Over or under agitation?

[winger]

I have another theory, since a roll I recently developed has the same thing (though not as pronounced). Another roll I did the exact same way is perfectly fine. Sooo, the difference between those two rolls is that the one that's fine was sitting in the Holga right until the day I developed it. The other roll sat on the counter in my darkroom waiting - it's also the laundry room so the lights were on a fair amount of the time and it sat there for about two months. I make the rolls as tight as I can when I take them out of the camera and I was sure this wasn't loose, but how much does it take?
In the future, I'm going to put all exposed rolls in a black bag if they have to sit. And, yes, there will always be a time lag between shooting and developing. I have to squeeze all photography stuff in between all the grocery runs, cleaning, soccer practice, homework supervision, and everything else around here.

 

[glbeas]

I have my doubts about that. Fogging from loose paper is much more uneven that what you are getting. Do you measure your developer or just pour it in until the tank is full? My technique is to have a spare tank for the reel and fill the one Im using with developer and drop the reel in with lights out. That assures enough developer but not too much and no fill delays to speak of. When agitating hold it upside down during the inversion long enough to be sure the air bubble makes it up and the same going back. Rapid inversions may not allow for complete circulation of the developer.

 

[winger]

Do you measure your developer or just pour it in until the tank is full?

Measured. I put the reel in and poured in just enough water to cover the reel and then poured it into a decent beaker and marked it - that's how much I've always used. And it's a stainless tank with a Hewes reel.

I have my doubts about the fogging, too, but I've been very consistent about my agitation for the last 7 years. The darker negative edges haven't happened often, but it may have been more with rolls that sat waiting for longer.

 

[mshchem]

Thanks Winger, this has been fun.

I just love these agitation threads. There are so many ways that people agitate their film that it just amazes me that anything gets developed at all.

- roll it across the darkroom sink

- tilt it back and forth

- roll it completely over

- turn it while you roll it

- do a mobius strip (that one almost sounds a bit suggestive)

- do a figure eight

- fill it partway

- fill it all the way

This could be a dance or maybe a party game.

9

 

[mshchem]

I have another theory, since a roll I recently developed has the same thing (though not as pronounced). Another roll I did the exact same way is perfectly fine. Sooo, the difference between those two rolls is that the one that's fine was sitting in the Holga right until the day I developed it. The other roll sat on the counter in my darkroom waiting - it's also the laundry room so the lights were on a fair amount of the time and it sat there for about two months. I make the rolls as tight as I can when I take them out of the camera and I was sure this wasn't loose, but how much does it take?
In the future, I'm going to put all exposed rolls in a black bag if they have to sit. And, yes, there will always be a time lag between shooting and developing. I have to squeeze all photography stuff in between all the grocery runs, cleaning, soccer practice, homework supervision, and everything else around here.

I think you may be onto something. Also it's possible that, the precision instrument that it is, the Holga , or the loading and unloading ,may have played a part. Just follow the instructions that come with the developer / film combination. With Kodak, 3 inversions, with a twist every 30 seconds has how I've done it for decades, Nikor and Kindermann state proper volumes for each film. 8 us fl. oz. for 35mm, I can't remember for 120, seems like it was 15 fl oz.

 

[bernard_L]

I need three hands to put down the beaker, invert the tank, and start the timer

?? With my righthand I hold the beaker to pour into the dev tank; when almost done, my left hand starts the timer. Then I burp the lid. Then I bang it on the table. Even if I had three hands, I would not want to invert the tank while I'm pouring from the beaker...
And... there is no real necessity to start the timer exactly when... when, by the way, when you just finished pouring the dev? Because there is another decision to make: when is the official end of dev time? For me, I start pouring out (one-shot) 10s before the time is up. Bottom line, it's the time elapsed between these two events that counts, and even more so, it's being consistent that counts.

 

[Doremus Scudder]

First, start your timer before you start pouring and just add the pour time to your development time; same result, less stress. Development ends when you start pouring in the stop. Just be consistent and adjust your total time to give you negatives of the contrast you want.

Second, I still think you have an agitation problem; more turbulence at the edges of the film creates more density there. I had real problems with 120 film and agitation schemes when I first started shooting MF. I went through 15 rolls or so testing different agitation schemes till I found one that worked. The fact that this shows up only periodically indicates that your agitation is really close to right, but sometimes results in unevenness. Try being a bit more vigorous and see if that helps (that was my solution). If not, try the opposite.

Keep in mind that many subjects won't show uneven development clearly. But clear skies certainly will. Go shoot a couple of test rolls with clear blue skies from side to side and develop them with different agitations and see what you get.

Good luck,

Doremus

 

[M Carter]

Regarding the notes on timers in this thread - I use the IOS app called "develop" - it's greatness, simple, does just what you need it do. Big timer display, and it chimes for agitation (I agitate 5 seconds every 60 - Rodinal) and I'm easily bored and distracted, I tend to wipe counters and tidy up when the film's in the tank, so the chime has saved me many times. I understand there's a similar app for Android, too.

 

[winger]

I use the IOS app called "develop"

I'll look for that one. Thanks!

(tongue partially in cheek/) It's almost enough to make me consider stand developing (/tongue in cheek). Well, I'm just going to shoot more 4x5. And I've never had any problems with 35mm doing this. It's only been 120 - and not just from one camera. So it's either the sitting in light or the agitation. My money is still on the agitation, but I really think I'm consistent, even though the results are not. Those who really know me know how methodical I am. ARGH!

Thanks all! I'll work on it (and maybe shoot some test rolls in my "spare" time).

 

[russell_w_b]

I have a query... I've only ever used Ilford developer (DD-X; ID-11) and Rodinal, and both have different documented agitation methods. Any film I've developed in Ilford I've agitated as per Ilford's method, and likewise with Rodinal for that method. Tapping into experience on here, and before I try it, would applying Ilford agitation technique to Rodinal or vice-versa be a bad thing? I expect the given agitation techniques by both manufacturers are as a result of research and evolution and a generic agitation method across the board would be a compromise, yes?

I quite like the results from semi-stand development too, but have only done it with 120 film so no bromide-drag effects from sprocket holes (yet).