Semi-stand, uneven highlights and Pyrocat

couldabin · May 17, 2007

I must be doing something wrong, because my experiments with semi-stand and minimimal agitation are producing negatives with marked unevenness.

I'm shooting FP4, 4x5. Working solution was Pyrocat HD at 1:1:200, 200 ml in a 5x7 tray. Film was pre-soaked for 3 minutes.

My first mistake: attempting semi-stand with two sheets. This is the way I normally develop -- two sheets back-to-back, emulsion out, and agitation every 30 seconds that includes inverting the pair of sheets. One try at semi-stand produced a negative with pronounced "bars" across it, caused by the ridges on the bottom of the tray.

OK, so it was on to one sheet at a time, emulsion side up.

What I got was mottled development, which was most noticeable in highlights. Snow pictures really make it show. I tried variations on semi-stand, with occasional agitation (as often as at the 3, 8, 15 and 25 minute marks) and still had mottling. (In all cases I started with 30 seconds of agitation.)

It was only by reverting to "standard" agitation (every 30 seconds during the first half, every 60 seconds during the second) that negatives appear to be evenly developed.

What am I doing wrong?

duane

lee · May 17, 2007

If I read you correctly you are doing semi stand in a Tray. I have always thought stand and semi stand was best done in a vertical position like in a tube one at a time. Artifacts are what you are seeing I believe caused by the fact that the bromides (?) are just sitting on the film.

lee\c

Tom Hoskinson · May 17, 2007

I have been sucessfully doing semi-stand development in Slosher Trays with pyrocat for over 2 years and have posted my technique several times on APUG. I develop with a single sheet - EMULSION SIDE UP - in each slosher tray compartment. I presoak in tempered water for five minutes before development. I usually use the 1+1+100 dilution of Pyrocat and my initial (gentle) agitation duration is 30 seconds. I agitate again, half way through the total development time. Otherwise, the film stands, EMULSION SIDE UP, in the developer, with no agitation.

My negatives are all uniformly developed with no streaking or mottling.

couldabin · May 17, 2007

Tom, any thoughts on what is causing my mottling?

Tom Hoskinson · May 17, 2007

couldabin said:
Tom, any thoughts on what is causing my mottling?

I think that for tray developing multiple sheets (2 or more) of film, you would get better results by agitating continuously, shuffling the stack of film in the developer using Michael A Smith's and Paula Chamlee's procedure:

www.michaelandpaula.com/mp/index_skip.html

sanking · May 17, 2007

In addition to Tom I know several other photographers who are getting good results with semi-stand in slosher trays. I myself tried in a slosher type configuration and got great results.

But I don't know anyone who has gotten good results in a regular tray. I tried it myself several times but always got uneven development.

My own development is in vertical positioni, in open-ended PVC tubes which are then placed in a large Beseler drum. I get very even development this way with both semi-stand and extreme minimal agitation.

Sandy

Tom Hoskinson · May 17, 2007

couldabin said:
Tom, any thoughts on what is causing my mottling?

couldabin;Take a look at these 2 Michael and Paula threads:

Dead Link Removed

Dead Link Removed

Michael Kadillak · May 17, 2007

sanking said:
In addition to Tom I know several other photographers who are getting good results with semi-stand in slosher trays. I myself tried in a slosher type configuration and got great results.

But I don't know anyone who has gotten good results in a regular tray. I tried it myself several times but always got uneven development.

My own development is in vertical positioni, in open-ended PVC tubes which are then placed in a large Beseler drum. I get very even development this way with both semi-stand and extreme minimal agitation.

Sandy

I am conducting tests as we speak with conventional development as well as Semi Stand and Extreme Mininal Agitation with gaseous burst agitation utilizing stainless steel hangers in minimum sized tanks for the specific format. I am using a timer that turns off the power to the gas solenoid valve to accomplish the long periods between development agitation cycles. The positive aspects of this process is that after one inserts the hanger rack into the dilute developer, a flip of the switch is the extend of one's personal involvement in the process so it is about as easy as one could possibly ask for. Plus, the probability of scratched negatives is as close to zero as one could ask for because they are contained by individual hangers. One of the tanks I am testing is built for 8x20 with two sheet film hanger slots to minimize developer volumes and individual leveling feet. More later,

Cheers!

Cheers!

Scott Peters · May 17, 2007

Use 5 x 7 trays. That way the corners won't 'move' around too much and cause problems. I have processed up to 10 8 x 10 successfully ( 10 x 12 trays) , though usually do 6 at a time...

