Stand developing

[tballphoto]

How does stand developing impact the ISO rating of a film?

I know that I shoot a roll of 400 iso film at 200, I need to make adjustments to developing times. But what about when done with stand development?

 

[bobsteele]

[starts the popcorn]. This outta be interesting, I bet. Cue the (re)hash wayback machine.

 

[juan]

There are lots of threads here on stand developing. Lots. Partially, it depends on what you’re looking for. A portrait photographer who is interested in skin tones, not deep shadow detail, would rate it one way. A landscape photographer another. It also depends on the film, the developer, and the developer method. Do you let the film stand at room temperature for an hour, or do you use a Mortensen method such as letting it stand 8-hours in the refrigerator.

The answer - it depends.

That said, I recommend some minimal agitation scheme over strict stand development.

 

[radiant]

I prefer sitting.

(sorry, I couldn't resist)

 

[jay moussy]

I prefer sitting.

(sorry, I couldn't resist)

You can go upstairs for a sit-down dinner, while "standing".

 

[Donald Qualls]

I think I've tried stand developing (in Parodinal 1:100) once, didn't like the results (been more than fifteen years, so I don't recall much detail). What I did instead, specifically by way of boosting shadows while keeping normal contrast, was reduced agitation. I'd process in Parodinal 1:50 for about double the listed time (came out around fifteen minutes, generally) with agitation only every third minute. Shadows got lots of development, but local exhaustion kept the contrast in check.

.EDU Ultra 100, Parodinal 1:50 (3 minute agitation cycle)
Brownie Hawkeye Flash

 

[pentaxuser]

How does stand developing impact the ISO rating of a film?

I know that I shoot a roll of 400 iso film at 200, I need to make adjustments to developing times. But what about when done with stand development?

Here's as direct an answer as I can give to your direct question: Stand development does not impact the rating of a film as the time taken to develop and the amount of developer is the same for all films and all ratings. I refer here specifically to that famous stand developer "known to the mobs as the enforcer" ( sorry couldn't resist that one). Rodinal is known to be the stand developer of choice

Others may of course add more to the thread but that's the direct answer to your direct question in a nutshell

pentaxuser

 

[removed account4]

what developer are you using? are you planning on gently agitating every like 45 mins or 1 hour ?
is it roll film that will be enlarged? or sheet film that will be contact printed? or will you film be scanned and worked on that way ?
when you look through the site archives for info on stand developers and what chemistry works best
look for semi-stand development too. one of the concerns people have with stand is that there is "bromide drag"
you might end up with either thin film or really dense film depending on what you do..
im a fan of dense film so I like to do whatever I can to get that..

 

[Rick A]

I do stand developing, sitting is for lazy people.

 

[Neal]

Dear tballphoto,

Stand developing is fun to try. Bracket the heck out of a roll and go for it. Be sure to use a tank with plenty of volume so you have enough developer. There are plenty of old threads describing how to do it.

Don't expect great results. There is a reason that Jobo systems with continuous agitation are so popular.

Have fun!
Neal Wydra

 

[pentaxuser]

Yes there are lots of views and lots of suggestions here but for the sake of the OP can others whether they use Stand now or have used Stand and didn't like it address his original questions. Then by all means tell him your like or dislike of it.

His questions seemed relatively straightforward to me and capable of direct straight answers

If it were me asking the question I'd prefer to see more than one respondent giving direct answers

Thanks on behalf of the OP whom I first met here today and whom I have no knowledge of or interest in, other than believing that as a forum member he deserves direct answers to direct questions he asked

pentaxuser

 

[Paul Howell]

Some shooters swear by stand, I've use stand on occasion, and found that it works rather well, but you do run the risk of bromide drag. I recommend shooting a ring around to test for personal E.I, you can also use a densitometer. Set up scene in open shade, something zone VII, something zone II, a 18 percent gray card and if possible a model with pale skin tones for zone VI. Shoot starting at ISO 25, shoot an empty frame then shoot ISO 50 and repeat until you max out your meter. Be sure and keep notes. Pick your developer, Rodinal at 1:50 to 1:100 seems popular, use standard temps, 68 or 70 degrees then pick your time, an hour is what most people use. As you are shooting 35mm I would not do more than 1 or 2 agitations, or none, you are more likely to get bromide drags in the sprocket holes the more agitation you use. Once fixe washed and dried scan or print a contact sheet and find the ISO that gives you good shadow detail without blowing the highlights, that your personal E.I for your film and developer using stand. When I tested Ultrafine 400 found that 400 was spot on.

 

[pentaxuser]

Some shooters swear by stand, I've use stand on occasion, and found that it works rather well, but you do run the risk of bromide drag. As you are shooting 35mm I would not do more than 1 or 2 agitations, or none, you are more likely to get bromide drags in the sprocket holes the more agitation you use..

Paul so it seems you are saying that more than 1 or 2 agitations in the hour runs the risk of bromide drag and no agitation at all is best as a way of avoiding bromide drag? I had always thought based on what seemed to be the consensus of others that lack of agitation was the risky method and in effect semi-stand gave the best chance of avoiding bromide drag.

Your well explained test procedure while good for whatever specific film you are using gives a result in terms of best EI for the user seems to fly in the face of the other claimed benefit of being able to develop several films used at a range of speeds in one tank such that stand eliminates the need to choose a dev time for each specific film?

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Full on stand is risky. Semi-stand, with minimal agitation, is a safer...and better...route to go. My experience is with Pyrocat-HD and mainly HP5 sheet film. Full on stand affects ISO more than semi-stand. With full on stand, I always gave an extra stop of exposure from my normal EI of 250. I never bothered with this extra exposure with semi-stand.

 

[Alan Johnson]

On the rare occasions I have done this I used Rodinal 1:100 and noted the recommendations of the experienced Don Cardwell.
He gives curves for Rodinal 1:50. Results may depend on whether you print optically (range inside the box on his curves?) or scan (full density range?).
He says his tests gave better shadow speed with semi-stand than with normal development (agitating every minute).
https://www.photrio.com/forum/resources/shaping-the-tone-curve-of-a-rodinal-negative.50/
You may have to log in to see this.

 

[ic-racer]

How does stand developing impact the ISO rating of a film?

I know that I shoot a roll of 400 iso film at 200, I need to make adjustments to developing times. But what about when done with stand development?

As far as I know, no manufacturer uses 'stand' development for ISO testing/rating.

 

[pentaxuser]

tballphoto has yet to reply but I feel that what he is seeking as answers are rather more simple that we are making it. As far as I am aware Stand does allow you to develop films of different box speeds in the same tank as Stand is in effect development to the point of developer exhaustion.

What may be better ways to develop films and what may be the drawbacks to using Stand is another matter on which the OP may want to ask questions but currently that is not what he asked

pentaxuser

 

[NB23]

How does stand developing impact the ISO rating of a film?

I know that I shoot a roll of 400 iso film at 200, I need to make adjustments to developing times. But what about when done with stand development?

Stand development is a comedy of errors that acts goofily on many fronts to give, in the end, rounded-off half-results on all fronts.

Iso? While one is half-assing his development why care for iso?

 

[Paul Howell]

The answer to OP question, in my opinion, is that stand development should not affect ISO, the question is based on camera, meter, developer and time what is the true ISO for that set of circumstances? If OP is using a later model camera with good electronic shutter and matrix metering she/he should very close to box speed. Then again, Foma shoots around 1/2 to full stop slower than box speed, with Tmax 400 maybe 800 with no troubles. I know that many hate testing, but sometimes doing a ring around is the best answer to what ISO?

 

[tballphoto]

I was sleeping and doing chores today. original post was made on an insomnia run..

What i am trying to find out is just how little impact will happen. I have ONLY used cinestill df96 monobath and will admit its not the greatest thing in the world. But what I learned from using it is that some films are rather picky.

I shot about 12 rolls of bw film, and shot at box speed. Arista EDU 200 and 100 were developed at same time in my tank and well lets just say, after scanning i thought i was looking at photocopies made from black and white photos in a news paper.

And even with following proper agitation for the monobath, i still had several rolls get ruined by bromide drag. So I am trying to be proactive and get the basic ideology down before i ruin good film/good shots by being a moron and skipping things.

 

[MattKing]

This discussion is complicated by those who are using ISO when they really are referring to Exposure Index.
As stand development tends to alter (sometimes radically) the contrast performance of a film, if you use something that approximates the ISO approach to determine the light sensitivity of the film (and therefore how to set one's meter), then stand development will really complicate that determination.
If you use something closer to a Zone system approach to determine the light sensitivity of the film (and therefore how to set one's meter), then the question is probably simpler, but figuring out how to reliably print the results is not.

 

[cliveh]

Those who think stand development works well for them are not able to compare the same set of negatives developed with standard agitation and are thus living in cloud cuckoo land.

 

[MattKing]

I have ONLY used cinestill df96 monobath and will admit its not the greatest thing in the world. But what I learned from using it is that some films are rather picky.

I understand the allure of a monobath to someone new to this. However, they add a layer of complexity that I think makes them really unsuitable for someone new to this.
I have almost the same opinion of stand development - it too is really inappropriate for someone new to this (IMHO).
Monobaths and stand or semi-stand techniques are special purpose tools/techniques that are better suited to those with at least a bit of experience with the more typical techniques for which the films were designed.
They are also fun to try - just more fun if you have the more usual and normal results to compare them with.

 

[Don_ih]

Stand development creates a situation where local activity works to exhaustion with equal results at different times. That is, something overexposed will burn the local developing agents and alkalinity quickly and something properly exposed will do the same more slowly - they will possibly both end up at the same amount of apparent density by the end of the hour. Since shadows don't have high exposure, they are not working the developer to exhaustion as quickly so that can continue to develop for longer. So, you can expect roughly the same results from a wide range of exposure, where you are unlikely to ever get maximum density, and contrast will probably be on the muddy side. That said, you will always get results that are fully developed. I find it useful for high-contrast copy film. It's pretty bland for good, new film, though.

 

[Paul Howell]

I would not use a monobath developer with stand development, the high dilution will affect the fixer as well as the developer. Arista EDU 200 and 100 are house branded Foma 200 and 100, a good film which I use in all formats, but for a person just starting out I recommend a classic developer like D76 or Extol, easy to use, forgiving, good balance, of grain, speed, sharpness and contrast.