A Question on XTOL and Agitation

To start: I am not much of a trier-outer. I read with pleasure and amazement how others try out different developers with different films and discuss different methods of agitation. I have moved a couple of years ago to XTOL, at first with undiluted solution regenerating according to KODAK documentation. Later I moved to 1:1 dilution and one shot development.

In the last couple of weeks I have been reading in the development forums of different groups and found that agitation will influence shadow detail. My method for 135 and 120 film is 30 seconds continuous agitation followed by 3 seconds of inversion (twice) every 30 seconds.

This does not work for 5x4inch film. I use a Jobo 2500 drum and use rotation development as I would use a lot more developer. I use a motorized rollerbase and I change the rotation direction every 30 seconds to counteract laminar flow to avoid streaking ( was a real problem )

My question: if it is true that increased agitation leads to loss in shadow detail, how can one compensate. I want to try increasing exposure by ½ to 1 stop. In sheet film I use Acros 100 and Tri-X 320. What is your opinion?

Moorlander,
I'm glad you bring this question up since I will be trying Xtol with 4x5 later this year. I've tried far to many developers in the last few years and while I have found some to be good and some not so good with the films I use, I have found a couple I can happily live with. One is a pyro style developer and the other is Xtol using replenishment. With roll film I find Xtol to give me all I need in the form of box speed and control of highlights. I'm hoping the same is true with 4x5 film as well. With roll film I have been going on the light side as to agitation so I'm curious to see what happens with 4x5. I do not use rotary development. I did have a Jobo Cpp2, but didn't care for it and sold it. Now it's tray and Yankee tank for 4x5.

Dear Moorlander,

One of the time honored traditions of film photography is to try and pick the fly poo out of the pepper. Your Jobo setup will not cause you shadow detail problems. I have used the Jobo 25XX system with 4x5 and Xtol 1+1 for 16 years. Any issues have always been due to my own errors either in exposure or development time. Use it without fear.

Neal Wydra

Moorlander said:

if it is true that increased agitation leads to loss in shadow detail

Click to expand...

michael_r said:

It isn't true, so don't worry.

Click to expand...

I'm curious to hear why this isn't true.

In situations like this I would suggest going with the manufacturer's (Kodak) recommendations. They know their product far better than someone on a forum somewhere.

Moorlander said:

if it is true that increased agitation leads to loss in shadow detail

Click to expand...

This conclusion is the result of faulty logic and incorrect extrapolation (on the internet - not the OP).

As michael_r indicates, there are some circumstances where an increase in development time combined with decreased agitation results in a small increase in shadow detail, but a less than normal increase in highlight density - a so-called compensating developer effect.

The change in agitation is the factor that leads to the less than normal increase in highlight density. It will have little or no effect on shdow detail.

Increased agitation will also increase the overall contrast. At the printing stage, if the highlights are printed to a satisfactory level in a straight print, the shadows will be darker. This may be where the internet fallacy arose.

MattKing said:

The change in agitation is the factor that leads to the less than normal increase in highlight density. It will have little or no effect on shdow detail.

Click to expand...

If you're following most film/equipment manufacturers' recommendation to cut development time by 15% under constant agitation, then it's the change in time, not agitation, that's going to put a dent in your shadows. The net effect of constant agitation, then, is a loss of shadow detail or a more contrasty negative -- the degree to which depends on the developer, of course.

Due to extraneous effects changing agitation to control contrast is not a very good idea. Contrast is controlled by development times.

michael_r said:

All other things being equal, an increase in agitation frequency leads to an increase in the degree of development (which will affect all parts of the curve).

Click to expand...

I'm here to learn. My understanding is that if you're constantly moving fresh developer along a piece of film, the highlights will develop at a much faster rate than the shadows, since there's no opportunity for localized depletion of the developer around the highlights (as will occur during stand cycles in intermittent agitation). I did some testing of my own a while back and confirmed this to my satisfaction. This would suggest, then, that shadow detail development is largely unaffected by agitation, or that the effect is negligible.

Thanks for the feedback. I am not quite sure what to make of this discussion. Rotary development is a must with my sheet film so I have no option. I think I will take Neal’s advice and treat the whole thing with a pinch of salt. After all I have been developing sheet film for quite some time now and I was not unhappy. Just to show that a little information can make you unsure …. I will stick to Kodak’s developing times they have published for the XTOL developer.

(Just as an aside: I went for Kodak because of the wealth of documentation they publish)

Andreas

Here are some comments from John Sexton:
http://www.jobo-usa.com/images/archive/JQ3.pdf

Alan Johnson said:

Here are some comments from John Sexton:
http://www.jobo-usa.com/images/archive/JQ3.pdf

Click to expand...

Thanks. Well worth a read, I thought

pentaxuser

I develop my 4"x5" film in the Jobo 3010 Expert Drum using the Jobo Processor at the '4' setting, not the 'P' setting.

Sirius Glass said:

I develop my 4"x5" film in the Jobo 3010 Expert Drum using the Jobo Processor at the '4' setting, not the 'P' setting.

Click to expand...

That doesn't provide any indication of what rotational speed you're using without knowledge of your processor's serial number. See this post


for details.

Edit: It seems I also previously posted those data here: