View allAll Photos Tagged standdevelopment
Pentax MZ-L
smcPENTAX-DA40mmF2.8Limited
Kodak_Tmax-100
Kodak_HC-110
Stand_Development
18minutes_21deg.C
Dilution_H
1:63
Kodak_Tmax-100
Photo was taken by using a Hasselblad 501CM with Carl Zeiss Planar 80mm f/2.8. Kodak Tri-X400, 1h in Rodinal 1:100, 20°. Presoaking for 3min. Scan with Epson V500. Digital development in LR CC.
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.
Gas Station, 3.33am
I decided to give stand development another try. I wasn't 100% happy with the results so far, but I couldn't just sit down and watch. So to speak, that is.
Having read that stand seem to be working better with medium format than with 35mm, well I thought "whatta hell let's go 35mm then."
Basically, everything I pretty much read, I broke.
Hence, I used a 35mm T-Max 400 (pushed at ISO 1600) with Rodinal, 2 hours. And I absolutely loved it.
What a ride.
Nikon F4s + Nikkor 24mm 1:2.8 AF-D + Kodak T-Max 400 pushed ISO 1600
Self developed in Agfa Rodinal (stand development, 2 hours)
Development details on FilmDev
Epson Perfection 4490 / No Photoshop
Teusaquillo, Bogotá (COL)
© 2015 follow me or avoid me on instagram tumblr facebook twitter
-------------------------------------
...Don't tell me you didn't know that my street work can now be seen at my secondary Tumblr blog, www.tumblr.com/blog/smilefromthestreetsyoushoot. Amazing, isn't it? Enjoy it then, why not? Of course you will. I know it, you know it.
Leica IIIf, test after curtain replacement and CLA
Summitar 50mm f/2
Arista 200, Caffenol-C-L, 70 minutes, 20-21°C
Pakon F135
Caffenol-C-L
water 500mL @ 20°C
washing soda 8g
vitamin C powder 5g
iodized salt 3g
instant coffee 20g
Got the shutter curtain replaced on my Leica IIIf, so no more pinhole light leaks. The Summitar was also cleaned, so everything is good!
Horizon Kompakt
Industar MC 28/f8
Rollei RPX 400
EI 3200
Taken on 30 December 2023
Paranol S (1+100) 60 min 20c
Epson v850
Silverfast 8
Lightroom
Sydney
New South Wales
Australia
Shot on February 5, 2023, with Mamiya C220, Mamiya-Sekor 80mm f/2.8 Blue dot, Lomography Earl Grey 100.
Stand developed using exhausted Fuji Microfine for 10+ hours. Scanned on EPSON GT-X980.
Shanghai. 35mm Minolta SRT100x with Rokkor 50mm F1.4. Ilford HP5 developed in HC-110 at 1:100 for 1hr25min
Hasselblad501C/M CF T*80mmf2.8
KODAK Tmax400
Kodak HC-110 Dilution H(1:63)
Stand Development
18minutes_21deg.C
日本家屋がここに残ってます。建て替え前の実家のようです。
Edo-Tokyo Open Air Architectural Museum
Bronica S2A, Zenzanon MC 40mm 1:4, Rollei Infrared 400, Hoya R72 filter, dev'd in Rodinal 1+100, stand developed for ~1 hour
Hasselblad501C/M CF T*80mmf2.8
KODAK Tmax400
Kodak HC-110 Dilution H(1:63)
Stand Development
18minutes_21deg.C
This photo had a back-paper issue in back ground.
Helsinki, Finland 2019
Canon EOS 5
Canon EF 50mm f1.8 II
Ilford HP5+ at 1600
Rodinal 1+100 100 min semi-stand at 19°C,
Agitation 1 min + 5 sec at 25 and 70 min.
RealitySoSubtle 6X6 pinhole camera.
My images are © Copyrighted and All Rights Reserved. This image cannot be reproduced and/or used in any form of publication, print or the Internet without my written permission.
Olympus OM-2n
Zuiko 50mm f. 1.8
Ilford HP5+
Stand developed in Rodinal 1:100, one hour (two agitations after 30 min)
Scan from negative
Thank you very much for stopping by, for your faves and comments – it is much appreciated :-)
Helsinki, Finland 2024
Fujica ST605
Asahi Pentax Super-Takumar 105mm f2.8
Agfaphoto APX 100 shot at ISO 200
Compard R09 One Shot 1+100 60 min semi-stand at 20°C
Hasselblad501C/M CF T*80mmf2.8
KODAK Tmax400
Kodak HC-110 Dilution H(1:63)
Stand Development
18minutes_21deg.C
RealitySoSubtle 6X6 pinhole camera.
My images are © Copyrighted and All Rights Reserved. This image cannot be reproduced and/or used in any form of publication, print or the Internet without my written permission.
A week ago I did a shoot on 8X10 HP5 and forgot to calculate bellows extension (DUH!) and so I had film that was approximately three stops underexposed. Since I regarded this film as trash anyway, I decided to perform an outrageous test to see what happens: I developed a sheet in Rodinal (Well, specifically RO9) 1:100 for 12 hours (started at 8PM and I fixed it at 8AM the next morning). There was 8 ml of RO9 in 800 ml of water, and it appears that there was development activity well past the one hour mark, as the other sheet processed for one hour was far thinner than the 12 hour neg.
Was it a useable negative? Sort of. There was plenty of density overall, but there was some unevenness and a bit greater density towards the outside edges of the sheet, plus there was a heavy fog base. Still, I got an image out of it
Testing Rodinal's compensating properties with a very high contrast scene. Ilford FP4+ @ ISO 100 stand developed in 1:100 Rodinal for one hour @ 68F