Fast or Slow developing, what's your preference?

P

Pirate

Guitar playing Fotografer
Local time
1:35 AM
Joined
Sep 27, 2009
Messages
1,864
I'm sure I'm just wracking up the points here with all the questions lately....

Looking through some new (to me) developing stuff and wanting to try things like Rodinal, I'm also looking at some of the available developing times per dilutions.

Just wondering now, what do you prefer - long or short developing times, and what have you learned about either?
 
My attention span is too short for 20 min developing times. I tend to choose recipes that give me 6 to 10 min times. D-76 is good for the purpose because you can change both dilution and temperature. D-76 seems to work very well in 24C instead of the normal 20C.
 
Slow developing - if you go a few seconds over or under the indicated time the impact will be much less felt with 20min development than with 10min, of course.
 
Prefer something in the 8-12 minute range so I generally use XTOL or D76 1-1 for normal processing but use them at full strength when pushing Tri-X to 1600.
 
The longer the better. I screw up too much to not take advantage of as much wiggle room as possible.
 
Many years ago when I first started developing, it seemed to be commonly accepted that longer deveopment times gave better grain, as well as saving money if that longer time was obtained by a diluted developer. That was then what I became accustomed to.

The problem with asking this type of question is that if you can't see my negatives and the resulting prints, you don't know that what I consider a good result is what you would consider a good result. The only real answer to your question comes from getting those develpers and trying them yourself.

Good luck in your quest.
 
5 minutes as minimum I do, but I am working with 2 developing machines:
Jobo CPA-2 (elevator) and the Heiland Tas processor.
So I like to be on the longer times, 10-20 minutes but it's running automatically.
C41 color 3:15 minutes.

In B&W AM74, CG-512, HC-110 and Rodinal.
 
Generally 5/10 min. I make D76 a liter or two at a time and use it 1:1 and those time are 5/10 minute range. There is a chart I made with excel and it is posted on the wall.

I have done C 41 in small stainless tanks for the standard 3.5 min and it worked fine. Same with full strength D76 for pulled film.

People are afraid of short times because of error. My method is to hover the loaded film reel over a tank prefilled with developer with the right hand. Start the timer with the left which has 5 extra seconds set. I count 5 while I locate the cap. At 5 I drop the film into the developer and cap tank with left.

This avoids a ton of problems because i have found most uneven development is from not getting fast and even immersion. The second is from insufficient agitation where you can get bromide streaking and areas of the film where developer does not replenish as much, ie light areas. But all that is another thread, so just read this and move on taking it for what it it is worth.

Long times are a pain, but I have done them also with high dilution Rodinal and D76 1:3. 1:3 D76 was around 16/17 minutes, but I have not used it in years. You get very sharp negs, but they are grainy. Like every developer in the world, there is a trade off between film speed, fine grain, and sharpness.
 
Last edited:
If you want real fine grain, shoot at half box speed and reduce the development time 20%. This is one of the ways I ended up with very short times and why I established the development procedure I described above.

In practice, I found it does not make much difference if I use 1:1 or full stock undiluted with pulled film.
 
I prefer 6-14 min, I work in a darkroom (my schools crappy one) that doesn't have temperature. In the winter it gets down to like 58, so I try to develop at 69F for 6 min. Has worked well for me... tho Ive never had formal training haha
 
At least 5 minutes but less than 20 or 22. If it helps to get a negative that prints well, the relatively negligible time spent developing is a great investment in the overall goal of making a fine print—especially considering the investment in equipment, film, and effort put into burning an hopefully worthwhile image on film.
 
oftheherd said:
Many years ago when I first started developing, it seemed to be commonly accepted that longer deveopment times gave better grain, as well as saving money if that longer time was obtained by a diluted developer. That was then what I became accustomed to.

The problem with asking this type of question is that if you can't see my negatives and the resulting prints, you don't know that what I consider a good result is what you would consider a good result. The only real answer to your question comes from getting those develpers and trying them yourself.

Good luck in your quest.
Click to expand...

...follow this advice, everything else is subjective.

Different developers will give you different grain structures along with the times, dilution, etc. Your best bet if you're serious about film is to take the film you plan on using, buy a few combinations. Make sure you're exposing for shadows and developing for highlights or at least using the zone system effectively and then try it in different developers with the same paper. It might take a full day and cost a little extra. But do you really want to spend a year using a developer/film combination that could be inferior to what you really want?
 
I've learned to love stand development in Rodinal (Adonal). It's a laid-back way to go. Otherwise, I use Diafine, which is 3+3 minutes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom