another way to ponder 'intermittent' agitation
Although some of us agitate film continuously, most of us do so intermittently in the developer. We are told to agitate 'every 30 seconds', 'every 60 seconds', or other inventive ways. Maybe a better, more rational approach would be to space agitations according to how long development time is.
My theory is this: with long development times it takes a proportionally longer time to exhaust developer at the specific location it is on the film. This local exhaustion necessitates refreshing that developer with 'new' developer, and that is done through agitation. If development time is really short that means that the developer is working very quickly and, thus, exhausts rapidly.
Why not, instead of 'standardized' agitation intervals, simply divide the TOTAL development time by a factor of, say, 10, and base those agitation intervals upon that? For a 10 minute development time that would mean we agitate every minute. For a five minute development time that means that we would agitate every 30 seconds, and so forth.
At least to me, this would seem to result in a negative process that more closely conforms to the ACTUAL capacity of the developer and respects that developer's ability to reduce silver in a standardized way, regardless of the speed (and inherent contrast) of the negative material it processes. And it simplifies much: from now on ALL films get 'ten agitations'. - David Lyga
Last edited by David Lyga; 04-12-2013 at 10:28 AM. Click to view previous post history.