Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,557   Posts: 1,573,235   Online: 953
      
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 23
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Floriduh
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,274
    Images
    2

    Stand developing and Developers

    I read an article in the new View Camera concerning stand developing and wanted to ask a question as concerning the developers. From what i remember the author mentioned using a tanning developer, and I was wondering if other types could be used. From what I have read a glycin type of developer is preferred, but forgot why sulfite was not wanted in the solution. Overall, has anyone tried other developers, and could you share the results of your testing regardless of developer used. Also, I do understand that this article was in regards to contact printing out on Azo paper, but would there be any benefits to enlarging or contact printing on other papers? Thanks for your thoughts.

  2. #2
    Flotsam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    S.E. New York State
    Posts
    3,221
    Images
    13
    I haven't tried it but I have seen highly dilute Rodinal mentioned as being successful for stand development.
    That is called grain. It is supposed to be there.
    =Neal W.=

  3. #3
    Donald Qualls's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    North Carolina, USA (transplanted from Seattle)
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,845
    I've used highly dilute HC-110 (Dilution G) for stand and semi-stand development. The result is very high compensation -- highlights and upper mid-tones are strongly compressed while shadows are about normal -- with some edge effects visible at high magnification. Like many alternate development techniques, this one seems to work better with "traditional" type films rather than "designer grain" types like T-Max and Delta.

    The main thing you need, and what I understand to be the main reason for glycin in traditional stand developers, is a low fog formula. Secondarily, you need a developer that is less affected by bromide/iodide as a restrainer, because these ions are produced from the film as a by-product of silver reduction and make the solution locally denser than the aggregate, so can induce vertical streaks of reduced density (due to increased restraining effect) proceeding from highlight areas. Last, your developer still needs to either selectively exhaust where exposure is high (hence high dilution with HC-110 or Rodinal), or be restrained by its own oxidation products (like glycin and, IIRC, metol and phenidone) rather than catalyzed by its oxidation products (like hydroquinone and possibly ascorbate), in order for the development to be reduced in higher density regions.

    BTW, most of the old glycin formulae were used with a single glass plate lying flat in a tray, and development was (anecdotally, at least) often by inspection (most of this usage predated panchromatic films).
    Photography has always fascinated me -- as a child, simply for the magic of capturing an image onto glossy paper with a little box, but as an adult because of the unique juxtaposition of science and art -- the physics of optics, the mechanics of the camera, the chemistry of film and developer, alongside the art in seeing, composing, exposing, processing and printing.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,243
    Images
    9
    There is a lot of talk on michael and puala's AZO forum about it. Pyrocat seems to work really well. I tried it once and was not overly impressed but I am not enlarging, I contact print and the edge effects and apparent increased sharpness did not seem to make that big of a difference. I think if I was enlarging I would do it alot.

    I should also note that I tried it with pyrocatHD at the dilution recommended on the AZO forum. Can't remember what it was though.
    Technological society has succeeded in multiplying the opportunities for pleasure, but it has great difficulty in generating joy. Pope Paul VI

    So, I think the "greats" were true to their visions, once their visions no longer sucked. Ralph Barker 12/2004

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Fond du Lac, Wisconsin
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,065
    Images
    39
    A good developer for stand development is FX-2 at 1:1.

    -Peter
    www.desmidt.net

  6. #6
    Andy K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Sunny Southend, England.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    9,422
    Images
    81
    There are three shots in my gallery which were stand developed in Rodinal 1+50, 'Night Life...' I used stand developing so the highlights did not blow out and to get detail in the shadows.


    -----------My Flickr-----------
    Anáil nathrach, ortha bháis is beatha, do chéal déanaimh.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Greenville, SC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    4,813
    Images
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by waynecrider
    I read an article in the new View Camera concerning stand developing and wanted to ask a question as concerning the developers. From what i remember the author mentioned using a tanning developer, and I was wondering if other types could be used. From what I have read a glycin type of developer is preferred, but forgot why sulfite was not wanted in the solution. Overall, has anyone tried other developers, and could you share the results of your testing regardless of developer used. Also, I do understand that this article was in regards to contact printing out on Azo paper, but would there be any benefits to enlarging or contact printing on other papers? Thanks for your thoughts.
    I have not seen the article but I assume that it was by Steve Sherman? If so, I have already read it as I provided some assistance to Steve in the preparation of the article.

    Steve used a very dilute solution of Pyrocat-HD for his semi-stand technique, something on the order of 1:1:150 to 1:1:200. As someone already mentioned, there is a lot of information on stand and minimal agitation procedures on the AZO forum. I really don't know why Pyrocat-HD works so well with this type of development since a staining developer is not normally what we would expect to use for stand development, but for whatever reason it does work very well as lots of people have found out. Other developers that are reported to work well with stand development are dilute solutions of Rodinal, HC-110 and FX-2. I tried FX-2 and was not at all happy with the results, but the problem may have been my technique.

    Sandy

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    6,242
    I have pretty much standardized on minimal agitation (semi stand development) in tubes. The enlargements from 4X5 Efke PL 100 negatives developed in 1-1-150 Pyrocat exhibit sharpness that I have not duplicated in contact printing. I might mention that I do enlarge with a Durst 138 S condensor enlarger preferring it over a diffusion source. The reason that I mention this is that I am sure that this enlarger optimizes the edge effects of this film and developer combination. I will say that I have not observed the extreme compensating effects that another poster alluded to. That may be due to the fact that I have tested the film, developer, and procedure combination to arrive at the density range that I need for my equipment and for the paper that I use.

  9. #9
    Dave Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Middle England
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    3,894
    Images
    2
    I’ve started using partial Stand Development when using 1:50 Rodinal with Delta 100. I invert the drum, at 30 second intervals, for the first few minutes, and then let the drum stand for the last ten minutes. I haven’t notice any difference in results; but my arms don’t hurt so much.
    Regards Dave.

    An English Eye


  10. #10
    gainer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    3,726
    Images
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Donald Miller
    I have pretty much standardized on minimal agitation (semi stand development) in tubes. The enlargements from 4X5 Efke PL 100 negatives developed in 1-1-150 Pyrocat exhibit sharpness that I have not duplicated in contact printing. I might mention that I do enlarge with a Durst 138 S condensor enlarger preferring it over a diffusion source. The reason that I mention this is that I am sure that this enlarger optimizes the edge effects of this film and developer combination. I will say that I have not observed the extreme compensating effects that another poster alluded to. That may be due to the fact that I have tested the film, developer, and procedure combination to arrive at the density range that I need for my equipment and for the paper that I use.
    Do you use the enlarger as a source for contact printing? I know that would not be practical for AZO, but it would be interesting to try a contact print on enlarging paper using the enlarger as source. A collimated source might give a little extra edge, even to a contact print.
    Gadget Gainer

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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