Stand development - first attempt - blank film

Yes it would certainly seem unlikely that Adox would state as a minimum amount of 5ml as a quantity that gives development problems.

cliveh said:

The edge markings are put there by the manufacturer, if you have no edge markings, then you have either put the fix in first, or developed the film in some kind of bleach.

Click to expand...

To be fair to the OP, jarvman, he did then try his R09 with a leader for an hour and it made no difference. Somehow the R09 was totally shot

He did also describe his agitation and it did appear to me to be more like semi-stand. It certainly wasn't the stand development of the pour and leave alone variety

pentaxuser

Arvee said:

A quote from Roger Hicks: "As one of Ilford's technical experts said to me many years ago, "You need about a tablespoon of developer to develop a film. The rest is there to wet the film quickly and evenly." He also pointed out that a peel-apart Polaroid uses about a teaspoon full of developer."

This statement was made during a discussion about Roger successfully using D-76 1+3 (75ml/300ml).

Click to expand...

This is largely correct, but there is a caveat that can/ will trip up the unwary - the minimum stock solution per roll is given more to ensure that an end user's results have a chance of being within a reasonable margin of operator error of the manufacturer's published data, even if the developer (given sufficient time compensation) will give equal results when used in a much smaller quantity per roll.

Jarvman said:

Ah really. Never knew that. Thought it was the other way around. That’s good news because tri x is more expensive I think.

Click to expand...

It's not a universal rule - it can and does vary between different developers, and the speed enhancing ones tend to narrow what little gap there is between them. HP5+ has some advantages, 400TX has others - neither is outright 'better' than the other.