Stand Processing Test Results #3 of series

bobbysandstrom · Feb 18, 2006

allrighty then...

here are the results of the 3rd test with a comparison of tests 1 and 2

-------------------------
TEST 3
FP4+ Rodinal 1:100 68F Agitate 1min

N-1/4 16min EI125
*N 19min 50sec EI160
N+1 57min 50sec
N+ 1-1/2 2 hrs EI160

-------------------------
TEST 2
FP4+ Rodinal 1:200 68F Agitate 1min 30sec

N-1-1/2 16min EI100
N-1 20min 9sec
*N 45min 30sec EI125
N+1 2hrs EI160

-------------------------
TEST 1
FP4+ Rodinal 1:200 68F Agitate 1min only

N-2 16min EI100
N-1 22min 40sec
*N 46min 50sec EI125
N+1/3 64min EI160

with this test I didn't go to 2 hrs so I'm going to assume you''ll get close to n+1 at 2 hrs.

Now it's time to kick around these numbers and see what they mean. I will eventually test scenes with 1:100 vs 1:200 to see any differences in edge effects or overall tonality and eveness of development. I'll post my results when I've done that.

That's enough testing for the time. Now I want to take some photos!

Again, I'll post a cohesive page on completion outlining processing details for anyone that might be interested.

noseoil · Feb 18, 2006

Bob, thanks for posting this information. It is a good starting point to get some shots and see about edges and shadow textures. Sounds like you're having a good time with all of this.

I'm sure a page would be greatly appreciated by plenty of folks on the forum. Can you post some scans of the results when you put it all together? Would like to see how this combination performs in the real world and hear your comments about insights you may have. tim

hortense · Feb 18, 2006

Stand Processing Dilutions

Bob, thanks you for your continuing efforts. Valuable for what Ive been working on.

My understanding from Ilford is that Rodinal should be at a minimum of 5ml of the concentrate for one roll? If my calculations are correct, 1:200 is not enough developer for one roll of 120 size film? 1:200 ≈ a little more the 0.5%. but you are doing the testing so well wait see what comes out.

Again many thanks, Im sure all of us stand guys are eagerly awaiting your final results.

bobbysandstrom · Feb 18, 2006

Tim, my plan is to a/b or a/b/c shots taken at the same time but processed differently so I have an idea of what's most pleasing to my eye. I will tone and mount these prints so I can judge them accurately. I will report my findings once done.

Hortense my tests so far have been with 4x5 film using 400ml of solution per sheet in a jobo expert drum. That equates to 2ml of rodinal per sheet. 4 sheets = 1 roll of 35mm or 1 roll of 120 or of course 1 8x10. So in essence, I'm using 8ml per roll for my tests which would bring me above the minimum posted amount.

bobbysandstrom · Feb 18, 2006

I forgot to mention my numbers are for printing on Kodak Polymax paper with an Exposure Scale of 1.01.

If you use Ilford MGIV you should be pretty close.

bobbysandstrom · Feb 19, 2006

OK. It's going on 14 hours today between finishing some tests and getting out to shoot then coming home and printing. All I can say is I've found my Film/Dev combo for landscape and I will look no further for a long time! I just want to learn this combo like I know my name! (MAN I'm Excited!) I thought I had found my dream combo with FP4 and FX1 however I plan on buying an 8x10 enlarger and didn't like the way the FX1 enlarged hence my mission to find another solution. So today I did an 8x10 shot as well as a 4x5 (so I could see how the Rodinal enlarged) and I'm just thrilled! The prints glow as well as exhibit plenty of accutance without being overdone. It's just right. I know I said I'd mount the prints to assess them but I honestly don't have to! I love this combo and processing method. Now I just want to photograph as much as humanly possible. I feel like a kid let loose at the chocolate factory. I will work on the post with all of the details very soon. Good Night!

Steve Sherman · Feb 19, 2006

Great for You!

Yours is the approach everyone should take with this technique. Run some film through the process and see what your likes are, settle on what works for you and go make photographs for yourself.

Hopefully your enthusiasm will be contagious.

Cheers, Steve

noseoil · Feb 19, 2006

Bob, this is why I'm so hooked by Pyrocat and Efke 100. It gives some very nice results and behaves in a similar, predictible manner. I have some Rodinal, but have been reluctant to use it because it was going away with Agfa. Sounds like it may be here to stay, so perhaps I may have to get out that couple of bottles and buy some FP4 to see what happens. Very much appreciate your posting the numbers as a starting point. I still have one more year to go with the Pyrocat, before I try anything else. Too damn many magic bullets flying around on this site to not get hit by one once in a while, don't you know.

I'm curious what you found lacking in the FX1/ FP4 combination? I know what stand development is capable of doing, was the FX1 too "mushy" in the film to yield decent results? tim

bobbysandstrom · Feb 19, 2006

Tim, when enlarged, I found the fx1 to be a little bit gritty(for lack of a better word).

As I sit here looking at my prints from last night I've come to the conclusion that, for me, this film and process gives the perfect combination of sharpness and tonality. I posted a few days ago looking for advice on a middle of the road developer. I mixed up a batch of dilute D76 and processed some film but was still wanting a bit more accutance. I happened to see a post for rodinal stand and decided to give it a try. I was so pleased with the results that I set out on my little testing spree and I'm glad I did! The additional benefits of this is there's no fuss mixing chemicals or standing over the film during development. For my step wedge tests I used a jobo expert drum and agitated (with it sitting upright not on its side like on the cpp2) simply by turning the drum 1/3 a turn per second. I used a metronome to count the seconds. I alternated 5 turns in each direction. I had the drum in a flat tray so it turned easily. Try it with the cap off filled with water to the brim and watch the action.

I only had 1 sheet of 4x5 left for my "real" shot so when I got back home I used a standard daylight reel tank filled with 600ml(to cover the film) vs 400ml of solution and turned(agitated) the same way. It worked perfect.

Using the jobo saves the hassle of having to deal with multiple tubes. And if you have different times you can mark the drum and pull out an individual sheet as required.

Anyway, it's off to freestyle when they open to pick up more film!

happy shooting!

bobbysandstrom · Feb 20, 2006

PLEASE NOTE:

I am correcting my film speed (EI) numbers from my post above. They should have read as follows:

-------------------------
TEST 3
FP4+ Rodinal 1:100 68F Agitate 1min

N-1/4 16min EI100-
*N 19min 50sec EI125-
N+1 57min 50sec
N+ 1-1/2 2 hrs EI125-

-------------------------
TEST 2
FP4+ Rodinal 1:200 68F Agitate 1min 30sec

N-1-1/2 16min EI80-
N-1 20min 9sec
*N 45min 30sec EI100-
N+1 2hrs EI125-

-------------------------
TEST 1
FP4+ Rodinal 1:200 68F Agitate 1min only

N-2 16min EI80--
N-1 22min 40sec
*N 46min 50sec EI100-
N+1/3 64min EI125-

with this test I didn't go to 2 hrs so I'm going to assume you''ll get close to n+1 at 2 hrs.

bobbysandstrom · Feb 20, 2006

Jay, I plan to spend some time shooting and assessing actual photos now so I can see just how these numbers translate to the real world. I want to play with expansion and contraction to see if I like how the tones compress and expand. So far, I really like "N" times using 1:200. Images have a glow and sharpness that's very pleasing. My guess is the 1:100 will exhibit less edge effects. It's just a guess but we will see. I think one of the greatest benefits from going through this process is that it gets you thinking about how/when to best apply your tools. I will definitely post any findings!

hortense · Mar 19, 2006

Rodinal Test Used

bobbysandstrom said:
So today I did an 8x10 shot as well as a 4x5 (so I could see how the Rodinal enlarged) and I'm just thrilled! The prints glow as well as exhibit plenty of accutance without being overdone. It's just right.

Very pleased to hear this. Question: Which TEST no. did you use? I am interested in the Rodinal dilution you used, the agitation, and time in the developer.

BTW, I will be testing Paterson's Acutol that ostensibly will provide grearter acutance and edge effect (perhaps too much). This a Non Solvent High Definition Developer accoring to Anchell and Troop. They rate it for acutance just below the category that is for FX1, Beutler Neofin Blue and some pyrocatechin developer. The next category below this contains Paterson FX39, Acutol (FX14), FX2 and FX37.

bobbysandstrom · Mar 19, 2006

hortense said:
Which TEST no. did you use? I am interested in the Rodinal dilution you used, the agitation, and time in the developer.

I used the 1:200 dilution with one minute agitation up front (TEST 1)

I wanted to take a look at FX-2 as well. I must say, it is VERY IMPRESSIVE! It's plenty sharp and produces great tonality with a fantastic glow. I read somewhere it's the glycin that causes the glow. I've only looked at it with fp4 8x10 conatacts. I'm sure it will enlarge beautifully. I would highly recommend checking out this combo. (FP4+ w/ FX-2) I tried the TFX-2 from PF and immediately ordered the chemicals to mix my own(FX-2). I'll use the Rodinal/fp4 combo for certain things however for the bulk of my processing I'll use fx2. I plan to do my testing this week.

good luck.

JeffD · Mar 28, 2006

Couple of questions- pardon me if I didn't see in the above posts:

How are you determining film speed? I usually subtract 4 stops from the exposure given by my light meter, and expect .1 over film base plus fog. Is that your criteria?

What were you exposing your negatives to to work out your speeds and devel times? I have been using a stouffer wedge sheet sandwiched over my film in a holder, and exposed to zone 10. I think Noseoil posted an article about this a while ago, and I like the method. May not be perfect, but works pretty well for me.

How are you determining developing time? A lot of people shoot for a time which gives them a certain density at zone 8, or 3 stops over their meter reading. Is this what you did? What density were you shooting for and in what zone, for determining your devel times?

Lastly, which expert drum do you have? I have a 3010, that holds ten sheets, but it is so large, I can't imagine using it for stand development. I do have a combi-plan tank that I want to do some testing similar to what you did.

As an aside, I tried semi-stand development with fp4+ and XP1- using the directions with Formulary data sheet for XP1. Contrary to the data sheet, in no way did I get any additional film speed using XP1. Idon't think I got even published film speed. I haven't run the negs under my densitometer yet, but I can just tell by looking that they are underexposed. I was kind of dissapointed with my first go with XP1.

I have some Rodinal on order too, and look forward to working with it. In the past I have used HC110, and got some pretty good results with TMAX 400 film (contrary to what most people seem to report).

bobbysandstrom · Apr 1, 2006

Jeff

I use BTZS, Beyond The Zone System to find my numbers.

hortense · Apr 7, 2006

Acutol

hortense said:
Very pleased to hear this. Question: [B I will be testing Paterson's Acutol that ostensibly will provide grearter acutance and edge effect (perhaps too much). This a Non-Solvent High Definition Developer accoring to Anchell and Troop. They rate it for acutance just below the category that is for FX1, Beutler Neofin Blue and some pyrocatechin developer. The next category below this contains Paterson FX39 then Acutol (FX14) and, FX2 and FX37.

Bobby. I promised you the results of my Acutol Stand Development Testing.
I am very pleased with the results. Did straight prints; prints showed just enough "edge" effects (not to much, just right) for what I wanted; not over done. Compared to the Unsharp Masks I did with 4x5, FP4+/Acutol/Stand. gave me what I wanted.

Acutol/FP4+ Test 3/06

Roll No. 20
Stand Development:
Soak/agitate water: 5-min.
Dev: 2.96% Acutol
19-min @ 68°F
First 6o-sec. agitation
NONE thereafter.

bobbysandstrom · Apr 7, 2006

congratulations! It's always nice to get the results you hope for.

craigclu · Apr 7, 2006

hortense said:
Bobby. I promised you the results of my Acutol Stand Development Testing.

Hortense... What was your EI and metering method? Thanks.

hortense · Apr 8, 2006

craigclu said:
Hortense... What was your EI and metering method? Thanks.

EI 200. Use a Pentax Digital Meter and standard test method for determining ASA.

Stand Processing Test Results #3 of series

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency