How to avoid uneven development with Rodinal

Yesterday, late afternoon, the sun was already near the horizon and clouds came up, a wonderful light with pink details and deep shadows...

film holder were loaded with tri-x 320 (normaly exposed as 200ASA).

I placed the deepest just divined shadows at zone II 1/2 and the small parts of the sky got as the result zone XI ...
Ok, not so trivial but with a portion of intuition I shot with 50 ASA and noticed the sheets to be developed as N-2 or better near N-3 ...
I know, that's hard at the limit of physics ... but it worked, no burned out lights and the shadows detailed as expected. I used Rodinal 1+100 at 15 mins with reduced agitation (the first 60 seconds plus every minute agitation for 5 seconds)

As the negs are as expected or better as hoped with one restriction: single parts of the sky without any detail became a bit weak with less density. It reminds me on two bath dev of paper: First bath developer, second bath water where the paper remains extended time ... the only difference is there's no marbling now.

I assume the reason could be the reduced agitation. Ok, extreme light needs extreme development, but do you have any hints to avoid it like additions? More alkaline? More acid? More sweet?

Horst

You could try a pre-soak. I often pre-soak in water that has 1/2 teaspoon of sodium carbonate (Arm & Hammer washing soda) or borax in a liter of water for 5 min. A pre-soak can often assure a more even dev and also helps get rid of the dreaded purple stain of today's films.

What works for me with Rodinal to make N-2 is greater dilution, longer times, less agitation. See the thread here on Stand Development.

Thanks for "pre-soaking"..
Pre-soking I normlaly used with a water bath but this time I avoided it .. perhaps my thoughts guided me into the wrong direction this time: I wanted to extend the time in the developer. Too much excitement before developing;-)
Tomorrow I will give it try with the sodium carbonate, as part of my paper developers I have enough in here

jj: I've read und understood, thank you. Will make a test drive if I can't calculate the necessary amount of Rodinal per unit of area.

The only I hope such extreme light like yesterday will happen soon again.


Horst

Next time try developing one sheet as you did this time and another with more frequent and active agitation. The effect you are seeing is called "Eberhard" and is due to the relative differences in accumulated bromide between areas of detail and large areas like sky. I don't think stand development will cure the problem, but that is just my opinion.

gainer said:

Next time try developing one sheet as you did this time and another with more frequent and active agitation. The effect you are seeing is called "Eberhard" and is due to the relative differences in accumulated bromide between areas of detail and large areas like sky. I don't think stand development will cure the problem, but that is just my opinion.

Click to expand...

I have plenty of 4x5 and 120 stand-processed film that has no such problem, and so do a number of others. I don't know why, but I know it works.

Horst: What method are you using for developing the film? Tank? Tray? If in a tank, how are you agitating? If in a tray, what size of tray and what volume of developer? If the problem were agitation, I think you might see other effects, such as uneven development in other areas. What you describe soundsto me like developer exhaustion in those areas. However, that's just a guess.

Also, I would think that for testing purposes you could find a location where the brightness range matched your original scene. On a bright day, you could shoot a building with sky and dark shadows in an alley, for example. Or a dense wooded area with sky and deep shadows. Just a suggestion.

Earl

Thanks to all for the input!

As asked: I use a tank, a Doran 1,8 Liter (able to swallow up to 12 sheets).... with the above mentioned negatives I placed three inside and used 18ml of Rodinal. As read in the thread "Stand Dev't" you suggest 5ml per 120 roll ... no wonder with the three sheets the solution can't exaust.

All this sounds like I'd have to keep my emanations away from the tank while developing, perhaps wrapped into aluminium foil and grounded to earth will fix it;-)

To be serious:
As mostly the secenes with other than N0- contrast are those of main interest it calls for a kind of systematics, and so I will try it, additional suggestions to enhance are welcome. so, let me butcher my box of Tri-x.

Ok, here we go with my limited hardware, the results will be posted later:

I'll take several shots with a simliar scene, detailed areas, deep shadows with details and areas of sky. All we be exposed equally.
The amount of Rodinal will be calculated not on the base of 1+100 but as an relation of unit per area (basis will be 5ml per 120 roll)
Each sheet will developed ... lonesomely
... not pre-soaked
... pre-soaked with water
... pre-soaked with sodium carbonate

combined with (after the initial agitation)
... "heavy" agitation (every 5 minutes)
... reduced agitation (every 10 minutes)

and finally
... for 40 mins
... and 60 mins

The negs I'll contact, dry and ... hopefully find someone with a scanner.

Any suggestions?

Horst

How can one tell the difference between local exhustion and local accumulation of bromide? It is generally the accumulation of bromide that causes exhaustion. If it is only localized, it can be cured by agitation.

I think the premise that extremely diluted developer is a good thing is often combined with the premise that reduced agitation is a good thing along with the idea that two good things combined is an even better thing. Rodinal is no different from most other developers in that its activity is diminished by bromide. The theory that perfectly still stand development will result in something called compensation does not always take into account that there are local differences in developer density and temperature due to the chemical reactions of development. I doubt that there is truly any such thing as perfectly still development.

It would be interesting to compare in a controlled experiment the various effects of dilution, agitation and scale. Yes, scale will make a difference. The same subject compressed onto a 35 mm negative will have less of the Eberhard effect than on a 4X5 or larger negative. Maybe I will live long enough to do it myself.