[rollei_list] Re: Planar 2.8 coverage
- From: eroustom@xxxxxxxxxxx
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2007 14:55:09 +0000
I should be more careful making such statements, I'm still new at this. I
should have said the roll that was processed in Rodinal seems smoother to me
than the rolls I've done in Ilfotec HC. I understand that as a difference in
grain.
This only gets more interesting with every new variable. Ilfotec HC has been
very good, long storage life, easy dilutions.
E.
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: "Richard Knoppow" <dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "ERoustom" <eroustom@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2007 5:05 AM
> Subject: [rollei_list] Re: Planar 2.8 coverage
>
>
> > Thanks! This was my first roll in Rodinal, and since
> > Ilford's spec sheet gave one time, and Rodinal gave
> > another, I split the difference, so maybe not enough
> > time. and maybe back to 5 seconds every 10 minutes. I use
> > a stainless steel tank, agitating for the first 10
> > seconds of each minute. Ilftoec HC never gave me this
> > problem, but the grain is much much finer with Rodinal.
> >
> > I wonder though about how tightly the camera is holding
> > the film. This is the same roll that gave me the strange
> > light leak across frames.
> >
> > Thanks again all.
> >
> > Elias
> >
> Curious about the grain. I've never used Ilfotec HC,
> which is similar to Kodak HC-110 but would expect it to have
> somewhat finer grain than Rodinal. I've used Rodinal mostly
> for sheet film and have never had any problems with it but I
> generally use finer grain developers in tanks. I think the
> main thing with tanks is to have a long enough development
> time to average out irregularities in agitation. However, if
> there are surge effects in the tank they are likely to be
> the same even if the time is increased. The most common
> surge marks in inversion type tanks are increased
> development at the edges of the film due to turbulent flow
> in the interstices of the reels, and sprocket hole marks due
> to turbulent flow through these holes, also causing a
> localized increase in development.
> If you find the problem _is_ due to surging I can only
> suggest using a different type of reel or rotating the tank
> along with inverting it. I was taught this trick long ago
> and its become a habit.
>
> ---
> Richard Knoppow
> Los Angeles, CA, USA
> dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> ---
> Rollei List
>
> - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
> in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>
> - Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
> 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>
> - Online, searchable archives are available at
> //www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
>
---
Rollei List
- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Online, searchable archives are available at
//www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
Other related posts:
