Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Reuse Rodinal ?
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Darkroom
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun Nov 22, 2009 11:27 pm    Post subject: Reuse Rodinal ? Reply with quote
Can I reuse the Rodinal developer I used for one roll?
If so, how does the developing times change?


PostPosted: Mon Nov 23, 2009 12:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
If I remember correctly (it is years ago) it cannot be used again. Just found that also on wikipedia (but in german)


PostPosted: Mon Nov 23, 2009 12:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
thanks.


PostPosted: Mon Nov 23, 2009 12:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
But there is RODINAL SPECIAL, that can be reused (page 7)
http://vietnam-photo.com/pdf/agfa_datenblatt.pdf
(sorry, found only the german one...)

There is a discussion about that here:
http://www.flickr.com/groups/rodinal/discuss/72157622340517487/

Last edited by kds315* on Mon Nov 23, 2009 12:47 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Mon Nov 23, 2009 12:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ah, so that is the difference with "special"! I always wondered.
Anyone has experience with special?


PostPosted: Mon Nov 23, 2009 1:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Orio wrote:
Ah, so that is the difference with "special"! I always wondered.
Anyone has experience with special?
As far as I know they are total different stuff, the only connection is in the name. More than that I do not know, since I've never used Rodinal Special. I would not reuse Rodinal since it's common to use it at high dilutions and thus when used once it's almost surely depleted.

Cheers, Marty.


PostPosted: Mon Nov 23, 2009 4:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I think I'm in the super minority in that I don't love Rodinal simply because it is one use.
T-max may cost more but I still find it a better value.
Rodinal is difficult to dispose of for me (all are). My house is on a septic system and I refuse to use the toilet to dump developer.
I know the label says ok but, no way!


PostPosted: Mon Nov 23, 2009 8:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
In Italy we have so called "Ecological Stations", where you can take these liquids to for disposal. I have a can where I put exhausted liquids in, when it is full I take it to the eco station.


PostPosted: Mon Nov 23, 2009 12:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Rodinal is not expensive, so I doubt I would consider reuse.

I'm on a septic system too. I have been pouring it down the drain with no ill efects......yet. I may store it and dispose elsewhere.


PostPosted: Mon Nov 23, 2009 5:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Even it it could be poured down the drain, I would certainly NOT do it
and also rather collect it and bring it then to an ordered disposal station (we have those here to). Simply for eceological reasons.


PostPosted: Wed Dec 02, 2009 4:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I like one-shot developers in the summer because then the ambient room temperature often reaches 25°C or more and the tap water isn't as cold as it could be -> a lot of bottles cooling in the sink -> angry wife. A one-shot developer leaves me with just the fixer and stop bath which is more manageable.

Apart from that, I've see no problem with either kind. Will try a bottle of Fomadon LQN I recently got to try out (some say it's intended as a paper developer and not for film), the first one-shot I'll try apart from Rodinal and the old recipe Foma R09 (1+40 dilutions instead of Rodinal's 1+50 and so on).


PostPosted: Thu Jan 28, 2010 12:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Single use , especially when the dilution ratio is 1/100 or 1/75 .... The developper energy is almost completely exhausted when you process a 36 exposures 35mm film .... Same thing with the Neofin "Blue". These developpers are excellent for very slow films , 25 to 50 iso.


PostPosted: Thu Jan 28, 2010 1:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Scoo wrote:
Will try a bottle of Fomadon LQN I recently got to try out (some say it's intended as a paper developer and not for film)
You mean Foma(the producer) says that? Smile

Helios wrote:
These developpers are excellent for very slow films , 25 to 50 iso.
You mean rodinal? Have you tried Tri-X pushed to ISO1600 and developed in Rodinal 1+100? nice combination for reportage;)


PostPosted: Thu Jan 28, 2010 1:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
berraneck wrote:
Scoo wrote:
Will try a bottle of Fomadon LQN I recently got to try out (some say it's intended as a paper developer and not for film)
You mean Foma(the producer) says that? Smile

Nope, just some speculation on another forum I think (maybe a bit silly to keep that rumour going by re-posting it here) Wink Foma certainly labels it as a film developer, have not had time myself to use it yet but it will be the next one-shot developer I'll try out.

