 400 rather like Perceptol which at 1+3 seems reach a higher speed, albeit only 320 like replenished D23 ?

John this is amazing, I'm a 99% d23 guy (occasionally some rodinal) but I've avoided using it with hp5 assuming it would be a bad combination (for no reason whatsoever) but I'm glad to see how well this combo works. D23 is just magic with my usual fp4 and panf. I'm actually taking some time away from film instead opting to use a Canon 5d classic because I just don't have the time or money for film at this stage of life. I know I will come back to film eventually as I just love the process but it sure is nice shooting digitally and being able to really work on my lighting and composition skills without the financial penalty for every shot! All the best to you as always ❤️

What's your opinion on XTOL ? Do you know it's clone from Czechia (W27, Fomadon Excel) ?

I really enjoyed that. I've used D23 (as well as many others!) but currently developing with Thornton's two bath variation. I have the ingredients to make up FX55 and will be getting to that soon. I will be looking out for those subtle effects.

The way you share your outstanding expertise on black and white developing here John is amazing. I just ordered your book and I am very much looking forward to it.

I’ve never used D23 but often use Perceptol. It seems to be D23 ++ in terms of composition. I wonder exactly what the difference might be in terms of results.

hey john,can i ask u a question ? my phenidone work very good in my FX55 but when i try to use E-72 with phenidone it did not work