On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 10:33 PM, Igor Roshchin <[email protected]> wrote:
> I am considering A&I as a candidate. Even though they don't use > Rodinal, but X-Tol, given the age of the film, I don't think it would > make a big difference... Honestly, in your situation, I would prefer Xtol. Rodinal is a very fine-grained developer, but it can slightly decrease film speed (reducing shadow detail). Xtol is also fairly fine-grained, but I think it will also provide better shadow detail than Rodinal. I would expect your old film to behave much like underexposed film, and Xtol should be quite good at pulling out whatever detail is still there. > I just don't know how to deal with the uncertainty in the time, as > they are using a machine, not manual processing. > I wonder how much is X-Tol forgiving for the variation in time... > Does anybody know? Even with the major US-market B&W films, the development time was different for every film (not to mention longer, but non-standardized, times for push processing). I would expect that A&I's equipment can develop for whatever time they tell it to. I would suggest discussing the concerns with them. They might, for example, want to extend development because of the age of the film and the fact that it was exposed a long time ago. Also, whether the negatives come out thick (unlikely) or thin, a lot of further adjustment can be made in the printing or scanning process. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
