Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,593   Posts: 1,546,089   Online: 903
      
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 23
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    144

    stand development: hc-110, d-76 or microphen?

    yes i know, rodinal is the be-all, end-all for stand development. however i don't have any on hand, and i'd like to try it with what i have, if suitable.

    are any of these three developers suitable? if so, can someone suggest times and dilutions please?

    this is all because of my attempts at finding a better way of developing 4x5 and 2x3 sheet film. currently i use the 'taco' method, with a rubber band around the film, in a daylight tank. it works, with occasional corner scratches (more so on the 2x3, as it has more room to wiggle). but i'm limited to four 4x5s or five 2x3s.

    i've got an old Fr brand adjustable sheet film tank. i can do up to 12 sheets at a time, and it adjusts from 2x3 to 4x5. except...i get massive flow marks and edge over-development when using normal agitation methods. so, using what i have, stand development might fix this.

  2. #2
    TheFlyingCamera's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Washington DC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    8,370
    Blog Entries
    51
    Images
    435
    Actually, the be-all end-all of Stand development is Pyro, but that's another discussion. You MAY have some luck with the sheet film tank, you may not. I think the only thing it would work with is pure stand development. Only way to find out is to try it with some test shots you aren't emotionally invested in. HC-110 might work at one of the higher dilutions; I've not used it so I can't comment. D-76 is a very active developer and I don't know that it is good for stand development techniques.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,879
    Images
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by rippo View Post
    yes i know, rodinal is the be-all, end-all for stand development. however i don't have any on hand, and i'd like to try it with what i have, if suitable.

    are any of these three developers suitable? if so, can someone suggest times and dilutions please?

    this is all because of my attempts at finding a better way of developing 4x5 and 2x3 sheet film. currently i use the 'taco' method, with a rubber band around the film, in a daylight tank. it works, with occasional corner scratches (more so on the 2x3, as it has more room to wiggle). but i'm limited to four 4x5s or five 2x3s.

    i've got an old Fr brand adjustable sheet film tank. i can do up to 12 sheets at a time, and it adjusts from 2x3 to 4x5. except...i get massive flow marks and edge over-development when using normal agitation methods. so, using what i have, stand development might fix this.
    IMHO none of the developers you named is really suitable for Stand Development. Any of the Pyrocat Developers will work fine, as will Crawley's FX-2 and several other Glycin based developers and Rodinal is ok too (but Rodinal is certainly not the be-all, end-all for stand development).

    Stand development is not a good fix for massive flow marks and edge over-development when using normal agitation methods...You should not be having these problems with any of the three developers you mentioned.

    I suggest practicing your film handling and development agitation techniques with the lights on. Sacrifice a few sheets of film to the learning process.
    Tom Hoskinson
    ______________________________

    Everything is analog - even digital :D

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    144
    thanks guys.

    the reason why i thought stand development might be the solution is because i didn't have any flow marks when using a two-bath developer (Anchell/Troop's TD-201), with no agitation on the B solution. i'd use this more often, but my negs aren't always as contrasty as i'd like.

    Tom, it's probably not my agitation techniques. i've seen other people complain about this Fr tank for the same reasons. and i don't get over-development using other tanks.

    the thing is just so convenient if it worked though! it's huge and takes a lot of liquid, which is another argument for stand development.

    i know i'd need to experiment, but i figured i could save a few bucks and at least reduce the amount of film i'd have to burn to find out.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,879
    Images
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by rippo View Post
    thanks guys.

    the reason why i thought stand development might be the solution is because i didn't have any flow marks when using a two-bath developer (Anchell/Troop's TD-201), with no agitation on the B solution. i'd use this more often, but my negs aren't always as contrasty as i'd like.

    Tom, it's probably not my agitation techniques. i've seen other people complain about this Fr tank for the same reasons. and i don't get over-development using other tanks.

    the thing is just so convenient if it worked though! it's huge and takes a lot of liquid, which is another argument for stand development.

    i know i'd need to experiment, but i figured i could save a few bucks and at least reduce the amount of film i'd have to burn to find out.
    Matt, please describe your FR tank processing procedure, step by step, for us.
    Tom Hoskinson
    ______________________________

    Everything is analog - even digital :D

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    144
    well first i should probably describe the tank. it's a cubical shaped tank, and takes 1.5 liters of liquid approximately. there's a holder inside for up to 12 sheets of film. the film slides in from the top, and the ridges are curved so as to curve the film. the ridges that hold the film in place are about 3/8" high. so the film's rebate area has 3/8" on either side that has impeded flow of some sort. the gaps are pretty wide, perhaps 1/8".

    the tank is not invertible. therefore i agitate by grabbing alternate corners and pulling up and down, to slosh the developer around. i make sure to alternate pairs of corners each agitation period. and every once in awhile i'll pick the tank up and swirl it around instead, again at an appropriate agitation period.

    which is 5 seconds for every 30 seconds of development.

    rinse, fix, wash.

  7. #7
    gainer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    3,726
    Images
    2
    Try rocking the tank from side to side so that the flow is parallel to the film. It seems to me that you have only motion at some angle to the film, and that there might be dead, or at least deader areas in the center of the sheet. I used to have one of those tanks, but hadn't had much to do with it before I lent it to someone and never got it back.
    Gadget Gainer

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,565
    Images
    47
    I use HC110 at 1:100 semi-stand. One inversion only every three minutes. Total time 20 minutes.
    Rick Jason.
    "I'm still developing"

  9. #9
    DWThomas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    SE Pennsylvania
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,241
    Images
    65
    I own one of those FR tanks. I don't remember it being so bad back when I was using it in the 60s and 70s, but many of those old negs look pretty bad along the edges today -- maybe the fixer didn't circulate so well either. I think they made the grooves super deep to compensate for the coarse intervals in the width adjustment. At any rate, the last time I did any 4x5 (Worldwide Pinhole Photo Day 2005 & 2006) I tray developed because of this problem.

    If I ever seriously go back to 4x5, I will look for some other option. I suppose one might be able to cut the ribs down and round off the edges. That would be a lot of work, and might screw up its future use for other film sizes. The fact that I own one from back when is a sure sign it was cheap -- and probably a compromised design!

    DaveT

  10. #10
    sly
    sly is offline
    sly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Nanaimo
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,359
    Images
    220
    Hmm, I've got one of those tanks and I have not noticed your problems. I agitate every 30 sec for 5 sec. Typically I gently rock holding opposite corners, then with the next agitation it sits flat on the sink and I gently swivel it back and forth. Alternate back and forth through the development time. So far only trouble with the tank was when I tried to get by with 48 oz of developer rather than 1.5 liters. They are not the same! Sly

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