They look fine to me. I'm still running tests and haven't done any finely manipulated prints from negatives produced this way yet. I can scan something soon.
My thinking is that in terms of overall density, the difference between 60 and 40 minutes may not be much. I believe that the local exhaustion occurs in the highlight areas much sooner than where there's shadow density being built.
I get the micro contrast. Im actually surprised that developer with such high depletion rates works well being used in that method.
Im ok taking your word for it. :)
What do you use that might serve me better than Pyrocat?
HP5+ and stand/semi-stand in Pyrocat-HD is sublime. Unbelievable edge effects. I develop in BTZS tubes (8x10). It takes 1200ml of diluted developer to fill an 8x10 tube (standing), therefore, my dilution is 1:1:240 (5ml A + 5ml B + 1200ml water).Quote:
Curious if any one is doing this with HP5+ (Pyrocat [MC or HD], Extreme Minimal Agitation) and if so, what dilutions as times are you using.
My development time is 1 hour. I agitate (by rolling) for the first minute, then about 5 secs every 20 minutes. I always remove the film after I agitate, invert and reinsert.
It is wise to shoot a backup just incase of excessive bromide drag or mottling. I used to have these issues, but inverting the film inside the tube has eliminated them.
I should also add that stand development is not recommended for all types of images. A negative where the local contrasts are high, and lots of textures, would work very well. I once semi-stood a negative which had a softly lit scene with fog... and it just looks yucky.
It was asked, how easy the negatives were to print, which are produced with FP4+ in Pyrocat MC 188.8.131.52 for 60min.
Here's an absolutely straight grade 2 print on Arista EDU VC. Print time is 20.1 seconds at f16. Development is 2 minutes in Liquidol 1:9. Toning is six minutes in Legacy Pro selenium.
I did nothing but straighten the scan and crop the edges in Photoshop.
Apologies for the scan lines. My scanner is lousy.