PRe-soak 5 minutes, emulsion side always up, constant shuffle in tray. Then into developer. When shuffling, lift from the bottom, then lay the neg on top of the developer and immerse with hands ( in nitrile gloves - no powder) , rotate the images once during development which may or may not help....I do it out of habit...about half way through development....(180 degrees btw). This may help with streaks or 'mottling' in the sky areas.

Also, you may want to try 1:1:100, instead of 1:1:200...
About 9-18 minutes for me based on temp. and N + rating.

couldabin · May 17, 2007

Hmm. This is curiouser than I thought.

I'm puzzled as to why there would be no mottling in a slosher tray, but there would be with a standard 5x7. Constant agitation and/or constant shuffling are out -- I'm trying to achieve even development using the semi-stand process, which I understood to entail dilute working solution, initial agitation and a single bout of agitating in the middle.

I'm heartened that I'm not the only one experiencing mottling, and now all the more curious about how others avoid it ...

sanking · May 17, 2007

Michael,

If it is possible to get an agitation burst system on the market at a good price this will be without question the perfect system for minimal agitation development.

Sandy

Michael Kadillak said:
I am conducting tests as we speak with conventional development as well as Semi Stand and Extreme Mininal Agitation with gaseous burst agitation utilizing stainless steel hangers in minimum sized tanks for the specific format. I am using a timer that turns off the power to the gas solenoid valve to accomplish the long periods between development agitation cycles. The positive aspects of this process is that after one inserts the hanger rack into the dilute developer, a flip of the switch is the extend of one's personal involvement in the process so it is about as easy as one could possibly ask for. Plus, the probability of scratched negatives is as close to zero as one could ask for because they are contained by individual hangers. One of the tanks I am testing is built for 8x20 with two sheet film hanger slots to minimize developer volumes and individual leveling feet. More later,

Cheers!

Cheers!

Scott Peters · May 17, 2007

No mottling in trays for me and it's close to semi stand....and I get the advantage of development by inspection....

Michael Kadillak · May 17, 2007

sanking said:
Michael,

If it is possible to get an agitation burst system on the market at a good price this will be without question the perfect system for minimal agitation development.

Sandy

As I concluded in the recent View Camera article, I believe that it will be possible to acquire various sized gas burst development tanks from Alistair Inglis for this objective at very reasonable prices. Plus, there is always the possibility of acquiring tanks in the used market as California Stainless, Ted Pella and Arkay produced one two and 3 1/2 gallon gas burst tanks to accomodate 4x5, 5x7 and 8x10 for years.

I am providing Alistair feedback on certain operational features that I feel should be worked out sooner rather than later. One of these desired features is for Alistair to fabricate a development cage that would concurrently work with standard Kodak 4A hangers and his custom acrylic hangers. Lastly, I need to insure that each sized tank and the plenum configuration performs as intended before I would feel comfortable that they make their way into the public domain. This should not take long to accomplish so we should be able to have these issues worked out shortly.

The good thing with Alistair is that each tank will be made to exact customer specifications and he does fabulous work.

Cheers!

Tom Hoskinson · May 17, 2007

couldabin said:
Hmm. This is curiouser than I thought.

I'm puzzled as to why there would be no mottling in a slosher tray, but there would be with a standard 5x7. Constant agitation and/or constant shuffling are out -- I'm trying to achieve even development using the semi-stand process, which I understood to entail dilute working solution, initial agitation and a single bout of agitating in the middle.

I'm heartened that I'm not the only one experiencing mottling, and now all the more curious about how others avoid it ...

Single sheet development with the emulsion side facing up is an important factor. I believe that the design and construction of my slosher trays (i.e. Summitek Cradles) and the developer flow patterns that result, are also important.

http://www.summitek.com/cradle.html

I will also add that I get fully comparable, uniform development and mottle free semi-stand results, developing in BTZS type tanks with Pyrocat.

sanking · May 17, 2007

Scott Peters said:
No mottling in trays for me and it's close to semi stand....and I get the advantage of development by inspection....

Scott,

What does "close" to semi-stand mean?

Sandy

couldabin · May 18, 2007

Tom Hoskinson said:
Single sheet development with the emulsion side facing up is an important factor. I believe that the design and construction of my slosher trays (i.e. Summitek Cradles) and the developer flow patterns that result, are also important.

http://www.summitek.com/cradle.html

I will also add that I get fully comparable, uniform development and mottle free semi-stand results, developing in BTZS type tanks with Pyrocat.

Tom, are we talking about two different things here? (And I sense Sandy is pursuing the same idea below ...). Semi-stand development is said to work if the film is placed in a tray (slosher or otherwise), initially agitated for about 30 seconds, and then left for a period of about 20 minutes, agitated again, and then removed after another 20 minutes. The difficulty I have is that doing that has, for me, resulted in mottling. If I move the film constantly I don't have that problem, even without a slosher tray.

Are you moving the film (shuffling)?

Scott Peters · May 18, 2007

Sandy, it would be results as the process involves more shuffling and development times are not as long. Results are good enough for me. I have done semi stand with very high sbr shots with nice results. Perhaps for me its more of a control thing than edge effect thing? Maybe I just haven't done the semi enough either....

Tom Hoskinson · May 18, 2007

couldabin said:
Tom, are we talking about two different things here? (And I sense Sandy is pursuing the same idea below ...). Semi-stand development is said to work if the film is placed in a tray (slosher or otherwise), initially agitated for about 30 seconds, and then left for a period of about 20 minutes, agitated again, and then removed after another 20 minutes. The difficulty I have is that doing that has, for me, resulted in mottling. If I move the film constantly I don't have that problem, even without a slosher tray.

Are you moving the film (shuffling)?

No, Duane.

1. I agitate intitially for 30 seconds.

2. I then let the film stand in the developer for half the total development time without any agitation, then agitate again for 20 -30 seconds.
3. Then I let the film stand in the developer without agitation for the remainder of the total development time.
4. Plain water rinse.
5. Fix
6. Wash

couldabin · May 18, 2007

Tom Hoskinson said:
No, Duane.

1. I agitate intitially for 30 seconds.

2. I then let the film stand in the developer for half the total development time without any agitation, then agitate again for 20 -30 seconds.
3. Then I let the film stand in the developer without agitation for the remainder of the total development time.
4. Plain water rinse.
5. Fix
6. Wash

Thanks for the clarification. I'm having trouble imagining there's any (significant) circulation of developer after it has stood for more than a minute, let alone after 10 or 15 minutes, maybe more.

Tom Hoskinson · May 18, 2007

couldabin said:
Thanks for the clarification. I'm having trouble imagining there's any (significant) circulation of developer after it has stood for more than a minute, let alone after 10 or 15 minutes, maybe more.

Little or no developer circulation occurs during the stand periods.

couldabin · May 18, 2007

Tom Hoskinson said:
Little or no developer circulation occurs during the stand periods.

That's what I believe, also. If that's correct, though, shouldn't semi-stand development give the same results in a slosher tank as a regular tray?

sanking · May 18, 2007

couldabin said:
That's what I believe, also. If that's correct, though, shouldn't semi-stand development give the same results in a slosher tank as a regular tray?

I would figure the same.

But, the dynamics are not the same. The slosher type cradles have holes in the bottom. Trays do not.

Could this be the reason for the difference in results? Not sure, but it is the only difference I see?

Sandy

Tom Hoskinson · May 19, 2007

sanking said:
I would figure the same.

But, the dynamics are not the same. The slosher type cradles have holes in the bottom. Trays do not.

Could this be the reason for the difference in results? Not sure, but it is the only difference I see?

Sandy

I believe the holes in the bottoms and 4 corners of each slosher compartment affect the developer flow patterns and are likely one reason for the difference in results. Placing the film emulsion side facing down in the tray is another likely source of difference, IMO.

couldabin · May 19, 2007

Tom Hoskinson said:
I believe the holes in the bottoms and 4 corners of each slosher compartment affect the developer flow patterns and are likely one reason for the difference in results. Placing the film emulsion side facing down in the tray is another likely source of difference, IMO.

If this is the case, then there must be circulation. It sounded earlier as if we agreed there wasn't any during the long periods of no agitation.

I would expect osmosis to cause some movement, but I would not have guessed that the shape of the tray would influence (may I coin a phrase?) osmotic circulation to that degree.

gainer · May 19, 2007

Circulation can be caused by changes in specific gravity of the developer due to development and variations in temperature from one point to another. I did some tests years ago that were published. I thought that stand development with emulsion side down would prevent streaking. No. The same force that causes a meniscus in a glass tube keeps the developer without agitation from leaving the surface of the film. You see this force at work when you pour liquid from a wide mouth container. It clings to the container and runs down its side.

In my tests I did not use a highly diluted developer. High dilution minimizes local differences in specific gravity due to chemical changes in the developer. There still can be local differences in temperature that cause convection currents. Maybe some experiments with food dye and plain water can give you an idea about what you're up against.

Semi-stand, uneven highlights and Pyrocat

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency