Thank you. By the way, I'm passing this all on to my friend who is also
interested in such things. He just needs to get on here, doesn't he?!
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 3:01 PM, Dennis P <dlp4777@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Apr 17, 2015, at 11:10 AM, Janet Cull wrote:
"I generally use the late version Rodinal at 1-50..."
Dennis, do you find the new Rodinal to be different from the old? When
you say, "the late version", is that the same as R09? Thanks for your
reply.
Janet
To me the subtle difference between similar developers is impossible to
see without a very controlled, all things the same, side by side
comparison. Even then the results are always surprisingly similar. I
have tested several developers against each other and find the difference
is not enough to make or break an image. You can over time develop
personal concepts of what the character of your favorite developers is but
that is always anecdotal and subjective and dependent on way too many
variables.
The reason I still use Rodinal sometimes is because it is cheap and one
shot. I also like the slight bluish cast it seems to give my large format
film. I do think that to me Rodinal makes beautiful looking negatives...
as opposed to Pyro with it's ugly yellowish brownish or greenish color.
That is however no indication of how much you will like the print.
I also often use Beutlers formula and find it nearly identical to using
Rodinal though I think Beutlers gives me just a tiny bit more density in
the middle tones.
I have used the R09 and didn't like that it went so dark in the bottle...
though that is supposedly no indication. I really doubt I would personally
be able to see and difference at all between the new and the old formulas
and certainly not one that is significant.
IMO
Dennis
