On Mar 9, 5:46 pm, "Nicholas O. Lindan" <s...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> "piterengel" <pslavi...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote
> "David Nebenzahl" wrote
>
> > > why would you want to ruin the potential results of
> > > a fine-grain film by developing it in Rodinal?
>
> My thoughts exactly.
>
> > I've developed TP in Rodinal 1+300 using a semi-static procedure,
> > obtaining a continuous tone negative and virtually no grain.
>
> Shoot two identical rolls of TP. Develop one in Technidol, the
> other in Rodinal. Make 11x14 prints. Compare.
>
> I kept hearing about how dilute Rodinal, Rodinal with sulfite,
> dilution-x of HC-110 give wonderful 'continuous-tone, fine grain'
> negatives. Being as cheap an stingy as the next man, I tried them -
> having used TP and Technidol since '83. The results _were_
> negatives, and they _were_ continuous tone, and the
> grain _wasn't_ monstrous - but the results were truly awful.
>
> TP in Technidol produces prints with the same low, smooth and
> creamy tones of 2 1/4 - 4x5. Nothing in the print makes you
> think 'contrast'.
>
> TP in Technidol looks a bit like TMax-100 in Microdol. However TP
> and TMax prints, when viewed side by side, are very different and there
> is no doubt which is which.
>
> > I have never used Technidol for TP
>
> It is possible that's why Rodinal looks good.
>
> If cost is an issue try POTA, it has to be the cheapest
> developer in creation.
>
> Better yet, have your girlfriend/wife buy you some Technidol for
> your birthday. It is the ideal gift: You need it, you want it (you
> will), and you won't buy it for yourself.
>
> --
> Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
> Darkroom Automation: F-Stop Timers, Enlarging
Metershttp://www.darkroomautomation.com/index2.htm
> n o lindan at ix dot netcom dot com
I hope silly answers are end now... So can we turn back on Rollei ATP
questions please? Thanks.
|
