Rodinal - Reducing that Grain?

Rodinal is one of my favourite developers and I love the way it looks but sometimes I might want to reduce the grain, especially if I want to print big from a small negative. Today I try a method sent to me by a Patreon of my channel, Tim.
Follow my journey from taking the photograph to processing and scanning the negatives. I then print them big so you can see for yourself if the grain is reduced.
Thanks for watching! If you like these videos why not become a Patreon of Pictorial Planet? Your patronage will support the making of these videos, my informative website, and the writing of my second book full of photographic goodness.
John Finch
Pictorial Planet
Other Rodinal videos in my channel:
Getting the Best From: Rodinal Part 4 - Making Rodinal
• Getting the Best From:...
Getting the Best From: Rodinal Part 3 - Stand Development
• Getting the Best From:...
Getting the Best From: Rodinal Part 2 - Best Dilutions for Scanning and Darkroom Printing.
• Getting the Best From:...
Getting the Best From: Rodinal Part 1
• Getting the Best From:...
Website: www.pictorialpl...
Patreon: / johnfinch
My Book: www.pictorialpl...
#Rodinal

[@StephenPrior-mh3gd]

I prefer the straight Rodinal however due to the difference in contrast on the negatives it would be interesting to see how they compare if the grain reduced version was given extra development so both were printed on grade 2.

[@diegomilanese3930]

I like both, but the fantastic thing here is that with a single type of development you can obtain two very different effects, so you can use them as needed. Truly remarkable. Compliments! thank you!

[@PictorialPlanet]

Yes, very insightful, Diego! Two developers in one.

[@erichstocker8358]

Loved both this episode and the next. I was surprised at how well the grain reducer worked. I've always enjoyed the contrast and "sharpness" of negatives developed in rodinal. However, I didn't enjoy the large grain. So, I don't use Rodinal very much or mix a little with HC110 for stand development. But I might experiment with this approach. I appreciate the formula provided in the second episode.

[@user-ss6zt2mo1l]

Absolutely amazing the look of both the photos and from 35mm. Would be interesting to see a slight reduction in the 10ml grain reduction amount to 6ml and shot again. Would love to see it in medium format. Great videos as always !!

[@stephendeakin2714]

It's difficult to tell on my little tablet screen, but my initial reaction to the negatives was that the strip with grain reducer were underdeveloped by about a stop and as you said John another minute wouldn't hurt. My personal preference is for smooth pictures, so the grain reduced negs certainly appear to perform better.

[@PictorialPlanet]

Thanks, Stephen!

[@davidottman9501]

This is the great thing about doing our own B&W developing and printing. Experiments are always educational. There aren't many "right" or "wrong" answers, only suitability to the task at hand. It depends on the desired results. Personally I like Rodinal for what it is and the look it gives, especially in medium and large formats. If we want reduced grain, another way to do it is to use a bigger piece of film. 😉

[@chesslover8829]

I totally agree.

[@PictorialPlanet]

I like that!

[@canoedoctor]

I've been trying to really explore Rodinal recently, (inspired by your great work!) different dilutions, different ISO, different development times. All towards getting negatives which will print well in my darkroom. So, this video is particularly interesting to me. Yes, I see a decrease in grain size, but it also reduces that great sense of illumination (the glow that you refer to?) that straight Rodinal imparts. The result, while nice, is more ordinary and eliminates what makes Rodinal special to me. FP4 is now my default film stock and I prefer Rodinal 1:25.

[@PictorialPlanet]

Glad you're really getting into Rodinal. Please drop me an email sometime.

[@canoedoctor]

@@PictorialPlanet Will do! When you get an email from Red River Canoe & Paddle, that's me

[@canoedoctor]

@@PictorialPlanet I will. When you get an email from Red River Canoe & Paddle, that's me.

[@user-qm8sx8ne8g]

I had heard of one way of reducing Rodinal grain which I haven't yet tried but not this one so thanks for trying this out. The operative word for me is "punch" and sadly the grain reducer does seem to remove some of Rodinal's punch and at 8x10 I couldn't see enough counterbalancing effect from the reducer to make it worthwhile at 8x10 at least but clearly it works. However I was really amazed at how unobtrusive the grain still seemed to be at 12X16. There may well be instances where grain reduction is more imperative and this reducer is a handy one to know about Thanks for all your efforts in this and all the other videos

[@PictorialPlanet]

I hope others try it and play with amounts, times, etc. between us all this could prove to be useful.

[@vadimbecker9934]

boric acid and borax used in all classic developers as a fog reducer. It dissolve metal silver and remove's silver from unexposed areas. The cost is anemic images without contrast.

[@PictorialPlanet]

Good comment. More development should fix that :) increased developer time increases contrast, using a lower EI increases negative thickness.

[@toomuchrose]

Potassium Bromide or Benzotriazole are used as restrainers to reduce fog in developers. Borax and Boric acid don't affect fog by restraining development. Borax is an alkali accelerator, used to activate the developing agents which are usually Metol, Hydroquinone and Phenidone. It is used in soft working fine grain developers. Boric acid is rarely used in film developers but it is used in some fixers. Neither Borax or Boric acid are silver solvents, sodium sulphite is a solvent and is used in many developers for this purpose. It is also the preservative which prevents the developing agents from oxidising.

[@hoggif]

@@toomuchrose Borax and boric acid is sometimes used as a buffer. IIRC rodinal tends to be quite alkaline and borax/boric acid mix buffer addition would raise pH. That would make it less active that is probably one reason for reduced development. For real grain analysis we'd need a more developed one to have equal density to compare with.

[@toomuchrose]

@@hoggif Not quite. Borax and Boric acid wouldn't increase the pH of Rodinal, which is about 11.5 for 1:50 dilution, it would simply keep it at the same level throughout the chemical reaction of the development process - this is what buffering means. And increasing the pH of Rodinal would make it more active, not less, for a given dilution. You can make any developer more active by increasing the pH level by adding a stronger alkali, for instance adding sodium carbonate to D76 increases the contrast because the higher pH increases the developer activity and so increases the contrast if you keep the development time the same as for normal D76. The normal pH of D76 is given by Kodak and Ilford (ID11) as 8.6 - 8.7. adding 5gms of sodium carbonate to a litre of D76 (or ID11) will increase the pH to about 9.5.

[@hoggif]

@@toomuchrose Your right. I have indeed sayd "increase pH" when I should have said decrease pH based on my rule of thumb assumption on pH. I did not measure or calculate pH for buffer but as a rule of thumb I think pH 9-11 is typical for borax buffer depending on how much each item is used. Increasing pH would indeed also make it more alkaline ie more active (for rodinal).

[@heinzhagenbucher4714]

Dear John. I love watching your videos about black and white photography, and development. I'm still new to all this, and still struggle to understand, and read my negatives. I haven't enlarged anything yet. But I think it must be awesome to watch you over the shoulder, listen to your knowledge at the same time. Thank you so much for your videos. Kind regards from Switzerland Heinz

[@PictorialPlanet]

Thank you for you kind comment, Heinz.

[@ajbrennan6456]

Heinz, you have to grab the bull by the horns my friend, you will be blown away. regards

[@heinzhagenbucher4714]

@@ajbrennan6456 This bull is massive, and only buckets of knowledge will overcome it. 🤣 I'll try step by step. 😉

[@hansjzeller]

IMHO, both are very nice prints, as you said in the video!! My first reaction was that with the grain reducer, it might take a longer development time. My "grain reducer" is called HC-110, which I use instead of Rodinal when I don't want so much grain, e.g. for an ISO 400 film in a 35mm film camera. I also generally love the look of Rodinal. Thank you for the very informative video!

[@PictorialPlanet]

Thanks!

[@jdebultra]

I can see the reduction in grain but also the slightly reduced acutance. They both have that Rodinal graphite look but perhaps the standard has a slightly more layered, 3 dimensional look. When I drew using graphite, you could get a nice glow and 3D look by layers of different hardness in the graphite. I love Rodinal and it's versatility. It works exceptionally well with FP4. I prefer the grain and I use Rodinal for 35 and 120. I use the same mix and time as you. I also love to stand develop with it as well, 1+100 for 1 hour. For 35, I will gently turn it once at the 30 min mark to prevent the sprocket drag.

[@PictorialPlanet]

Thanks for your comment! Yes, FP4 and Rodinal, lovely combination!

[@tonyhirst3628]

It looks exceptional, the reduced version.

[@PictorialPlanet]

Thanks, Tony!

[@tonyhirst3628]

@@PictorialPlanet with condenser illumination, this would look incredible, I'm gonna try it.

