Stand-development uneven drag issue

ericzhu

ericzhu

Established
Local time
2:40 PM
Joined
Aug 12, 2005
Messages
182
View My Gallery
Last night, try Rodinal 1+100 to develop Rollei R3 EI 200: Paterson film tank, 20C, presoak 5 minutes, 400ml working solution, continuous agitation for the 1st minute, 2 inversions at 25 minutes, totally 50 minutes development.

The result is obvious with uneven vertical drag. Any solutions? Shall I agitate every 10 minutes?
 
I never could make any of those crazy agitation schemes work. Closest I ever came was Tri X and rodinal. The images seemed ok, but the leader was full of drag marks.
I never tried again because I figured the once in a lifetime frame would get a drag mark right down the center.
 
Thardy said:
I'm curious. What is the purpose (objective) of developing this way?
Click to expand...

I heard that high dilution has compensating effect. RLS is too expensive, I am trying Rodinal to see the effect. Also Stand-development saves energy of agitation.
 
I actually think there is some effect to stand development, but you have to have taken an image of a very high contrast scene to see the effect. With scenes of normal or less than normal contrast I have never seen anything different. And as on any roll of film, it is very unusual to have all high contrast scenes it probably isn't going to be very helpful.

There is also a theory that because of the very thin emulsions on todays film that stand development is not of much use. I can't speak to this because I don't have any scientific evidence plus or minus. But maybe someone with much more knowledge than I will jump in and enlighten us.
 
Last edited:
I haven't done any stand development in a while, but I found that with a pre-soak of the film, then a minute or so of agitation right at the start, followed by a couple of inversions in the middle of the time period, I didn't get any obvious drag marks. It's important to make sure the developer is well mixed before you use it.

In fact, I get worse drag marks using Diafine for 3 minutes than I ever did with Rodinal for an hour.

The reason for stand developing: a lot of people think it has an extreme compensating effect, prevents blowing out of the highlights, and increases acutance. Personally, I didn't consistently get results good enough to justify using it over standard agitation. However, there's no doubt that at some times, and for some subjects, it was a useful tool to add to the arsenal.

I had quite good results using some semi-stand techniques with slow orthochromatic 'document' film that would otherwise have been far too high contrast with standard agitation.

Matt
 
Hi, if you are happy with the density of your Negs split your 2 inversions,try 1 inversion at 15mins and 1 at 30mins.The dilution exhausts the dev ,agitation gives your highlights.
Thanks
 
I have found that Paterson reels are more prone to "bromide drag" than the thinner stainless steel ones. Dont exactly know why - but it does show.
A couple of "flips" midway through the process usually helps, but you are going from "stand developing" to "semi stand developing" by doing this.
Using Rodinal you tend to get enhanced Mackie lines with stand development (black "halo" effect where bright surfaces meet dark surfaces). It is not a consistent way of processing and be prepared for surprises.
 
In my very limited experience, my surprises have all been pleasant.

Films: 135 & 120 Ilford Pan-F+
Tanks/reels: Paterson
Agitation: Continuous for the first 30 secs. to 1 minute. 3 inversions midway or none.
Total: 1 hour
Results: Nice and even.

YMMV
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom