Hi all,
Semi stand-in is the way to go.
I got some interesting results (also some craps with Lucky film), and at
least 2 cases, when top 1/4 part was with different contrast (perhaps
temperature difference).
Rodinal 1:100 works great. Just do one inversion after 10-15 minutes or
so, and total time 1 hour.
I tried to do some prints, after several years of semi-stand-in and
figured, that wet darkroom prints lack contrast.
Now, i have switched back to regular development (since i got brand new
Ilford tank).
Gasha
On 01/27/2016 07:39 PM, Mark C wrote:
I have used stand processing quite frequently. It's a good process but
it's not 100% bulletproof.
My process was to put a single roll of 35mm film into a double roll
tank, add developer solution for 2 rolls to the tank, (usually Rodinal
at 1:100 but sometimes HC110), agitate for 1 minute, let stand for 60
minutes. Most films exposed at their rated speed will come out well
with a 1 hour stand in 1:100 rodinal. Rodinal seems to result in less
grain when stand processed vs conventional agitation. I used the double
tank because you have to pay attention to the minimum amount of
developer needed per roll.
But - it does not work well for everything. I have some crappy "Pro Max
100" film (which I am 99% sure is Lucky SHD) and figured stand
processing would be a good alternative for it. Nope, not at all. It gets
weird stains and streaks and looks terrible. HC110 Dil B works well
with it though. My experiments with Arista Edu Ultra 200 stand processed
in Rodinal also did not go well, though it can be very nice processed
regular agitation in Rodinal.
I've also had problems with streaks in 120 film when stand processing. I
theorize that thermal currents in the tank will cause streaking, and the
greater surface area on 120 film makes it more susceptible, though I
have seen some streaking on 35mmm rolls as well. I have taken to
wrapping the tanks in a towel or two as insulation around the tank.
Otherwise a cooling or warming tank will generate thermal currents and
result in streaking. Worse streaking if the tank is not 100% level.
I've stand processed many types of film but only use it as a standard
technique with Ultrafine xtreme 400 (which really shines when stand
processed in Rodinal) and Rollei IR 400 (which is very contrasty and
benefits from the flatness of stand processing in HC110). I've even
managed to push Rollei IR400 a couple stops using a stand technique,
without it getting excessively contrasty. When pushing you do need to
increase the stand time.
As noted I've had a situations where it has not worked, so testing with
any film would be advisable. Personally, after experimenting with it I
went back to conventional development -ts faster and I like a more
contrasty negative even for scanning. Though if I had an unknown expired
roll of film stand processing would be my first choice.
BTW - Ansel talked using HC 110 DIl G for semi stand development, but as
I recall he still agitated a bit.
Mark
On 1/27/2016 11:26 AM, Darren Addy wrote:
I've been out of the darkroom side of things for a while, so maybe
this isn't news to anybody but me, but this concept of "stand
development" is an interesting one (for multiple reasons) and if you
plan on scanning your negatives (not printing them in a wet darkroom)
it really seems to be the ONLY way to go.
The wild part of this concept is that you do the same thing regardless
of the film or ISO. And you don't have to shoot an entire roll of film
at the same ISO. It is also the perfect technique to use for
developing an unknown ISO roll of film (or vintage film). I found a
roll of exposed 620 in a camera I purchased and am going to use this
technique to develop it.
This article explains it well (using Rodinal as an example, but the
principle works with any film developer). The point is to mix a very
dilute developer (so it is economical) and that developer is
completely used up in the developing of the film. Next-to-no agitation
is employed. The film "stands" until all of the developer is used up.
Your highlights don't block up because the developer is only strong
enough to develop them fully (then, with no agitation, only exhausted
developer is in contact with that part of the film. Meanwhile the
shadow detail can come in. Many stand developers let the film sit for
an hour or more.
The only downside I can see is that negatives are flatter than usual
(lower contrast) but this is no problem if scanning because you can
change that with levels or curves in post-processing. The main thing
of importance is in developing all of the captured detail you can from
shadows to highlights, without losing or blocking up either one.
Here's the article:
http://jbhildebrand.com/2011/tutorials/workflow-tutorial-2-stand-development-with-rodinal/
Anybody tried this method? Thoughts?
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