Ditto the high-dilution usage of Rodinal, it makes for a certain 'look'.


PostPosted: Thu Jan 28, 2010 1:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Scoo wrote:
Nope, just some speculation on another forum I think (maybe a bit silly to keep that rumour going by re-posting it here) Wink Foma certainly labels it as a film developer, have not had time myself to use it yet but it will be the next one-shot developer I'll try out.

Yay, i switched Fomadon LQN(negative) and Fomatol(positive).. sorry, you´re right.


PostPosted: Thu Jul 13, 2023 3:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ive tried it no.

1+50 rodinal used once, then immediately again - zero result.


PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2023 5:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
It deteriorates pretty quickly when mixed, even at 1:25.

Once used 1:25 will almost develop matte papers~ if it's used immediately after the film. The murky, muddy results aren't really worth the effort.

To me, the original Rodinal system made a lot of sense on my highly varied schedules. No puttering around with replenishing powders etc, which ended up with a lot of good developer wasted in my experience.

-D.S.


PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2023 6:19 pm    Post subject: Re: good Reply with quote
SPAM! See the url tags at the end?

Code:
[quote="victorpatrick"]Yes, you can reuse Rodinal developer for multiple rolls of film. Rodinal is a highly concentrated developer that has a long shelf life and can be reused. Reusing developer can help you save costs and is a common practice among film photographers. [URL=https://bitlife2.com/][color=#FFFFFF][size=1]Bitlife[/size][/color][/URL][/quote]


victorpatrick wrote:
Yes, you can reuse Rodinal developer for multiple rolls of film. Rodinal is a highly concentrated developer that has a long shelf life and can be reused. Reusing developer can help you save costs and is a common practice among film photographers. (url deleted)


PostPosted: Thu Aug 17, 2023 5:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
berraneck wrote:
You mean rodinal? Have you tried Tri-X pushed to ISO1600 and developed in Rodinal 1+100? nice combination for reportage;)


Tri-X developed this way worked very well for me, especially with Ilford's multigrade matte/pearl papers.

Loved it with tri-x at ASA/ISO 320 and 1:50.

-D.S.


PostPosted: Thu Aug 17, 2023 5:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Yes, it was aimed at home-developing where only a few plates were developed at a time (1890s)
Very practical, highly concentrated, not too sensitive to temperature and fast acting.

It fell out of love in the 70s, when grain was underrated but came back in the 90s.

https://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/Rodinal/rodinal.html

Doc Sharptail wrote:

To me, the original Rodinal system made a lot of sense on my highly varied schedules. No puttering around with replenishing powders etc, which ended up with a lot of good developer wasted in my experience.

-D.S.


I made a mistake recently and used 1:10 instead of 1:25 for AGFA APX100, luckily I realized the mistake before the 1st minute and made a quick calc in my head. Negs are salvageable.


PostPosted: Thu Aug 17, 2023 7:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
titrisol70 wrote:
I made a mistake recently and used 1:10 instead of 1:25 for AGFA APX100, luckily I realized the mistake before the 1st minute and made a quick calc in my head. Negs are salvageable.


Good for you. I sometimes (not often) am that quick on my toes...

-D.S.


PostPosted: Fri Aug 09, 2024 7:05 am    Post subject: commercial lab and they reused Rodinal Reply with quote
In the 1980s I worked in a commercial lab and they reused Rodinal for a week. They used a liter already diluted to develop about 5 36 exp 135 films. They kept it in the refrigerator between work days. I was surprised since it was a single-use developer but everything was of sufficient commercial quality. Regards
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Darkroom
Page 1 of 1