SilverFalls05.jpg
The lower falls, about a mile east of the parking area. I know this falls has a name, but I can't think of it.
Photographed on Ilford HP5+ and processed in Rodinal 1:100 for one hour, with a few agitations at the start (after a 1 minute water soak) and one lift-and-dip agitation at the 30 minute mark (This process is known colloquially as "stand processing").
I don't typically use (or like) stand processing because if you have large areas of flat tone (like a blank sky) its a sure thing that you will see streaks or patches of uneven density. Film processed in a tank (like a roll of 120, which is spooled vertically onto the reel) often have a "hot edge" where the film at the bottom of the tank got more development, as bromides drifted off the film. You can also easily get streaks developing by the same process, and this is known as bromide drag.
However, with this image I had two identically exposed sheets, and the first one was developed normally in D76, and it proved to lack adequate density in the shadow areas (could have used another 2/3 or 1 stop of exposure). So I had a second sheet I felt I could experiment with and instead of doing a normal N+1 push, I opted to do a stand dev in Rodinal 1:100 (5 ml in 500 ml of water). This yielded a surprisingly good negative with much better shadow detail without compromising the higher values at all. It seems to be a very evenly developed sheet as well, which surprises me somewhat; I expected some conspicuous unevenness, such as a hot spot in the middle or edges, or something. But no, it appears there's none of that. I suspect this is because this was developed flat, in a tray, not vertically, in hangers.
What can I say? When it works, it works. But I caution folks that if you DO use stand development in tanks, expect development artifacts, hot spots and unevenness on your negs. Contrary to the mythology, this is NOT the perfect solution for every instance.
SilverFalls05.jpg
The lower falls, about a mile east of the parking area. I know this falls has a name, but I can't think of it.
Photographed on Ilford HP5+ and processed in Rodinal 1:100 for one hour, with a few agitations at the start (after a 1 minute water soak) and one lift-and-dip agitation at the 30 minute mark (This process is known colloquially as "stand processing").
I don't typically use (or like) stand processing because if you have large areas of flat tone (like a blank sky) its a sure thing that you will see streaks or patches of uneven density. Film processed in a tank (like a roll of 120, which is spooled vertically onto the reel) often have a "hot edge" where the film at the bottom of the tank got more development, as bromides drifted off the film. You can also easily get streaks developing by the same process, and this is known as bromide drag.
However, with this image I had two identically exposed sheets, and the first one was developed normally in D76, and it proved to lack adequate density in the shadow areas (could have used another 2/3 or 1 stop of exposure). So I had a second sheet I felt I could experiment with and instead of doing a normal N+1 push, I opted to do a stand dev in Rodinal 1:100 (5 ml in 500 ml of water). This yielded a surprisingly good negative with much better shadow detail without compromising the higher values at all. It seems to be a very evenly developed sheet as well, which surprises me somewhat; I expected some conspicuous unevenness, such as a hot spot in the middle or edges, or something. But no, it appears there's none of that. I suspect this is because this was developed flat, in a tray, not vertically, in hangers.
What can I say? When it works, it works. But I caution folks that if you DO use stand development in tanks, expect development artifacts, hot spots and unevenness on your negs. Contrary to the mythology, this is NOT the perfect solution for every instance.