lf-photo.org.uk

This Adox is doing my head in...

The picture here shows, from left to right, images exposed at IE50. The laptop screen was used as an impromptu light-box.

The first is developed in R09, 40:1 dilution, 9 minutes (per the great big dev chart) - I think it's under-developed. Note though there is no fogging of the edges, which tells me my loading and transfer to tank technique is light-safe (we won't look at clip damage or fingerprints!) and also tells me that the batch hasn't been fogged by e.g. airport x-rays.

The second is with Caffenol-C-L but with iodised salt instead of KBr. 70 minutes stand development. Not overdeveloped - there is still detail in the whites (very pale plywood) - but very fogged and somewhat coffee-coloured.

The last is with Caffenol-C-M with reduced sodium carbonate, 15 minutes with agitation every 30 seconds (this and the previous at the suggestion of Reinhold at caffenol.blogspot.com) and still has excessive fogging though it doesn't have the staining.

None of these have image information greater than 50% of that available from the scanner - an image of sorts can be scanned but it requires maximum gain, a lot of black crushing, and adjustment of the gamma to get anything usable, and even then it's not good. For comparison, FP4+ in ID11 produces a negative with a range of 80 or 90%...

I'm head scratching here. More time in R09? Less time in Caffenol? Less coffee in the Caffenol? More restrainer? Half concentrate? It's been thirty years since I did this sort of thing.

Neil

I have good results with Chs100 in D76 1+1, rodinal 1+25, Pyrocat-MC 6+4+300 and FX-37 1+3. Maybe a highly diluted developer is not a good match with Chs film.

Hello Neil,
If I was you, I'll try this film in my favourite developer, the one I use the most often and which has proven apt to produce the excellent negs I produce.
This way you will change only *one* parameter at a time (this time, film) and you could gather solid evidence of what is wrong.
In your tests, the film is new, the developer is new and the results are new (as you do not know how a "normal" neg looks in these devs.)

I'd check your R09, if it's Calbe (Orwo) RO9 and has recommended dilutions of 1+40 it's old stock and it has poorer keeping properties than genuine Rodinal - now sold under other names but still made in the same former Agfa plant.

The Calbe version of R09 is an older formulation than modern Rodinal and is derived from a pre WWII version, it's missing an anti oxidant.

The actual speeds of EFKE/Adox films in the names PL25, PL50, PL100 are for Tungsten lighting, they are slightly faster in daylight.

However I'd check that dev time as well because it's far too short, I've just looked at my Rodinal times and combinations and they were always the same as Agfa's own recommendations although I'd also done Zone systems tests as well.

Rodinal and Tmax 100 (@ 50EI), Agfa APX100 (@ 100EI) and EFKE PL25 (@ 40EI) would all get 17 minutes in Rodinal at 1+50 @ 20°C, that's nearly double your time of 9 minutes - they all gave great easy to print negatives.

The Massive Development Chart doesn't tally with reality in many instances.

Ian

Thanks for that, Ian. The 40:1 R09 came from the great big development list; 50:1 is recommended on the bottle which I purchased only last week.

I need to go out and shoot some more test negatives - I got bored with the workman still life and started building the lightweight camera on it - but given the weather this week it might be a few days.

The longer dev time was certainly my first thought, but I was foolishly guided by the list. Annoyingly, Adox don't list recommended developers or times on the manufacturer's page.

Neil

Neil, it gets costly and time consuming testing film & developers to get the optimum exposure/dev time for a combination. I've always used 35mm to do the initial testing using Zone system techniques then fine tuned with LF film.

Ian

Ah, but my nearest 35mm camera is on Skye!

Neil Barnes wrote:Ah, but my nearest 35mm camera is on Skye!

Plenty of dirt cheap ones on eBay, or just take a quick trip to your nearest charity shop!

Or one of us could loan one

Ian

Well, there is that... but while the offer is appreciated, let's let it ride for now.

After all, I have a box and a bit of sheets to go through, and I'm not far off now, even for the coffee method.

Neil

Hah. Cracked it, at least with R09@23C: 2 min prewash, 17 mins, slosh it around every thirty seconds, 1 min wash, 4 min fix.

Finally, a picture with some contrast and shadow detail - it scans very nicely.

And the choice of subject? Well, perhaps the less said the better!: Tomato tree, test card, tomato tree, test card, ah, they're almost the same!

Thanks.

Neil