Straight from Kodak

[ColColt]

Back in the 80's I bought quite a few Kodak books and publications. I ran across several of them the other evening and one caught my eye since much has been brought up about developers, agitation methods, etc. This particular publication was called "Practical Processing in Black and White Photography", Kodak publication P-229, inside cover dated 1976.

Page 8 has some interesting info on agitation...

"Agitation is probably the least understood and the most abused of all the development controls. Some individuals use no agitation, while others employ a variety of techniques. Nevertheless, agitation is a simple, straight-forward process that should be used for consistent and uniform results.

When agitation is lacking, a stagnant layer of developer and development by-products forms at the interface of the emulsion and the solution. This stagnant layer is partially depleted in developing agent and is rich in bromide from the developing emulsion. Since bromide is a restrainer that inhibits developer action, the rate of development is retarded unless fresh developer is supplied to the emulsion. On the other hand, if the developer solution is agitated, fresh solution is continually brought into contact with the emulsion surface, and the normal development rate prevails.

Lack of agitation also contributes to another processing problem. Without agitation, the stagnant layer, which is heavier than the fresh developing solution, begins to sink slowly toward the bottom of the processing vessel. As it sinks, it tends to leave streaks on the processed negative. Good agitation overcomes this tendency toward uneven development. It is important, therefore, that the manufacturer's recommendations regarding solution agitation be observed."

There you have it, straight from the horse's mouth.

 

[Bill Burk]

Bromide is such a drag.

 

[Bill Burk]

Anyway, I think the Kodak agitation explanation was meant to encourage sufficient agitation when using normal concentrations of standard developers. I think if you practice "Stand Development" you are using a dilute developer and may not have as much Bromide in your development byproducts.

 

[ColColt]

True, I just thought I'd pass this along.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Well that explains what happens when agitation is not use. Thank you that was very interesting.

 

[summicron1]

never quite understood this passion for stand development -- you really like waiting an hour or more?

but seriously, use what gives you what you want -- and this is the explanation for agitation I've always gone by.

 

[mrred]

never quite understood this passion for stand development -- you really like waiting an hour or more?

Not so much waiting as opposed to doing something else. And not so much an hour, most often 20 mins or so. People that use an hour are probably overdeveloping.

 

[ColColt]

I think stand development has given different results for different folks depending on the developer/film. It would make me nervous and I don't intend on trying it. I have a hard enough time using HC-110 Dilution H with little agitation during the developing time but have had some good results.

 

[JBrunner]

I'm an agitator.

 

[marciofs]

I have being using the agitation I read a few weeks ago here. 10 seconds agitation every 5 min. It have being working great for em.

 

[ColColt]

Every five minutes? How long is the developing for? Most all my developing, regardless the developer or dilution is never over 10 minutes.

 

[JBrunner]

I have being using the agitation I read a few weeks ago here. 10 seconds agitation every 5 min. It have being working great for em.

Here in the uncivilized wastelands, we call that Semi-Stand developing. There are those who swear by it.

 

[marciofs]

Every five minutes? How long is the developing for? Most all my developing, regardless the developer or dilution is never over 10 minutes.

About 45% longer than the tame used for every minute agitation. Since I usually use dilution about 1:50 my development time with this method takes between 15min and 25min, depending on the negative I am developing.

 

[marciofs]

Here in the uncivilized wastelands, we call that Semi-Stand developing. There are those who swear by it.

It is indeed a semi stand development. But on a reduced time and higher concentration than the 1:100

 

[Sirius Glass]

I'm an agitator.

Me too. Either several inversions every 30 seconds or I let the Jobo processor do the agitations.

 

[Ronald Moravec]

I keep saying this to the chagrin of all the "internet experts." Certainly they may have developed a scheme where it works sometimes, or they do not see the defects. Sooner or later they will ruin the photo of a lifetime.

Thanks for posting.

 

[cmacd123]

the idea of the "stand" development is to actually use the effects that Kodak has noted as a way of extending the range of the image. The theory is that the "well Exposed" areas will saturate the developer, while the "barely there" parts will get MORE development. thus the dynamic range is compressed and so it might be posible to print an image taken with a lot of contrasty lighting without having to do a lot of Dodgeing and Burning. (and invoking the odd Plymouth while you are at it)

Not something I would want to try, but probably not 100% crazy.

 

[Kyle M.]

The truth is if your consistent stand developing is very consistent, regardless of what anyone may say. I've known people who have been stand developing for years and never had a problem, from what I've read Ansel Adams even used HC-110 to stand develop from time to time. Me personally I've only tried it twice, both times with Rodinal 1:100 for 1 hour. The first time was with Kodak T-Max 100, the second with Ilford HP5+, both times I got excellent negatives except for the fact that they had lost a lot of sharpness. I've seen other people do the same thing and have perfectly sharp negatives every time, to me it's just not worth the trouble when I can save 45 minutes or more and develop correctly. But for some people it definitely works and works well. Maybe I'll give it a try in HC-110 sometime just for the hell of it.

 

[Bill Burk]

I'm curious to hear from those who DO stand development, what role Bromide Drag plays into their process.

Is it simply another effect that makes the pictures interesting?

I see it as a problem when I'm watching old Westerns and watching the title screens for shows like "Have Gun Will Travel". The Bromide Drag effect is most easily seen on typefaces over white (or light gray) backgrounds.

But except for the 35mm "surge marks" I think in the midst of an interesting picture, it might not be bad at all.

 

[revdoc]

I use stand development for pinhole images on large format. With very long exposures reciprocity failure dominates, with the result that shadow detail is lacking and highlights can be very overexposed. Stand development in dilute developer helps to moderate this effect somewhat, by limiting development in the highlights while carrying on development in the shadows as far as it will go. I can't say I've ever noticed any bromide drag, but I contact print, so maybe the effect is just not visible wihtout enlargment.

I also find it simpler than "conventional" methods. No checking termperatures and watching the clock; just add developer, agitate for a bit, them go do something else for an hour.

 

[Bill Burk]

revdoc,

Are you standing the film/paper on edge or laying it flat in a tray? Might make a difference.

 

[marciofs]

I use stand development for pinhole images on large format. With very long exposures reciprocity failure dominates, with the result that shadow detail is lacking and highlights can be very overexposed. Stand development in dilute developer helps to moderate this effect somewhat, by limiting development in the highlights while carrying on development in the shadows as far as it will go. I can't say I've ever noticed any bromide drag, but I contact print, so maybe the effect is just not visible wihtout enlargment.

I also find it simpler than "conventional" methods. No checking termperatures and watching the clock; just add developer, agitate for a bit, them go do something else for an hour.

The same reason I do my 1 agitation every 5 minutes.
I do not stand develop because I rate have to wait too long to finish the work. Ok. In that 1h you can cook, watch TV, read a book. But you can't leave home for too long. You still have to be arround. While developing for only 10min to 20min you are completely free afterwards.
I just hate to wait.

 

[ColColt]

Maybe it's because I'm from a different generation...or another planet but to me anyone who pours developer over their film, walks away for 30 minutes or an hour is like someone who walks their dog and yaks on their cell phone. Neither is interested in what they're doing.

 

[Sirius Glass]