Stand Development

[cliveh]

Unless you were reproducing a fine lithographic print through a chemical photographic process, why would you wish to use stand development?

 

[Dusty Negative]

Look forward to hearing replies from Those who Know. Have pondered that myself many times. My readings indicate it is somehow a “safe” method of processing old film or film of unknown exposure, but I cannot make out why this should be so.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Full on stand is risky. Therefore, I never do full on stand. Semi-stand is just as effective, with much less risk of buggering up a negative. Bromide drag comes to mind. I appreciate semi-stand for its compensating effect, and especially for the edge effects. I always shoot a back up, just in case.

 

[eddie]

I've never done stand development, but there are people I respect (in both their images and knowledge) doing it, so I can't dismiss it as being illegitimate. I am intrigued, though, as getting in a nap while processing film is attractive.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I've never done stand development, but there are people I respect (in both their images and knowledge) doing it, so I can't dismiss it as being illegitimate. I am intrigued, though, as getting in a nap while processing film is attractive.

 

[pentaxuser]

The cat, as they say, has been landed amongst the pigeons. There will be flutters, feathers and hisses

pentaxuser

 

[Wayne]

Unless you were reproducing a fine lithographic print through a chemical photographic process, why would you wish to use stand development?

A 2 second google could have answered that question.

 

[greg zinselmeier]

With aviphot, technical pan chromatic, and the like, a.k.a document films, and/or arial film, stand or semi stand development allows for “ fuller” development of low or mid tones while highlights are restrained through exhaustion of developer in contact with those highlight areas, also high acutance, small grain, but sharp. Also heightened adjunct effect, particularly with aviphot 80 some call it rollei retro 80, the adjency effect is fantastic.

 

[greg zinselmeier]

The characteristic curve is different. I have plotted

 

[Dusty Negative]

With aviphot, technical pan chromatic, and the like, a.k.a document films, and/or arial film, stand or semi stand development allows for “ fuller” development of low or mid tones while highlights are restrained through exhaustion of developer in contact with those highlight areas, also high acutance, small grain, but sharp. Also heightened adjunct effect, particularly with aviphot 80 some call it rollei retro 80, the adjency effect is fantastic.

I much prefer this answer to the “2 second google.” Makes sense. Damn. Now I have to try this.

 

[Wayne]

I much prefer this answer to the “2 second google.” Makes sense. Damn. Now I have to try this.

But you'll miss out on 20 other answers if you don't google it. I don't believe the question was genuine. Who reproduces fine lithographic prints using stand development?

 

[awty]

Can someone define "edge effect" with some examples?

When ever I have seen pictures from those that use this method I see a rather flat tonal picture and think that maybe they should of moved the chemistry a bit more.
Not saying that there is not a use for it, but would love to see an example of the benefits that I couldn't get any other way.

 

[greg zinselmeier]

I don’t have a scanner to scan in an image. In regards to the post about a fine lithographic print. . . Etc is person who posted that being serious? If so, the only connection I can see, is that in some instances printers for Collotype prints did use litho-stone as a substrate/base for the dichromate/gelatin to print continuous tone images without half tone screen, in lithographic ink. As all dichromate processes have in common is a excellent straight line characteristic curve. IMO, with regular film stand development doesn’t offer better straight line characteristics than agitation method, it is however noticeable with document/ arial films. I’m not sure what the correlation is between stand development and lithography, unless of course, the poster is being absurd, for the sake of demonstrating how stand development is absurd. And I would agree that in the vast majority of cases stand development has very little effect on the casual observer of a print (gelatin or rc). But I do use it, if I realize if I set my meter for the wrong speed(therefor) my whole roll is off by 2 stops ( as an example) it has its place, buts it’s not a magic bullet, as always there are people who are believers and those who are not. For them it’s all or nothing, but for others where life is full of greys not black or white, stand development is one of many Arsenal of ticks to be used for a specific thing that comes around only so often.

 

[Alan Johnson]

Here are some some examples of edge effects:
https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/side-effect-of-stand-development.37964/
All the old films that showed strong edge effects , eg Efke 25, 50, 100; Plus X; Agfaphoto APX 100, are now discontinued.
It was thought that they all had low iodide content.
Of present day films that show some edge effect FP4+ is one.
I use agitation every 5 min to try to avoid streaks with stand development in Rodinal (After DF Cardwell).
Glycin developer FX-2 gives similar edge effects to Rodinal but is less prone to streaks.
IIRC, Steve Sherman used stand development in Pyrocat to improve microcontrast on large format negatives where the edge effect is proportionately less.
I have to disagree with Michael , whereas unsharp mask produces both increase and decrease in density each side of a border, stand developing only produces an effect on one side, they are not the same. See "Controls in Black and White Photography" by R. Henry.

 

[cliveh]

Post 15 shows quite clearly why stand technique is useful for reproducing fine line detail in etching and lithographic reproductions.

 

[relistan]

Stand development is useful as a general purpose development technique (generally as semi-stand), but IMO really doesn't give the best results for that. People on this forum will (have) flame(d) me for even saying that. However, *most* people who use it do so for its compensating effect, which in turn can allow decent push processing of various films. Edge effects, as mentioned, can be another intentional outcome. I used to often develop high contrast rolls this way in Rodinal 1+100 and found it reliable if done properly. However, many people don't seem to be able to achieve reliable results, for whatever reasons. And none of the things stand development does are exclusively available via stand development, it is just one technique to achieve them.

 

[MattKing]

Andrew O'Neill makes excellent use of enhanced edge effects. When those are combined with his Carbon Transfer work, it is impressive.

 

[Craig75]

Op did well to be on the board 10 years but somehow avoid the one billion threads on stand

 

[Helge]

I can tell you, don’t stand Ektar. I did that yesterday, thinking it was TMax.
Not great results. Two useable results out of a roll of 16. It was a night shoot though, so very high contrast.
Should be ideal for B&W at very slow speeds, but apparently not for Ektar.

Otherwise stand is wonderful and very forgiving.
Only ever tried it with Rodinal on slow film and with a single roll of HP5 6x6 that actually went rather well.
You never know whether you get very flat images or very high contrast ones.

I can’t really see a pattern or a curve that might apply. Seems rather arbitrary really. There has to be a some rhyme and reason though.

One thing i noticed though, is that scenes taken in shade end up unusually flat.

 

[eddie]

Only ever tried it with Rodinal on slow film with a single roll of HP5 6x6 that actually went rather well.

I've never considered HP5 slow.

 

[Helge]

I've never considered HP5 slow.

I missed an “and”. No, HP5 is blazing fast.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Andrew O'Neill makes excellent use of enhanced edge effects. When those are combined with his Carbon Transfer work, it is impressive.

 

[greg zinselmeier]

Thanks CliveH, for the redirect. I’m sorry I missed it the first time around

 

[Wayne]

Op did well to be on the board 10 years but somehow avoid the one billion threads on stand

That takes real talent.

 

[cliveh]

A billion threads is very much an exaggeration. How about a thousand, or perhaps a hundred, or even less? Stand development is fine for a specific purpose, but it is not a silver bullet to enhance your photography.