How well will RO9 Special/ Studional perform a month on from dilution.

Nikkormat FT2 camera

 The developer has been diluted for two months, it's time to see if there has been any degradation of the solution over those months. It was not my intention to put the developer on the spot by using an out of date film and then to pick a make of film that I find difficult to get good results with but the die had been cast by the fact that a film had been loaded into my FT3 some time ago and then promptly forgotten about.

 

Developer  has changed colour

So what happened? To start with as I poured the developer into the graduate it was a gorgeous turquoise in colour. This is the second time I have used this batch of Studional so I have not a clue what this colour represents, it was clear when it was fresh. For all I know this could mean that it is dead and buried and the best thing to do is pour it away. RIP. I carried on anyway no point stopping now. I need to know what the colour represents. Good or bad?

 

This batch of developer had been diluted 1+15 but according to the data sheet it should be 1+30 for Fomapan 200 processed for 12 minutes plus 20% increase for the age, as the table indicates. Seeing as I have not taken any notice of the indications this will not work I throw caution completely to the wind and cut the development time in half and add 20% which I ignored developing for eight minutes. What the hell!

 

Contact print Fomapan 200.

So what did you think happened? Well! Yes, you are wrong. I am astounded these are some of the best negatives I have made with Fomapan 200 they are crisp and punchy or should I say they have a very good tonal separation, producing some rich blacks as the photographs that illustrate this post show.

8 X 10 print on  Ilford RC gloss

I should throw caution to the wind more often if the results are going to come good like this!

Using RO9 special/ Studional as it was intended.

Negatives are FP4+ and Fomapan 100

I have had the opportunity to use RO9s/Studional as it was intended. Multiple development from the same batch of developer (1 litre will do 12 films). This is a new departure for me, I prefer the single use type. I was a little apprehensive with this decision but gathered four 120 format films together so I could put to the test the assertion that you can develop any number of film on the same day it was diluted without having to add a compensation factor for each film involved, as you do with other developers. This was something I had not heard of before.

Made using a Zero multi format pinhole camera.

 The two makes of film were FP4+ and Fomapan 100 in both cases at box speed. It just so happens that the dilution for these films is 1- 25 with a big time difference - four minutes for the FP4+ and ten for the foma 100.

As mentioned before in another article the developer has a syrup consistency to it as you pour it out. At this point I must add a warning because of the concentrated nature of RO9 special/Studional you need to take precautions when pouring it out to make up the working solution. I have found out to my cost that if you get it on your hands it has a nasty bite. Something I have not experienced when mixing up other developers.

Made using Bronica SQAi.

 With the developer made up the first film to be treated was the FP4+. I was curious to know how well the short process time would work. This will be the quickest I have ever produced the latent image. The actual time suggested was three and half minutes - you need to be careful of short times when it comes to processing film, so I upped it four minutes. Not a lot I know but it could mean the difference between a reasonable set of images and a good set. I can report that it was a good set of negatives with good density across the whole film. The next film out of the processing tank was the Fomapan 100 processed at the suggested time of ten minutes. Again a good set of negatives in fact when held up against the FP4+ film they looked Identical in density. To cut this short the third and fourth films were the same in look as their predecessors. I was not expecting such good results.

Made using a Bronica SQAi.

  The method I used was made up of my trusted inversion procedure and a returning of what was left of the 600 mls of developer back to the storage bottle. Let me explain, when you pour the developer out of the tank there is a a certain amount of fluid lost to this action. It is only a small amount but can be enough to stop the top edge of the film being fully immersed. With this in mind I poured the developer back into the litre bottle and then poured it out again into the measuring cylinder before each film processed. I could have just topped up the difference. This is me erring on the side of caution. This action may have rejuvenated any depletion that had occurred but I suspect that this is not the case with this developer.

Idle time between two batches	Development lengthened by
few hours (but development none *on same day)	None *
1 – 3 days	5.00%
4 – 8 days	10.00%
1 – 2 weeks	15.00%
over 2 weeks	20.00%

 
Related posts:

RO9 special developer
One month on

Fomatol PW paper developer.

Fomatol PW paper developer.

This small pack of paper developer has been sitting on the shelf patiently waiting for me to use it. I'm told it will produce some very rich brown looking prints. I think the time has come to try it.

