Extreme stand developing

mrred · Sep 22, 2016

While talking to a friend of mine, I was explaining how I tried stand developing in a fridge because of a (seemingly) tall tale from some assistant professing that it is what her employer did. I tried a 1:100 Rodinal mix and put a can and appropriate amount of wash water in the fridge for several days. I got developed negs, all be thin ones.

So being board, I just mixed up 1:1000 of Kalogen (about twice the strength of Rodinal, but not Rodinal). That was at 11pm and I will check on it sometime in the morning....room temp this time.

Any tales to add?

Cholentpot · Sep 22, 2016

I tried this a while back. 1:200 in rodinal for 3:30. When I pulled it the emulsion was so soaked it just wiped off at the slightest touch. I wonder if it would have started sloughing off if I left it in a little longer.

mrred · Sep 22, 2016

What film was it?

NedL · Sep 23, 2016

Several years ago, I shot a roll of tri-x with a Kodak Duaflex. There are two shutter modes, one for "instantaneous" and one that keeps the shutter open as long as you hold the shutter button down. I later realized that I'd had it in this "bulb" mode, so my exposures were all over the place -- holding my breath and pressing the shutter release carefully and gently probably made for some long exposures

I developed it in HC-110 about 1:250 ( 2ml syrup in the tank which holds about 480ml ). Agitated for 30 seconds and then set it on a shelf for an hour. The negatives were all perfectly printable and many of them were surprisingly sharp. There were also no "bromide drag" marks or other problems. I was surprised and thought that was pretty neat, but I never tried it again.

Here's a print from that roll:

At Fort Ross, a former Russian colony on the Sonoma Coast in California

mrred · Sep 23, 2016

Nice compression with the light from the window.

pcyco · Sep 23, 2016

hallo
i tried acros 100 wich rodinal 1:100 for one or two hours stand development. worked fine.

regards

thomas

juan · Sep 23, 2016

I read a Mortensen article, or maybe it's in one of his books, in which he described developing that way. I tried it with Efke PL-100 and IIRC a glycin only developer. It may have been glycin/metal. Mortensen used glycin, thus my choice. I think I developed four or five hours. The negative has a full contrast range and is rather dense and requires a bit longer to print. I never experimented further because I get such good results with minimal agitation and Pyrocat.

Dali · Sep 23, 2016

Sorry to ask the question but what is the advantage of stand development compared to "normal" development?

pcyco · Sep 23, 2016

Dali said:
Sorry to ask the question but what is the advantage of stand development compared to "normal" development?

you can go to sleep or shopping

regards
thomas

bdial · Sep 23, 2016

Dali said:
Sorry to ask the question but what is the advantage of stand development compared to "normal" development?

The theory is that it helps keep detail in highlights, because the developer exhausts itself in the highlight areas while remaining active in the parts of the negative that received less light. Without agitation to mix things around, the shadows get full development, but the highlights are held back some.

And you can go shopping

Dali · Sep 23, 2016

bdial said:
The theory is that it helps keep detail in highlights, because the developer exhausts itself in the highlight areas while remaining active in the parts of the negative that received less light. Without agitation to mix things around, the shadows get full development, but the highlights are held back some.

And you can go shopping

You explain the theory but does it work?

ic-racer · Sep 23, 2016

I have never seen a family of film curves from this technique. Maybe they will show up in this thread.

Cholentpot · Sep 23, 2016

mrred said:
What film was it?

Kodak Gold 200

farmersteve · Sep 23, 2016

Here is an article for pushing Tri-X to extremes. Even as high as 25600 with a 9 hour stand development time. Lots of charts and everthing... http://120studio.com/film-dev/pushing-tri-x.htm

removed account4 · Sep 23, 2016

while i have read the threads and heard about the problems
i think if someone wants to try these things and enjoy themselves
they can see what works and doesn't work for them ... i've never stand-developed for longer than maybe 40 mins
( i fell asleep and woke up 10 mins after i was supposed to rinse/fix )
i developed film like this ( c-41, e6, b/w, chromo b/w ) in the same tank, all different iso's, all different ages
( some expired, some way expired some fresh all shelf stored ) for a few years ... and
i didn't have any issues at all, and when i have enough film to process and i don't feel like standing around shuffling them in the dark for 8-15-mins or inverting a tank ...
i'd do it again in a heartbeat.

its not for everyone ... a lot of people love perfection and enjoy that sort of thing. i gave up on perfection a long time ago, set the bar really low and
have a good time. after all, that is why most of us are making photographs anyways ... and if i get a difficult negative or 2 while
i am having a good time, i'll learn how to print it better ... its a win-win ... but like everything

YMMV

Gerald C Koch · Sep 23, 2016

Mortensen used a technique which he termed developing to gamma infinity. The joke at the time is that he would fill the bathtub with water and add one drop of developer. The film was left for several days.

sly · Sep 23, 2016

I used semi-stand quite often for a couple of years. I really liked that I could make dinner or a batch of muffins and develop film at the same time. Most of my results were great but I DID get bromide drag on occasion. Never found a way to predict or prevent it, so went back to the usual.

mrred · Sep 23, 2016

michael_r said:
ic: See post #39 in this thread.

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Myths busted (including the commonly suggested 1 hour time). Aside from edge effects (which I did not evaluate), it does nothing regular development doesn't do besides adding the risk of abysmal uniformity.

I had planned to repeat the tests omitting the pre-soak (I suspect the pre-soak might actually worsen uniformity), but never got around to it since the thread went south as expected.

I don't think a step wedge would adequately show tonal compression, unless this is what you are referring to uniformity. Personally I either do a very quick pre-soak with some photoflo or just add some to the working solution (just a micro drop). This reduces the associated bromide drag and uneven development issues. If I do the latter I do not pre-soak at all.

John Wiegerink · Sep 23, 2016

mrred said:
I don't think a step wedge would adequately show tonal compression, unless this is what you are referring to uniformity. Personally I either do a very quick pre-soak with some photoflo or just add some to the working solution (just a micro drop). This reduces the associated bromide drag and uneven development issues. If I do the latter I do not pre-soak at all.

Why can't you do both the presoak and the micro-drop?

Alan Johnson · Sep 23, 2016

For anything important I stick to DF Cardwell's recommendation of 5 min agitation intervals for 120 and 10 min for 35mm, to get even development.
Post 4 here:
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

pdeeh · Sep 23, 2016

Surely "extreme" activities (e.g. Extreme Knitting, Extreme Ironing etc.) need to take place whilst doing some other risky activity - like skydiving or skiing down the Eiger.

Though I suppose that would lead to unwanted agitation in this case.

Andrew O'Neill · Sep 23, 2016

I sometimes give semi-stand in Pyrocat-HD (diluted a lot more than normal) with HP5 sheet film when I want edge effects. I've done semi-stand in other developers including Rodinal, and it does not compare or come close to what Pyrocat-HD can do.

Craig75 · Sep 23, 2016

michael_r said:
ic: See post #39 in this thread.

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Myths busted (including the commonly suggested 1 hour time). Aside from edge effects (which I did not evaluate), it does nothing regular development doesn't do besides adding the risk of abysmal uniformity.

I had planned to repeat the tests omitting the pre-soak (I suspect the pre-soak might actually worsen uniformity), but never got around to it since the thread went south as expected.

Thanks for this Michael. Very interesting.

fdonadio · Sep 23, 2016

bdial said:
And you can go shopping

But I do all my shopping at APUG's classifieds!

Cheers,
Flavio

mrred · Sep 23, 2016

Gerald C Koch said:
Mortensen used a technique which he termed developing to gamma infinity. The joke at the time is that he would fill the bathtub with water and add one drop of developer. The film was left for several days.

I fixed the film at noon today. That gave it 13 hrs at 1:1000. The leaders (35mm) were mud grey, but not enough development to see any images. In the spirit of what you have said, Gerry, the next (same dilution) one I will leave in the tank until Friday.

edit: I think I will give it a shake once a day

Extreme stand developing

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency