RPX 25 in Fomadon LQR

[hankchinaski]

Would somebody have an idea of the time for rpx 25 in fomadon lqr? They say it's like d-19, but I cannot find times for that either.
As an aside...the brochure for rpx 25 has these images, but an extensive search on flickr shows exactly zero photos looking like the samples...

 

[Alessandro Serrao]

Don't use Fola LQR or Kodak D19 with anything that is Agfa Aviphot-related. That includes Rollei Rpx25.
It's an hi-contrast film and hi-contrast developers.
Unless you're going for crazy contrast.

 

[koraks]

As an aside...the brochure for rpx 25 has these images, but an extensive search on flickr shows exactly zero photos looking like the samples...

It's a B&W film. It can look like pretty much anything depending on how the product was used. Exposure, development and in particular choices in printing and/or digital post-processing have a vast impact on the final image. So results may vary from very contrasty images with large areas of open shadows and harsh highlights all the way to buttery-smooth & soft 'infinite grayscale' tonality. It's mostly a matter of how much exposure you give and how the negatives are then post-processed or printing, with development being a factor of moderately high influence behind these two.

 

[hankchinaski]

Don't use Fola LQR or Kodak D19 with anything that is Agfa Aviphot-related. That includes Rollei Rpx25.
It's an hi-contrast film and hi-contrast developers.
Unless you're going for crazy contrast.

Thanks for the advice!

But these images are both developed in Rodinal 1+25, I can't understand the difference in contrast, even accounting for the fact that one image was probably taken in the dull of winter and the other in full sunshine.

 

[hankchinaski]

It's a B&W film. It can look like pretty much anything depending on how the product was used. Exposure, development and in particular choices in printing and/or digital post-processing have a vast impact on the final image. So results may vary from very contrasty images with large areas of open shadows and harsh highlights all the way to buttery-smooth & soft 'infinite grayscale' tonality. It's mostly a matter of how much exposure you give and how the negatives are then post-processed or printing, with development being a factor of moderately high influence behind these two.

Thanks Koraks.

I would disagree with the development factor. Taking FP4 as an example, I was able to make horridly gray images, especially with high dilution Rodinal, or exciting high-contrast images with LQR (you can ignore the esthetic judgments...)

 

[250swb]

Contrast can be tamed but it needs the right developer, I've found some 'normal' developers don't work well with it. The last time I used RPX-25 I used Adox FX-39 1+9 7.5 mins @20c and the contrast is excellent, metering for the mid tones. But my beef with RPX is that it isn't actually very sharp or grain free, Adox HR-50 is much better.

 

[koraks]

I would disagree with the development factor.

That's OK; I guess I've gotten a little cynical due to my experience that there's always a way to either boost the contrast on a horribly flat and/or thin negative or smash flat an exceedingly long-scaled one, one way or another, and in particular in digital space. It's generally easier if you have something that fits the purpose to begin with, of course. To that extent, development does indeed make a difference. But proper exposure and flexibility in the printing or post processing part are IMO overpowering factors, ultimately. Things are different if you need to print on an essentially fixed-contrast output medium.