The information on the packet:

    

Same size different amounts.

The developer is a slow working Hydroquinone that will produce warmtone images that verge on brown when used with Fomatone papers. This varies depending on manufacturer. You can get a bit more information about the developer 

from the Foma web site.

Mixing instruction: Dissolve big bag first in approx 750 ml of water at 20 c with continuous agitation. Then add small bag while continuing the agitation.

This makes no sense as both bags are the same size!!?

Figure 1
Ilford multigrade RC paper, developed in Multigrade.

Development: 2-3 minutes at 20 C depending on dilution. The more dilute the developer the stronger the image tone will be. The developing time is dependent on how many more parts of water you add to the stock solution. I.E Stock 2-3 mins, 1+1 4 to 6 mins, 1+3 8 to 12 mins. To keep the results consistent the developer should not be stored for the longer term.

 

 

 

 

Capacity:

 

 One litre of developer should develop 2- 3 sq meters of photographic paper. This translates to approx 210 sheets of 8 x 10. The number of pictures produced is dependent on the types and makes of paper used e.g. resin coated and or fibre base.

This little pack of powders makes up a stock/working solution of a litre. Which will mean for larger sheets of paper you may need to use two packs or dilute 1+1, this will extend the developing time and increase the tone of the final image.

Figure 2 Ilford multigrade RC paper,
 Developed  in Fomatol PW

The only bit of controversy with this developer is to determine which is the smaller of the two same size packs. If you lay the packs side by side it is easy to see which of the packets in fuller than the other or to be absolutely sure use a scales then there are no doubts. They could quite easily mark them A and B.

Making the developer up is straight forward:

Fill a mixing jug up with 750 mls of water at 20 degrees C. while mixing in the larger of the two packets make sure you constantly stir it. As you mix it in it will have quite a gritty feel to it turning the water white, this is normal. It will start to go clear as you stir in the the smaller pack. The gritty feel to developer will start to disappear as well. Once both the powders are mixed together add a further 250 ml of water making it up to a litre. Keep agitating the water until all the powder has dissolved. You should now be left with a clear slightly tan tinted liquid. This is classed as the stock solution and is ready to use as it is. You can if you wish dilute it 1+1 or 1+3 for greater colour.

Large pack of powder
added first.

I'm going to compare Fomatone PW against a semi fresh Ilford multigrade developer already in the slot processor. I am curious to see how much tone, different makes and types of photographic papers would show at stock strength. I poured the developer into a tray ready to use.

 I set the enlarger to grade 3 and the lens to F8 after exposing two sets of test strips the base exposure was set to twenty two seconds with a further forty seconds of burning in. I should have chosen a more straight forward negative for this comparison.

Figure 3 Adox MCC FB paper developed in
Fomatol PW for 5 Minutes

The first paper into the soup was Ilfords multigrade RC gloss into the slot process ( Fig 1) for comparison. Figure 2 went into the tray of Fomatone PW. Would the developer tone this paper? Resin coated papers can be difficult to tone.

Fomatone PW is billed as a slow working toning developer and at stock strength it was suggested that the image would take two to three minutes to reach full exposure. The Ilford paper was near enough spot on to the second of three minutes and has a warmth to it. Don't forget that RC papers tend to reach full development far quicker than it's FB brother.

Figure 4  Adox MCC FB paper developed in
Fomatol PW for 12 Minutes.

So I upped the stakes with Adox MCC FB paper this would really test how long the image would take to appear. Figure 3 shows what happened when I took the paper out after 5 minutes. I should point out that MCC is not a warm tone paper and yet here it exhibits a light chocolate brown colour.

I changed tactics for figure 4 it is the same paper as 3. FB paper can be manipulated far more than RC papers. So for this print I doubled the exposure time by adjusting the aperture to 5.6. I could shorten the developing time by pulling the paper out early. It should mean that the blacks in the image appearing more quickly. As it turned out it took twelve minutes for the image to be fully produced. If I had not increased the exposure I suspect that it may have taken a further twelve minutes to reach the same point of development. Of all the pictures made this is my favorite as it comes closest to what I had in mind. So far PW has demonstrated it is a very slow developer and a test of how long I can stand still rocking the developing tray. It is a shame that my darkroom is not big enough to allow a chair. How slow the developer can be I'm about to find out.

