I should also add that the times I get from the "Massive Development Chart" in at www.digitaltruth.com work for me. I also shoot a lot of Retro 400 in 35mm. Great stuff - a little rough and grainy, but I like it that way. My 100 foot roll is starting to get old, but that's ok too.
If you were in Massachusetts I'd know where to send you for great reliable service. If you network enough, you could probably find someone in NYC through this list or Flickr who'd be happy to host you in their darkroom.
Good luck, and please let us know what you come up with, and if possible post some results of both the thin and normal negatives.
Elias On Oct 30, 2009, at 10:35 AM, Elias Roustom wrote:
I find Retro 100 very good in D76 and Rodinal - I really like what I get from D76 stock. I always shoot it at 100. I'm probably as bad as any at getting the metering right, so it wouldn't surprise if I over (more likely) or under expose by two stops every so often, but I can't say I have too many examples of unusable thin negatives from that film. I develop by hand in small tanks at 20ºC.So what are you going to do, Shoot 3 frames at 100, 3 at 400 and 3 at 50, and see what you get back?Elias On Oct 29, 2009, at 9:17 AM, Thor Legvold wrote:I recently have had some problems having this developed, the negatives have come back very thin, pretty much useless.Today I picked up 4 more rolls, 2 tri-x 400 and 2 Rollei retro 100. The tri-x was beautiful, the retro not so. Now I've shot a lot of this film and never had any problems. I thought maybe there was some other issue, but then it occured to me that I started the 4 rolls with 100 ISO retro, went to NYC, shot a roll, changed to 400 (as it was getting dark and I was to attend a conference indoors the next few days), *changed the meter to 400 ISO*, kept shooting.Now, I can imagine being boneheaded enough to have forgotten to move the ISO on the meter from 400 back to 100 when I shot the last roll (on the last day of my trip, after the 2 400 ISO rolls), but I'm 110% certain that the meter (and film) were both set to 100 ISO when I started, and that film is just as thin (barely visible shadows on the negs) as the other.I spoke to the lab today, and they weren't sure what the problem was, but concured that it looked severely underdeveloped. We agreed that I will shoot another roll this afternoon and deliver it in the morning, and see what happens.So I wonder, has anyone had any problems with the Rollei Retro 100 ISO film?It was developed in Tetinol Ultrafine, 4 minutes (or more) @ 24C in a JOBO ATL1500.Best regards, Thor --- 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
--- 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