[@AI-Hallucination]

I need that Moriyama grain

[@toomuchrose]

This is an interesting experiment. I like the Rodinal with the additive, the tonal range is much longer than straight Rodinal and it seems just as sharp. I think what is happening here is that the salt - sodium chloride - Boric acid and the Borax are dropping the pH of Rodinal which will slow the developing action enough to prevent the excessive grain by 'under developing' the negative in comparison to straight Rodinal. Borax, being a much milder alkali than sodium hydroxide also acts as a buffer to hold the pH at a constant level. It would be interesting to see if longer development produces the same level of grain reduction. I'm not a fan of Rodinal, it's a very one dimensional developer, but the softer version does look nice.

[@brianschwellinger7851]

Hmmmm, it looks to me that the sky on the Rodinal print is a lot more interesting. Your comment on developing for an extra minute would be my next test and I might like the results for the sky. I used Rodinal 1:50 this weekend and the cloudy sky was really nice with a little extra burning in. I could be too fixed on clouds (have been all my life), the grain reduction and wider tonality of the test developer is very nice. Thank you for the test and formula!

[@PictorialPlanet]

Thank you for your comment! I too am a lover of skies in my photographs. I agree the Rodinal sky was better. I've found FX55 gives great skies, have you tried it at all? Recommended with FP4.

[@brianschwellinger7851]

@@PictorialPlanet Thank you for writing back. I admire your adventures and tests! I am sticking with a few film types and working on basics before branching out. Working out filters, zone metering/ exposure and development times, split grade printing, etc., has been a lot to grasp. I am preparing to travel to some special places this summer and good exposure / development technique along with understanding development times has been plenty to learn. Prints are easier to make now, and I hope to have some good negatives worth printing on fiber paper upon my return. I think your audience is more advanced than me, I imagine the scales being used and mixing going on around the planet as I type. Your videos are helping a great deal, thank you!

[@IslandPink]

On the initial comparisons, it looked like there was some shouldering of the characteristic curve with the grain reducer. It was less obvious in the later prints, however I still think the windowsills vs. the walls still show a little compression of highlights. I have come to think that highlight separation is one of the big reasons people like Rodinal. However the reduction in grain is very pronounced - what a nice option to have, if you want to adjust the character depending on subject ( easier with 120 ! )

[@PictorialPlanet]

Yes, an interesting option. I do like the straight Rodinal though, grain and all. As you point out, the highlights are lovely!

[@jondr.8933]

I think this is an interesting idea. For me rodinal is my go to developer. It's ideal for my use as I only get round to a developing session twice a year. As rodinal lasts for decades it suits me. With 120 film I'm not to concerned with the grain, but once you introduce Ilford 3200 35mm, stand development and pinhole photography, it can become problematic. This looks like an interesting solution

[@PictorialPlanet]

Rodinal's longevity is one reason I always have a bottle on my shelf. It has never me down. Ilford 3200 in 35mm, developed in Rodinal, that's something I should do a video on!!!! 😮

[@tarasb7425]

Thanks John! This is as close to trying it myself as can be. Looking forward to more Rodinal content, it is one of my go-to. How about an episode on Ralph Gibson Tri-X + Rodinal look :)

[@PictorialPlanet]

I'd love to but I can't afford Tri-X 😧

[@chesslover8829]

I prefer the straight Rodinal image. If I want less grain, my preference is to use a larger negative.

[@PictorialPlanet]

This

[@domenicotaglione7899]

Hi John, thanks for the videos you provide, they are very interesting and I learned a lot from you. Some time ago I asked you if you could try the Germain 777 or Dupont formula for us that I read from some book on Enry Cartier Bresson. If you can do it I will be very interested. Thank you .

[@PictorialPlanet]

I'd live to but I can't buy the chemicals to make it, sorry.

[@mikaelwerner1]

Very interesting additive and impressive results indeed. I'm fairly new to developing (though I've been photographing since 1971) and I only use Rodinal as a developer. I think I would like to try this additive on higher ISO film some time, but for 100 ISO or lower I feel reluctant to reduce grain on the expense of glow and contrast.

[@PictorialPlanet]

Very valid point. Rodinal is very special in its own right and we have other fine developers for fine grain such as D23 and FX55.

[@normusarms]

Hello John, love your videos., clear instructions with a common sense approach. Have you read the article about Rodinal on the unblinkingeye Web site? There is a suggestion that Rodinal can be developed with addtives to achieve finer grain.

[@PictorialPlanet]

Yes, I'm familiar with them, thank you though for mentioning them. I've used borax , alone , in the past, to reduce the PH, but this additive looked a bit different being more balanced. Gainer offered ascorbic acid as an idea too. Thanks again!

