[rollei_list] Re: Rollei Retro 100/Agfa 100 - problems

  • From: "Richard Knoppow" <dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 18:20:41 -0700


----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Rabiner" <mark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 4:23 PM
Subject: [rollei_list] Re: Rollei Retro 100/Agfa 100 - problems


Hi Mark,

thanks for the reply.

On 29. okt.. 2009, at 23.43, Mark Rabiner wrote:

It would seem that Rollei Retro 100 is "equivalent in
characteristics to
Agfa APX 100 B&W film" according to Freestyle.
Which means its the same stuff repackaged.

Rollei Retro is indeed Agfa 100. I specifically searched it out after Agfa went bankrupt and bought 100 rolls. I prefer the scale it offers
over the other films I've tried.

Agfa black and white films I've always found quite a interesting
tangent to
take form the mainstream but a major issue being the
phantasmagorically long
development times. Much longer than Agfa admits on their little data
stubs.
And longer than Rodinal suggests on theirs.

That's very interesting data. The guy at the lab might be relying too hard on his charts, instead of actually seeing what's up with the
film....

First he told me 5 minutes for Tri-X, and 4:30 for Rollei/Agfa. Later (after he went and checked) he said 4 minutes for the Rollei/Agfa (in an automated JOBO at 24C). Obviously 4 minutes is too short. But 15-20 minutes? They're going to charge me for push processing at those times! Besides, I've received many rolls that were developed just fine. For some reason it's the last few batches I've sent, where the Tri-X (I use for 400 ISO) is fine, but the Rollei/Agfa is very thin.

Do you think raising the temperature (but staying at around 5 min)
would work ok?

I'll have another talk with the guy at the lab in the morning.

So we have to be able to be in the mood to do this it seems
unusual.. Stand
there in your darkroom over a development tank for 15 or 20 minutes. Do that and you'll get proper densities and you'll see exposure was
not the
problem. Don't do it and you get such thin negs you'll not know
what's going
on.

Sounds like what you're describing. Weird that it just started recently, I've been using the same film for years. The guy at the lab
started there a year ago, I think.

I suggest sticking with Ilford and Neopan and even Kodak black and
white
films. I hear Kodak has gotten the pink issue out.

I never cared for Ilford or Fuji B&W films, Kodak Tri-X is beautiful and gritty, but that's not always what I'm after. Agfa 100/Rollei Retro has a beautiful tonality to it. If need be I might have to set up my own processing. Anyone have a Jobo for sale? Needs to be at least semi automatic, no time to stand over the sink in a darkened
room these days....

Mark William Rabiner

Cheers,
Thor



If your lab guy is talking about 5 minutes development times for anything
you're going to the wrong lab  - that's too short.
I see he's talking about 4.  Wow!
These times are way short for consistent results for film development. When for some god forsaken reason a time seems to be that short we dilute more to make for a more workable time; for better consistency and a smoother look. Seems to me he's giving your negs not intermittent agitation but continuous. I'd get a lab in which that's not the case. Better yet do it
yourself.
My last developer of choice was Xtol 1:3
The last years I shot black and white it was Ilford Xp2 which gets run in C41 a processs which gets done right in non professional labs.

Mark William Rabiner


If your lab is using continuous agitation machines four minutes may be enough but I am also skeptacle. Black and white is so easy to develop yourself and needs very little equipment. It would be worth setting up and at least trying some. That is unless you must process a very large volume of film. I used Agfapan 100 when it was made and got good results with it with both D-76 1:1 (long developing time) and Rodinal 1:50. I used the latter for sheet film which looked very good. Currently I would suggest Xtol. Check times, Agfa film generally has long developing times. if they are long use Xtol full strength, if not use it diluted 1:1. You may have to experiment in the absense of developing charts developed by actual sensitometric measurement. Otherwise you have no idea of what the target contrast index is or effective film speed or anything else. Visual experiments are good enough for practical use. All this is a bit of a PITA but if you are doing work that is important to you, or work for money, you really have to establish reproducible processing conditions.

--
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

Other related posts: