Re: [Leica] How'd they do that?

[Christer Almqvist <christer@almqvist.net>]

>Roy Feldman wrote:
>>
>>  The highlights in the photos are a pure white, then a real drop
>> in density with the shadows being dark but with detail discernable.
>>
>
>When I visited Tom A in Vancouver recently, and we were looking
>at pictures in magazines and books, every now and then I'd come across a
>picture with those tonal qualities.  Every time, I would throw my arms up
>in dispair and ask incredulously "How do you *get* tonal qualities like
>that?"
>
>Tom's answer was always the same: "Potassium ferrocyanide"
>
>:)
>
Although I am an Xtol  freak (particularly with Delta 100 shot at 200),  I
sometimes feel the need for more punchy prints than I get with Xtol and
Delta 400, 3200 and Tri-X under certain conditions. I then usually go for
Rodinal and conventional film. I am currently using Rodinal with HP5plus
because that film was on special offer and I bought a few bricks. I see
from the Rodinal label that it contains "potassium hydroxide" so this may
work  in a similar way to the "potassium ferrocyanide" mentioned by Tom A.
But I am not a chemist, so please enlighten me.

I shoot HP5 plus with an e.i. of 800 and develop in Rodinal for 12 min in
68°F  and I agitate the first 30 secs and then 10 secs every minute. I have
photographed a grey card and measured the densites for the different zones
and plotted the result and then compared it to the standard densities
graph. Low zones were a maximum of one half stop thinner than the standard,
and the high zones pretty close to the standard with zone iX one half stop
denser than standard. I have done similar tests for other  film developer
combinations, and the HP5plus/Rodinal 1+25 graph is very close to Delta 100
shot at 200 and developed for 12-14 mins in Xtol 1+1. I  have not been able
to get anything better densities with any other film developer combination
at any developing time and exposure index combination that I have tried,
but read the bottom paragraph below on development times.

I also tried Rodinal with Delta 3200. I did not manage to get more real
speed than about 1000 out of it. Comparing the HP5 prints and the Delta
3200 prints I found the HP5 low light portraits having much more shadow
detail and much less grain. I made a few shots inside a subway station and
the HP5 won hands down, better blacks and whites and the greys are grey,
not muddy. The only time Delta 3200 looked as good as HP5 (both in Rodinal
1+25) was night photos of  streets with carlights and street lamps
reflected in the wet asphalt.

Do not take my development times as final. For Rodinal 1+25  with HP5plus
Agfa say 8 min for e.i. 400 but the Cookbook says 6 min. Agfa say 1+50 is
not recommended for this film but the Cookbook has  1+50 times for e.i. 400
and 800 and even 1600. Ilfords Data sheet agrees with the Cookbook, but
perhaps that is just a copy of  Ilford's data....... or not because Ilford
does not give any times for e.i.1600. (Writing this got me confused, how
about you reading it?) Anyway, the Cookbook says 8 mins for 1+25 and e.i.
800 and this does give printablee negatives, but I prefer 12 mins.  Make
you choice!