Quote Originally Posted by Ian Grant View Post
A point that's not being made so leading to misconceptions it the format/negative size. Stand and semi-stand development can work well with larger formats and you do get better adjacency effect which means prints appear sharper. But with smaller formats it can look awful.

I use Pyrocat HD with HP5 and at the recommended 1+1+100 dilution with inversion agitation and I get the benefits of good edge effects and micro-contrast which are inherent with this type of developer containing Pyrocatechin or Pyrogallol anyway, due to the tanning effects of the developer.

In making the choice of taking the edges effects to greater extremes has to be balance with the intended uses of the negatives, for instance a 35mm negative which is going to be enlarged will give images where the edge effects look like unwanted artefacts, there may be cases where they contribute to an overall graphic effect. When the extreme acutance developers were available (Definol, Acutol-S, Hyfin, Kodak HDD etc) there were so striking grapgic usually quite high contrast images made using 35mm films - these developers weren't as fine grained as Pyrocat either.

Where this technique comes into it's element is Large format where there's little enlargement and particularly contact prints. I'm refering to the edge effects thouh here.
Semi-stand is great for enlargements, too. It's the only way I develop roll film now. The attached image is from a 6x6 cm 400 TMax negative developed semi-stand in Harvey's 777. There's no visible stain with this developer, but I believe there's significant UV stain. In any case, semi-stand gives me printable negatives on the same roll even with markedly different lighting conditions between the frames. The process is very forgiving as long as you don't overdevelop.