Figure 5

   Fomatone MG classic matt - Chamois 542 11 

Developed in Fomatol PW for 20 minutes 

Being this is warm tone developer I am about to see how it enhances a warm coloured paper. I chose Fomatone MG classic matt - Chamois 542-11. The papers base colour is cream to start with so what would a warm tone developer do.? Twenty minutes later - yes you read that right! - it is still under developed for my taste, all though it is richly toned. (Fig 5) Even with the red light on the colour was striking. 

 

 

Figure 6 is the same paper developed in multigrade to show how much tone the Foma PW has added. I must admit I prefer it in it's natural state.

Figure 6.

 Things to note:

• When mixing the developer up it will turn the water white.
• It does not matter that the pack is out of date. In this case by four years! Powder chemicals have good keeping qualities.
• It will significantly stain the tray you use.
• It is a very slow working developer and will require patience.
• I would suggest purchasing two packs at a time.

I like the tone that the Fomatone PW has produced and think it gives the paper a more contemporary warmth.

The developer will clear when
the smaller of the two
packets are added.

Figure 6 with 5 over laid to show tonal difference

                       

Since writing this article Foma has discontinued its classic matt Chamois 542-11 which is a shame. The closes paper to it is Ilfords Art 300 it is slightly more tinted look.  

RO 9 Special developer.

Recently, I had an unexpected back log of film to process It can be difficult to find the time to do them especially when it is more than a couple of rolls. Anyway a gap opened up so I dived into the darkroom to load two of the rolls ready for development. As I reached for the RO9 my attention was attracted to a couple of bottles of developer standing behind it. RO9 Special and Studional which as it turns out are one and the same along with Rodinal Special. While I was boxing up the first couple of film I had a rush of blood to the head and decided to give the RO9 Special a try. There was method in my madness.

At the time of my decision I had no background knowledge of this developer apart from how it was marketed and the information on the side of the bottle which is sparse to say the least. The blurb stated that RO9s was the finer bread brother of RO9 which was what attracted me to it in the first place. Part of my madness had been influenced by a cassette of HP5+ I had been given to process.

120  FP4+ Negs Developed in RO9s

In stead of jumping in at the deep end with both feet, I thought it prudent to check the very short developing times printed on the side of the bottle by processing a roll of 120 FP4+. Because I have a tendency to slightly under expose my negatives the suggested time of three and a half minutes at a dilution of 1 to 15 was increased to four. I used my standard agitation method of twelve inversions for the first thirty seconds and then four every minute. As there was no indication to the contrary. As soon as the fix was poured out of the tank I checked to see if they had developed properly. From what I could see they looked perfect. I had not intended to do a grain comparison for this film, it was purely to see if the times on the bottle worked in my favour.

The info on the side of the bottle for HP5+ suggested four minutes at 1+15 - I processed the film for five; as it turns out it was a good move. I think the negatives would have been a bit thin otherwise.

I have now researched process times and developer information for RO9s Something I should have done first with a visit Digital truths Dev chart for more times. They tell you to look at Studional.

HP5+ Negs developed in RO9s

 

Something else I had not been aware of was once the developer had been made up you could use it again. I had a suspicion it could be used again because the concentrate had a syrupy look when I poured it out. In fact you can process up to twelve rolls of mixed formats per litre. The most interesting thing about this developer is that there is no time compensation if you do more than one roll of film on the same day. You only add a compensation factor the longer the working developer in stored. Up to three months.

Developer Data:

RO9 Special/Rodinal Special and Studional.

Characteristics: Fine grain sharp negatives with good contrast. Once diluted can be stored for multiple use. Short process times.

Mixing instructions: Dilute concentrate with water 1+15

Number of Film per Dilution: 10-12 35mm or 120 format per Litre.

Temperature: Is best kept between 18 C and 24C with + or – adjustments as needed to the length of the development time.

Agitation: Tilt the tank for the first minute continuously and then once every minute. You should avoid developing times under three minutes.

Shelf Life: Concentrate should last 2 years in original bottle with no air gap. Once Diluted it should last 3 months without air gap in it's own container.

Time increases for multiple use: To keep speed yield and contrast consistent the diluted developer should be kept in brim full tightly capped bottles if this is achieved the following will apply:

Idle time between two batches	Development lengthened by
few hours (but development none *on same day)	None *
1 – 3 days	5.00%
4 – 8 days	10.00%
1 – 2 weeks	15.00%
over 2 weeks	20.00%

* with Atomal FF: + 10 %.

The extra times given above do not change if several films are simultaneously processed in one batch.

Suggested development times for use with RO9 special, Rodinal Special and Studional:

Film type	Time *	Speed
Agfapan APX 100	4 min	ISO 100/21°
Agfapan APX 400	6 min	ISO 400/27°
Fuji Neopan 400 Prof.	3 min	ISO 320/26°
Fuji Neopan 1600 Prof.	3 min	ISO 800/30°
Ilford PAN-F Plus	3 min	ISO 50/18°
llford FP 4 Plus	3.5 min	ISO 100/21°
Ilford HP 5 Plus	4 min	ISO 400/27°
Ilford Delta 100	3.5 min	ISO 160/23°
Ilford Delta 400	4.5 min	ISO 400/27°
Ilford Delta 3200	6 min	ISO 1250/32°
Ilford SFX 200	4 min	ISO 125/22°
Kodak Plus-X	5 min	ISO 125/22°
Kodak Tri-X	3.5 min	ISO 400/27°
Kodak T-MAX 100	5 min	ISO 80/20°
Kodak T-MAX 400	5 min	ISO 400/27°
Kodak T-MAX p3200	6 min	ISO 1250/32°
Kodak Recording 2475	6 min	ISO 640/29°

• Small tank or tray processing at 20 °C.
• Information above supplied by Agfa.

Almost forgot the reason for the rush of blood to the head if you had not already guessed it was to do with the 35 mm HP5+ I find that this films emulsion tends to produce rather grainy negatives with standard RO9. As I intend to enlarge these negatives to 9 x12 the finer developer should make the prints less grainy. I am pleased to say the strategy worked, the negatives have a much finer grain than the standard RO9. The proof of the pudding will be in the printing of the FP4+ and HP5+ negatives. I will share more prints in another post.

9 x 12  photograph from 35mm HP5+ negatives developed in RO9 special

Green Developer?

 ID11 used with Fomapan

In the normal run of things the colour of your developer as you pour it out at the end of the developing period is nothing out of the ordinary. You just get on with the next stage of the process. That is until it comes out emerald green!. What was just another film processing session has just thrown up a number of questions of doubt, or has it? This is possibly the first time for quite a while that you have taken any notice of what colour the used developer was supposed to be. So what changed? Your film make?

Basically what you are seeing, if you have not used a pre-soak, is the anti-curl and/or the antihalation coatings, washing off in the developer. It has no affect on the developing process which is the first thought most of us have when presented with something out of the ordinary. Different developers can present varying colours depending on which film manufacturer you use.

RO9 used with Fomapan

Why add these dyes?

The halation dye is added to the back of the film base to stop reflections coming off the backing (Acetate or Polyester) into the emulsion, causing exposure affects, usually visible to the eye as halos around areas of brightness. Sometimes the halation coating is sandwiched between the film base and the emulsion or added to the film base itself giving it a slight tone. This in no way alters the way the film acts with the printing process.

So which film developer combination gives you this wonderful Green?

Fomapan is responsible for the green tinting of the used developer. The developers I have used - ID11 and RO9 have produced this colour, so suspect that this film may affect other developers. Although Foma produces the most striking colour, other makes also add a tint to varying degrees to the developer during the process.

Mottled prints

The one thing I like about traditional photography is it can be unpredictable. Even though the method you use is tried and tested, guaranteeing to a certain extent, good results, when the unexpected happens there are a lot of questions. Checking the method and chemicals used is great when a clear mistake can be tracked down, but what happens when there isn't?

 Sometime ago I pulled a set of FP4+ 120 format negatives from the processing tank that at first glance looked normal. I was studying the negatives in their sleeve when I noticed that the grain was not as usual.

Anyway, I did no more about it until I printed a number of them, then it became apparent the grain structure was different, so much so that it gave the photographs a mottled affect. I was not impressed, however once the prints where dry I filed them away. 

I went back over the way I processed the negatives, checking everything, but could not find an obvious reason for the way they had turned out. To add to the mystery it was not present on all of them. At the time I had just started using a new batch of PMK Pyro developer. I asked myself a lot questions about: 'did I mix it properly?' 'in the right order?' etc. etc. but could not come to a clear answer. So I shelved the developer metaphorically and literally.

The reason I'm telling you all this is that recently I have been looking through some of my boxes of prints when I came across these pictures again. The funny thing is I now quite like those mottled pictures, so much so that I'm going to print some of the other negatives and do some reprints on different paper. I find it baffling that when revisiting prints or negatives that did not appeal at the time, either compositionally or technically, they have now come into vogue. It is almost as though you are not mentally ready for what your eye is telling you works. In other words you need to keep an open mind even if it is not what you set out to do.

Since writing this I have been reprinting some of the negatives making me question again whether it was a developer fault. There is only one way to find out. 

It is now 2021 and the fault is down to the backing paper in some cases if it is 120 format film.

I have now found the fault. 

 

Mature paper developer

Mature multigrade developer with FB paper.
Notice that it has a very subtle warmth to it.

I happened to mention to a group of dark artists that I use mature developer when printing my photographs. I was a little taken aback in that they did not understand what I was saying and possibly a number of you reading this will not either. Basically it means that I cut fresh developer with old and exhausted developer from other printing sessions. Not always from the same manufacturer. It is something I have done for years and have not given a second thought to.

The technical bit:

Starting with the papers light sensitive coating, they can be made from three materials Silver bromide, silver chloride and silver iodide. These are combined to make three types of coating chloride,bromide and chlorobromide. A number of other chemicals are also added to help things along. The way in which these chemicals are mixed together affects how the final print looks. Chloride rich papers are slower and warmer in tone. Where bromide predominates it leads to faster acting and colder toned papers. As a common rule the material named first has the most influence on the way the paper reacts. Bromide papers are the most light sensitive producing neutral or cold blue black tones.

Fresh multigrade developer with FB paper.
Although the picture is of a cold subject the tone
of the scene is cold as well.

The most commonly mixed materials found today are chlorobromide papers. They are a compromise between speed and colour. By adjusting the percentages of these chemicals the manufacturer can alter the tone from warm to cold and vary how sensitive to light they are. I have found that the new Kentmere RC papers to be very sensitive to light producing a cold look to the print. It's quick reaction to the developer means that full development of the picture can be achieved in less than thirty seconds when developed with fresh Ilford multigrade. Chlorobromide papers tend to tone better than Bromide. If you are going to use gold toner then a chloride rich paper is the better than bromide rich paper as it hardly responds.

This is was printed on Kentmere RC paper with
 fresh developer. It was fully developed in less than
thirty seconds.

Although the tone and tint of black and white papers are subtle it has a great affect on the viewers response. Neutral and cold tones tend to create a distance emotionally, a sense of looking in from the outside. While warm looking images draw the viewer in engaging them emotionally. There is a tendency to use these different tones for certain subjects, cold and neutral tones with landscapes, abstracts and modern architecture. With warm tones being used with subjects like portraits, still life and nostalgic pictures like churches and old barns. We maybe used to seeing them used in this way but there are no rules but those you make for yourself and even then they should not be set in stone. By learning to manipulate and control the tone of the paper you are printing with, opens up new ways of engaging the viewer in your vision of the world.

Printed on warmtone  FB paper using
a sepia tone developer. Again the warmth is
very subtle. when compared to the picture
above.

When talking about tone and colour of monochrome papers it is important to understand there is a difference between tone and tint. The tone of a paper is influenced by how much chloride or bromide there is in the coating of the paper. More chloride means slower warmer pictures.

Paper bases come in different colours/ tints such as off white, cream and variations on the theme. At one time warm tone papers could be made on a brilliant white base but these days the base paper has a tint to it, this allows the manufacturer to reduce the amount of chloride in the mix increasing the speed of the paper and still call it warmtone even though it is the tint we see. Tints are most noticeable in the high lights and tones in the shadows. Because the colour shifts are so subtle an untrained eye may not notice the difference until it is pointed out to them.

This is the most important bit when it comes to manipulating the tone of a paper. The main thing film and paper have in common is grain it maybe invisible to the eye but the bigger it is the blacker it appears. When the paper is placed in the developer the grain increases in size as it grows so it changes in colour. From a yellow to begin with it turns reddish, then brown and finally black which is the point of full development.

Printed on  Ilford multigrade FB paper.
 It has been developed in an almost exhausted developer
giving it a pinkish look.

This is valuable knowledge when it comes to changing the tone of a print for example: If you over expose your print more than the exposure your test strip suggests and then under develop the print by say a quarter of your usual development time this will help to increase the warmth of your picture. If you combine a warmtone developer and paper it will greatly increase the effect.

Now to the technical bit behind the mature developer. What happens; as the developer starts to exhaust, so it has trouble fully reducing the silver halides in the emulsion. This means the developer cannot turn the silver completely black therefore it leaves it in the warmer less processed state. You can induce this state by adding fresh developer to an old/ exhausted one which will leave your prints with a wonderful but subtle warmth. The old, new combination should only be used up to a dilution of one to one. Beyond this can lead to sudden exhaustion of the developer.

RO9 Rodinal film Develper

Having used up all the ID11 on the four film project and a backlog of exposed film building up, I thought it was about time I break out 'my something for the weekend' developer. I have always kept a backup developer for those occasions when I get caught out. This time I reached for a small bottle of RO9/ Rodinal. This little bottle has been on the shelf for years and in that time it has slowly turned to a rich red brown colour. This single shot developers keeping qualities are legendary. Silverprint has a forty year old bottle that they use from time to time! It still produces good quality negatives, so my 'youngster' should have no problems.

RO9/ Rodinal is not classed as a fine grain developer. It is famous for it's contrast control and flexibility. It's high acutance produces very sharp looking negatives a bit like sharpening a digital file in Photoshop.

It's character to a certain extent is governed by it's dilution.

For example:

• 1+10 will develop ortho film.

• 1+25 produces high contrast negatives and the most obvious grain.
• 1+50 Is the standard dilution producing crisp, normal contrast negatives, with slightly more grain than a fine grain developer.
• 1+75 and 1+100 will render high contrast negatives as normal.
• 1+300 can be used with document type films.

This is another developer I have not really used before so when I picked a Fomapan 100 ISO 100 to try it out on there is a little first use nerves! - How will the negatives look? How much is a little more grain than a fine grain developer? Is the time suggested going to produce well toned negatives? All questions that cannot be properly answered until the film has been fixed. My mantra is “keep it simple” and chose the standard dilution 1+50 as this comes close to the development time I use for ID11, which means I can compare these neg's against the ID11 negatives.

I used my long standing agitation method, although on the bottle it gives a different one. Agitate for the first thirty seconds and then tilt the tank at thirty second intervals.

I have used this developer with FP4+,Fomapan 100 and the Rollei 400s and again I'm having trouble with the latter. The other two have presented nicely toned negatives that have been easy to print. They are slightly more grainy than the ID11 negatives I am use to. But you would not think so when you look at the prints, I'm hard pressed to see a difference when comparing them side by side.

The pictures that appear with this article have been scanned from 9 x 12 prints produced on Kentmere variable contrast paper RC. I have found that grade two works better with these negatives than my usual grade three. This maybe down to its contrast controlling attributes. I have also used a couple of negative with the split grade method and again no appreciable difference. I do all my test prints on RC papers and then do my final prints on FB papers. Here again there has been no sign’s of increased grain.

All the pictures were developed in a mature Ilford multigrade developer - by mature I mean at least a month old, that has been replenished once or twice. I find that the prints take on a warmer tone than those first produced in the developer when fresh. It also takes longer for the first signs of the print to appear when fresh, about ten or so seconds and as it matures twenty seconds or so. This is not a method for the faint hearted as it can deplete very quickly in a matter of one print to the next. I have been caught out and ended up with a print that does not fully develop.

Overall I am very pleased with the negatives RO 9 presents. Yes they are more grainy but that does not translate to the final print. While I was looking into the use of RO9 Rodinal I came across a gentleman that has indicated that the original Rodinal could be used as a print developer and it was the exception to the rule in this respect. Does anyone know differently?