[@normusarms]

Adding your film grain reducer to Rodinal makes Rodinal behave like Ilford id68/ microphen, maybe?

[@jorgetapiarodriguez]

Hi John. Excellent video. How much time would the development have to be increased, considering that 10 more ml was added to the 1+50 mixture?

[@PictorialPlanet]

You mean adding 20ml grain reducer to the 1+50 Rodinal? Unfortunately, I wouldn't know because a use of the double effect on the chemistry. So for the 10ml (that I used) I'm thinking to add 25% and will put out a very quick video tomorrow with the results.

[@guillermoperezsantos]

Sodium sulfite for shure, it "dissolves" the grain like in D76

[@toomuchrose]

It is Borax and Boric acid, neither of which are silver solvents. Rodinal contains sodium sulphite as a preservative but it doesn't act as a solvent because Rodinal has a very high pH due to the sodium or potassium hydroxide used to activate the p-Aminophenol developing agent.

[@lhuhnphotography]

Thanks for this! During the video you compare the results of the augmented Rodinal to D-76. Is there an advantage of using the augmented Rodinal instead of just using D-76?

[@PictorialPlanet]

Yes, I think there are a few advantages in using augmented Rodinal. Having Rodinal means you have both while only using one space on the shelf. Rodinal also lasts much much longer so is always available. Both Rodinal's (with and without) are sharper in my experience. Rodinal is, I think, more versatile in use and considerably kinder on the pocket. Did I say it lasts donkey's years even in opened half used bottles?

[@alanhuntley55]

It certainly looks like the grain has been reduced, but I much prefer the straight Rodinal print. To my eye, the grain reduced image has lost much of its dimensionality vs the straight print. Additionally, I'm left wondering how the grain would compare if the grain reduced snip was developed to the same contrast as the non-reduced version.

[@PictorialPlanet]

I'm going to develop another clip from the same shoot in the augmented Rodinal for longer and put it up on Patreon.

[@marknicholson5293]

The grain-reduced version seems to have more shadow detail but maybe that is because of the lower contrast.

[@PictorialPlanet]

I agree, it does, interesting!

[@AI-Hallucination]

John mate can you do a review on your rh timer I am thinking about buying one

[@PictorialPlanet]

Mmmmmm... I don't really do reviews on kit because you can do everything the RH Designs timer with a regular one and an f-stop printing chart. Having said that, I do like it. It makes printing faster and has been very reliable. It's expensive but if you are spending a lot of time in the darkroom, and if you sell prints, it's a good investment. RH Designs have not supported me or sponsored me and my work. I purchased the timer with my own money.

[@AI-Hallucination]

@@PictorialPlanet that assessment is good enough for me, mate. Thank you, and thank you for sharing your work and your knowledge. I live in rural Scotland. I have plenty of time. I spend a lot of time in there now.

[@DoctorMikeReddy]

When doing the contrast and zoom in footage, how are you synching movement of the two images? What software is this?

[@DoctorMikeReddy]

And what effect would this have on (semi) stand development, I wonder?

[@PictorialPlanet]

Lightroom

[@OrelRussia]

Maybe next time you should try 5 ml of the grain reducer instead of 10 ml?

[@PictorialPlanet]

It certainly needs more work to fine tune the results. Maybe others will play with it now.

[@GirdHerd]

I prefer the grain reducer version.

[@PictorialPlanet]

Thanks for your comment.

[@peterrlee100]

The grain reducer is borax and boric acid _ mixed how

[@PictorialPlanet]

In the video notes

[@stephenperera7382]

Greetings from Gibraltar.....why would you want to change the characteristics of THE developer of all time haha

[@PictorialPlanet]

👍

[@timwalker6790]

…because we can!… 😅

[@janjasiewicz9851]

How "pure" does Borax need to be as you can get 99.9% which is used for laundry..

[@PictorialPlanet]

That's plenty good enough. The salt can be a problem because table salt can have additives including iodine which affects the developer.

[@janjasiewicz9851]

@@PictorialPlanet yes I have pure non iodized salt - which I use to make cafenol developer …

[@user-qm8sx8ne8g]

@@janjasiewicz9851

[@user-qm8sx8ne8g]

I may be wrong about this but it looks as if normal rock salt with nothing added that you can buy quite cheaply in supermarkets in the U. K. at least has nothing added