Having an issue with 1+100 rodinal semi stand development

[david.elliott]

I like stand development because I dont have to mess around with controlling the temperature.

 

[wde60]

I see the density change in the background above each lens. I think you are right on about streaking and that can be controlled by a change in development method. However what bothers me more is the horizontal white line just above the bottom of the frame. If that is a scratch or abrasion from wind on or a reflection from scanning I would want to get to the bottom of it.
Lynn

I think you are on to something. Since the negatives look similar above and below the white line, and since the line is so clean and well defined, I'd look for causes other than the 1:100 dilution.

 

[dfoo]

I like stand development because I dont have to mess around with controlling the temperature.

From experience controlling the temperature can be more difficult than you might think, especially if you develop with rotary processing with smallish qualities. I find, for example, developing in my cold basement in the winter after 10 minutes of development with 375ml of dev what starts out at 20C will drop to 17-18C. It isn't such a big issue with hand agitation since the developer isn't continually sloshing on the sides of the tank. Developing larger quantities also helps since there is more developer to hold the temp.

 

[remegius]

Well, very low contrast negatives (even under direct sun) can be obtained without stand development, but if you've found it's better for you...

This is no doubt true, and certainly when dealing with 13-20 minute development ranges there is plenty or room to adjust agitation in order to achieve a desired level of contrast. But I don't want, or need, to do the experimenting that would be necessary. And I don't want to stand by having to carefully agitate every few minutes. I plead terminal sloth. I just pour the developer into the tank, do a few easy inversions for 30 seconds, and then finish the job when the bell rings after one hour. Easy peesy. I find the results to be consistent and acceptable.

Cheers...

Rem

 

[healyzh]

I've found that the 1+100 stand development is ideal for me for 35mm B&W, and I'm far happier with the results I've gotten this way than with using the local lab, or doing my own in Ilford DD-X. The jury is still out on 120 film, and I've not tried 4x5 sheet film yet due to a lack of time.

One thing I have found is that with some outdated TMAX 400 I have I got better results using the Ilford DD-X. Done in the 1+100 rodinal the 10 year old film was unacceptably grainy.

As I'm working in less than ideal conditions the process seems perfect for me, plus the reduced cost is attractive. I love the look of Acros 100 developed this way, and want to test with a couple other films.

 

[beyond]

Tim, does it happens to every roll or just that particular roll?

 

[gerbilthemistake]

Tim, does it happens to every roll or just that particular roll?

It's happened only with this roll, it's been my first attempt since a year or so ago. Only issue I have with it is the white line that runs across the bottom part of each photo.

 

[charjohncarter]

Charjohncarter...

Do you scan, or print wet? I only scan, and I have seen the benefits of 1:100 stand development in that context. I have heard a lot of negative comments about this form of development by those who only use a wet darkroom, and I think that is unfortunate. If I was developing for the wet process I would never do stand development, but I need highly compensated, rather low contrast negatives for scanning, and I have found that stand development suits that end. After that it's up to me and Photoshop.

Cheers...

Rem

Like Juan said, I can get low contrast other ways; the simplest is to adjust development time. I guess you would say I do something similar to scanning. Personally I like Ansel Adams HC-110 (1:120) method for compensating development, but I only use in at the beach or at noon in Mexico. For some reason HC-110 doesn't come with all the baggage that Rodinal stand does. Don't get me wrong I use Rodinal every month just not doing stand/semi-stand. And I have tried Rodinal Semi-Stand, the only film that I liked it with (because there were no problems) was Tmax100:

 

[charjohncarter]

I think you are on to something. Since the negatives look similar above and below the white line, and since the line is so clean and well defined, I'd look for causes other than the 1:100 dilution.

Trius would say it is because you are using a plastic reel, but you will be able to tell the difference with a loupe. A scratch will be distinct and very thin.

 

[Jaans]

After reading the thread about the benefits of standing development, I thought i'd give it another shot. The outcome was pretty good except for the white line that has come across each negative. Here are the steps i took:

test roll of 10-15 frames on 35mm Arista Prem 400
Hewes Reel
4+400 Rodinal
1st min I did slow inversions
30min mark I did 3 Inversions
Hour I poured out and rinsed
Fixed
Washed
Wetting agent
All taken with a working Olympus OM1 50 1.8

If anyone can tell me why each of these pictures have that white line across it thatd be great.

I went through a similar process to you and yielded to the temptation of stand/semi-stand development after reading through one of the longer rodinal stand development threads right here on rangefinderforum. I had previously been getting very good results with Rodinal @ TRI-X at 1:50 but decided I should get in on the act and try it out. The results were disappointing no doubt due to my poor technique as I got air bubbles and streaks. I followed everything to the tee and was religious about tapping out those air bubbles.

So, I just went back to my initial processing regime of 1:50 with 30 seconds initial agitation (twirl, twist and invert in one motion) and then 2 agitations per minute at the start of each minute at 19-20C for a total time of 11:30 for EI: 400 and 10:30 for an EI: 200. The result, no air bubbles or streaks.

I have come to the conclusion that changing processing regimes for no reason is like succumbing to the temptation of a new lens or camera when yours works perfectly fine. I also use Rodinal at 1:100 for 19 minutes with TRI-X with the same agitation style as 1:50.

Good luck!

 

[palec]

I had similar results with plastic reels and was tempted to buy Hewes because of this. Now I see the reels are not the problem and I'm no more interested in stand development.

 

[beyond]

It's happened only with this roll, it's been my first attempt since a year or so ago. Only issue I have with it is the white line that runs across the bottom part of each photo.

I see.. Perhaps you can try another roll? I suspect it has something to do with that particular roll that you dev. It may be something to do with the film and the reel. (Just a wild hunch). Try another roll, if it is persistent, then something is wrong.