Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,894   Posts: 1,520,879   Online: 1123
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 15 of 15
  1. #11
    Alex Hawley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Kansas, USA
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    2,895
    Images
    63
    Thanks guys. That trick with the trays and towels sounds like a good place to start.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Fort Worth, Texas
    Posts
    229
    Quote Originally Posted by Poco
    (I ain't gonna mention the dilution 'cause it was just too crazy weak and Lex is gonna yell at me.)
    Nah, I'd never fuss at anyone for wanting to experiment. As long as it's with their own film and they don't blow up anything in the process. ~8o

    BTW, I've tried stand processing with more dilute Rodinal (1:300 to 1:500) up to 24 hours but all I got was thick fog obscuring the developed image. Not usable.

    I've also tried Ilfosol-S as a substitute for Xtol (both have an ascorbate component). No good - Ilfosol-S is prone to fog when used too dilute or for too long. A poor choice for push processing for that reason. Excellent for normal development with slow films, tho'.
    Three degrees of separation from Kevin Bacon.

  3. #13
    Ole
    Ole is offline
    Ole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Bergen, Norway
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    9,280
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    31
    I used semi-stand development (only about an hour) for developing my sheet film of the solar eclipse this spring. Mixed a dash of Maxim Muir's Compensating Pyrocatechin, agitated one minute, then the doorbell rang. and the door was unlocked...

    So I simply put the lid from a pack of paper over the tray, and sneaked out the door trying to open it as little as possible.

    As my unexpected guests were my parents, I could not really tell them to go away and come back later?

    Eventually I got back to the darkroom and got a look at the negative: Perfect!

    So that's what I'll do the next time I need to capture an SBR of >25 on film: Invite my parents over
    -- Ole Tjugen, Luddite Elitist
    Norway

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    653
    "(1:300 to 1:500)"

    Yup, that's the neighborhood of what I was fooling with. I was expecting fog and uneven development, particularly since I was dealing with a horizontal negative developed emulsion side up, but I just didn't get any of that. The negs were extraordinarily clean. I was using FP4, not tri-x, though. I've got some of the Efke and J&C films on order to experiment with.

  5. #15
    Les McLean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Northern England on the Scottish border
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,610
    For many years I have used a stand development technique I learned from an old press photographer. They called the method DD/FF (dilute developer/fast film)

    They used TriX rated up to 3200 ASA and developed it in D76 diluted anywhere from 1 to 30 to 1 to 90 and upwards with a development time of 5 hours plus. I first tried it about 25 years ago and rated TriX at 20, 400, 800, 1600 and 3200 on the same roll and got good printable negatives from every film speed used. The grain was crisp and sharp as you would expect from TriX.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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