Switch to English Language Passer en langue franšaise Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 74,621   Posts: 1,647,745   Online: 885
      
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 29 of 29
  1. #21
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    14,774
    Images
    297
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian C. Miller View Post
    Uneven development? Take a look at the attached files. This was done with refrigerator development, ala William Mortensen. I used Fuji Acros 120, in Ilford Ilfosol 3, for five days. Now, do you see uneven development?
    Do you have any negatives with a smooth tonality surface instead of strong texture, like a blue sky that has some tone in it? That's usually where you can see uneven development.

    Some people do standing development all the time, and never face any issues, and others have never ending issues. I was one of the latter ones, with lots of problems with bromide drag. Rodinal and Pyrocat, with different films.
    There are many accounts of this occurring, so please don't dismiss it just because you're successful, lucky, or know some trick the rest of us don't have.
    "Often moments come looking for us". - Robert Frank

    "Make good art!" - Neil Gaiman

    "...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera". - Yousuf Karsh

  2. #22
    Brian C. Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Everett, WA
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    495
    Blog Entries
    2
    Images
    13
    Right off hand, no, I don't have any with large sky areas or similar.

    Here's my technique: Dilute Ilfosol 3 normally with cold water. Pour into SS container, give it a martini shake for a little bit, and put it in the fridge. Give it a martini shake in the morning, and a martini shake in the evening.

    Mortensen developed the technique for use with nudes. If there was a consistent development failure, I'm sure that he would have abandoned it.
    Last edited by Brian C. Miller; 03-16-2012 at 04:34 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Sydney
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,393
    Images
    84
    Quote Originally Posted by pstake View Post
    This is why I have never explored stand dev.

    Do you push to 1600 or beyond? If so, how long do you develop in Rodinal?
    I rate Tri-X at 320 for Rodinal 1:50 13 mins at 20 degrees.
    Haven't pushed it but I have seen it done with good results. Pretty sure they used your time of around 18 minutes, so you should be on the right track.
    I also presoak with no problems, been doing it for more than 20 years.

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    935
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian C. Miller View Post
    Uneven development? Take a look at the attached files. This was done with refrigerator development, ala William Mortensen. I used Fuji Acros 120, in Ilford Ilfosol 3, for five days. Now, do you see uneven development?
    Of course UNEVEN development. The whole POINT behind shaking a developing tank is to get the MOST EVEN development as possible. It's Scientific.

    Now, I can see how a 5 days development might get even development: It's such a long time that each day's Bromide Drag is getting more Drag from the next day's shake that eventually it's so dragged that it becomes unnoticeable, just like splotching black paint on a wall, day after day, makes for a perfectly even Black wall. Eh?

    Besides, how exactly do you know when the developer gets exhausted? Maybe it's exhausted after12 hours. Why keep it for 5 days, then? That's so unscientific. Fun but unscientific.

  5. #25
    Brian C. Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Everett, WA
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    495
    Blog Entries
    2
    Images
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by NB23 View Post
    Besides, how exactly do you know when the developer gets exhausted? Maybe it's exhausted after12 hours. Why keep it for 5 days, then? That's so unscientific. Fun but unscientific.
    YEEEHAAW! It's the old Adams-vs-Mortensen "war!"

    Well, NB23, I can only show you what I have that works for me. You want to experiment with it for yourself? Go for it! Or not. I can only post the results. If you can find a flaw in the image that I've posted, please point it out. The refrigerator development isn't something I normally do, as I like to get back my film a lot faster. But I have proven it for myself that it works, and really, that's what counts.

    The film was scanned at 3200spi, and the two crops are at 100%. Mind you, the film has more detail than my scanner will resolve. (which is why I prefer my Omega!) I've shown my negatives to a very experienced printer, and he was quite impressed.

  6. #26
    pstake's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    715
    Images
    66
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael W View Post
    I rate Tri-X at 320 for Rodinal 1:50 13 mins at 20 degrees.
    Haven't pushed it but I have seen it done with good results. Pretty sure they used your time of around 18 minutes, so you should be on the right track.
    I also presoak with no problems, been doing it for more than 20 years.
    Thanks, Michael. After re-fixing, re-rinsing, etc. I loaded one in the enlarger last night and made a few prints. Really nice tonality. Plenty of shadow detail. Couldn't believe it. And at 5x7, no grain at all. A tad contrasty but i like a lot of contrast, anyway. This may be a new favorite combination for fast film, for me.

    Tri-X at 1600 in Rodinal, is a winner.


    Hope to get a decent scanner before too long, and when I do, I'll post a few of these images!
    Last edited by pstake; 03-17-2012 at 11:43 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    1

    Alternative for Rodinal

    Glad you found a solution for your fogging; as noted, always first suspect your fixer.

    As far as stand development is concerned, my own experience is a technique called "FFDD", or "Fast Film Diluted Developer". I used it extensively for theater and dance photography in the 80's.

    Basics : take a normal, but vigorous working stock developer (like D-76), dilute it (e.g. 1 dev + 4 water), agitate for 30 - 45 secs, and let stand ; total dev time = original dev time (stock solution) x total dilution (here : x5)

    Chemical/mechanical gist : fast film used to be thicker (Tri-X still is), and not agitating the soup made developer "exhaust" faster in the areas with more density (causing underdevelopment).
    Result: "overdevelopment" of the areas with low density in the negative (the shadows in the original) without hiking up the gradation of the negative, but still gaining 2/3 - 1.5 stops in sensitivity (based on the actual sensitivity point).

    Danger : bromide drag; you can see it as drag lines dropping down from your perforations on your neg, or as halo in dark areas (in the print) close to lighter areas. In theater photography (using 35 mm) some kind of halo above a character with a black background.

    My experience indicates this can mostly be avoided if you agitate for 5 secs (1 up-and-down cycle with the tank) every 4' (on 1+3) to 6' (on 1+5).

    The result is a neg that has a REAL increased sensitivity of 2/3 to 1.5 stops, without an un-printable contrast, but with a copy range of 8 - 11 stops (very useful in theater photography, but a PITA for normal lighting conditions).

    A strong No-No would be the pre-soaking : this is useful when using very short dev times with a lot of agitation (used originally by press photogs to shorten their dev times), but when combined with stand development could lead to uneven development (you have to migrate your chemicals through a water soaked emulsion, not very efficient if you don't shake your soup constantly).

    BTW, FFDD is bound not to be very useful on T-Max, because of the 2-layer construction, the thinner layers and less silver in the emulsion.

    Of course, YMMV.

    Wkr,
    Geert

  8. #28
    whlogan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Hendersonville, NC
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    528
    Images
    92
    I have been ussing the Rodinal 1;100 STAND for a long timenow and since i din't know it didn't work, (chuck, chuck) I got super results.... and I still do. Cut pre-soaks and vigorous agitations..... just a regrular one will do every now and again .... super results..... try it..... forget experts get your own tests and have some fun
    Logan

  9. #29
    pstake's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    715
    Images
    66
    Belfox - thank you for some great guidance on FFDD. Whlogan ... Now that I have had such great results with normal 1:50 processing, I don't see a benefit to trying stand developing. Maybe it would reduce the contrast to use stand developing instead of 1:50?

    I guess it will be easier for you to comment when I post some of the images but I'm really thrilled with the results of 1:50 Rodinal Tri-X / 18.5 mins / 20 degrees C / 3 minute pre-soak / normal agitation. I like the look ... which is not to say that I won't like the look of stand dev ... maybe even better? Maybe I will give it a go one day. But 18.5 mins is more convenient for impatient people such as myself. :-)

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  Ś   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin