Hi all, I have read a lot of conflicting views on Rodinal and stand development. Some say that stand development restricts the development of highlights to enable a narrower tonal range and better contrast, and also that it produces higher acuity and hence perceived sharpness. I decided to run my own test on the matter to come to a personal conclusion.
I exposed a 120 roll of Rollei RPX 100, in two brackets from -2 to +4. I cut the roll in half inside a changing bag, and loaded it onto two different reels/tanks.
Tank 1: Rodinal 1+50, 20c, 18 minutes. Agitation for the first minute, and for ten seconds of each minute. Agitation was done by inversion of the tank.
Tank 2: Rodinal 1+100, 20c, 60 minutes. Agitation for the first minute, followed by no agitation at all.
The restrictions on file size made my attached results sheet much less useful than my original is, but even with less detail visible it is clear that the difference between the two methods is not very noticeable. The 'adjusted' column refers to automated scanner adjustment in the image, which I have included for reference. In -1 stand development (unadjusted) I see slightly better development of shadows vs highlights as compared to the 18 minute ordinary development with agitation. I see very little evidence of the magical effect of stand development balancing out under or overexposures, which aside from -1 are very similar at each end.
In terms of sharpness, the attached image gives very little idea due to image size restrictions. I see very little difference in acuity or grain. In fact if anything, the negatives developed with agitation appear slightly sharper under a loupe.
I wanted to share these results in hopes they might be useful for others, as Rodinal & stand development is a frequent matter of discussion.
Limitations of this experiment I am aware of are that this of course only applies to one film, the Rollei RPX 100, and that a scene of different contrast or sharpness may have produced results with more variation.
I'd welcome others' views on the matter.
Kind regards,
Olli
I exposed a 120 roll of Rollei RPX 100, in two brackets from -2 to +4. I cut the roll in half inside a changing bag, and loaded it onto two different reels/tanks.
Tank 1: Rodinal 1+50, 20c, 18 minutes. Agitation for the first minute, and for ten seconds of each minute. Agitation was done by inversion of the tank.
Tank 2: Rodinal 1+100, 20c, 60 minutes. Agitation for the first minute, followed by no agitation at all.
The restrictions on file size made my attached results sheet much less useful than my original is, but even with less detail visible it is clear that the difference between the two methods is not very noticeable. The 'adjusted' column refers to automated scanner adjustment in the image, which I have included for reference. In -1 stand development (unadjusted) I see slightly better development of shadows vs highlights as compared to the 18 minute ordinary development with agitation. I see very little evidence of the magical effect of stand development balancing out under or overexposures, which aside from -1 are very similar at each end.
In terms of sharpness, the attached image gives very little idea due to image size restrictions. I see very little difference in acuity or grain. In fact if anything, the negatives developed with agitation appear slightly sharper under a loupe.
I wanted to share these results in hopes they might be useful for others, as Rodinal & stand development is a frequent matter of discussion.
Limitations of this experiment I am aware of are that this of course only applies to one film, the Rollei RPX 100, and that a scene of different contrast or sharpness may have produced results with more variation.
I'd welcome others' views on the matter.
Kind regards,
Olli