Share This Page. Thread Tools. Aug 5, 1. Messages: 2,
|Published (Last):||20 September 2010|
|PDF File Size:||8.8 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||18.75 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Share This Page. Thread Tools. Aug 5, 1. Messages: 2, However, having seen the number of people using Rodinal in other threads here I'm starting to wonder on what I am missing out. So, if you have actually used both Rodinal and DD-X I'd be very interested in hearing your views on the similarities and differences between the two.
Thanks in advance, Frank. Aug 5, 2. Messages: 3, I find little difference in results between the two products, however the use of Rodinal at allows me greater leeway on the longer developing time, and Rodinal seems to have a better shelf life. Aug 5, 3. Messages: 1, DD-X and Rodinal are 2 completely different developers. I like Rodinal a lot, but DD-X seems to work better with faster films and Ilford Deltas It wouldn;t hurt if you gave Rodinal a shot, is cheap enough and lasts for years so you can use it infrequently.
Aug 5, 4. I have both Rodinal and DDX on the darkroom shelf right now. Especially when pushed to or PS one of my favorite combinations is PanF in rodinal Aug 5, 5. Rodinal and DD-X are now the only 2 film developers I use and as has already been said they are very different.
Fine sharp salt and pepper grain, sharp pictures and beautiful contrast. That said if you want really large grain then you could try a faster film with Rodinal. My advice would be if you use slower films then give Rodinal a try, after all it's cheap enough to experiment with.
Aug 5, 6. Messages: 4, Rodinal is a decidedly "clean" developer; the grain itself is more clearly defined - and there is a HIGH degree of acutance. Amazing, in a way, that there are so many who will not even try Rodinal with fast films Aug 5, 7. Absolutely wonderful stuff.
Aug 5, 8. Aug 5, 9. Aug 5, Messages: 6, HC dil B is another good winner. I use both Rodinal and HC depending on what I want the final image to look like. Each has it's own flavor which can be used to artistic advantage.
To only use one developer, unless you are doing the alt process stuff, is short changing your ability to fully express yourself. So as you can see it's not just a matter of N or N-1 etc.
It's all part of the previsualization. Whatever the structure of the film is, will be shown. The developer agent p-aminophenol will make very sharply defined grain, giving a very clean look.
I doubt there is any sulfite or other silver solvent to decrease grain size as in most other developers. Aug 6, Very many thanks to all contributors, especially those giving their experiences of both developers.
My current "pending" tray for processing is too important for me to experiment on, but I will get hold of some Rodinal and try it out very soon especially as in my locale DD-X is currently about as available as rocking-horse pee!
Thanks again, Frank. OK folks I've tried a little test and have posted the results in the technical gallery for comparison. They are only negative scans as I didn't have time to wet print, but I hope they are of some use. TPP nice job. Thanks for posting the scans really informative. Im gonna try some HP5 I have sitting collecting dust in rodinal v.
PMK Pyro. Go with the tried and trusted for important pics!!!! You have to try Rodinal in D first, shoot 1 or 2 rolls of not-so-important pics to get a feel of it. Shot in a bright day. Last edited by a moderator: Aug 6, Aug 8, One of the thigns we haven;t touched here is pushing films with DD-X wth Rondial. I think DDX has the upper hand.
Messages: 21, While once I prefered Rodinal - for reasons of economy I switched to X-tol and get comparable results. Rodinal is one-shot not so economic tor 5"x4". I use Xtol on a replenishment basis and its superb.
I've found xtol to be very good with just about everything especially tmax films. I'm impressed as under the same lighting conditions and using flash which I hate with DD-X I would have got good enough but laking something.
With the Rodinal there's a beautiful satin feel and that sharpness is there again. Trying it with asa pushed to and then Delta with it's feisty attitude are the next logical steps I guess LOL. Nov 12, Nov 13, Nov 15, You must log in or sign up to reply here. Show Ignored Content. Your name or email address: Do you already have an account? No, create an account now.
Ilford Ilfotec DDX
So as I come to the end of the first quarter of blogs I figured I would give a review of the first developer I used. Ilfotech DD-X. Plus I see a lot of people using it. For me to be happy with a developer it needs to give solid results across a broad range of films, not just one or two. Which can be hard for a developer to do. Now I know that HP5 in 35mm is a very grainy film but DD-X just made the grain super muddy when scanning the film, and not exactly the most pleasing results. But enough with the negative lets get onto more pleasing at least to me results.
Ilford Ilfotec DD-X Film Developer 1L
ILFORD Ilfotec DDX 1000 ml Concentrate
Exploring Ilford – Part 1 – Ilfotech DD-X