Rodinal Stand Developing Tutorial

[Disaster_Area]

So I've had a lot of people ask me about stand development with Rodinal which is pretty much all I use now. I used to send them here, but after getting even more questions about which threads to read and which of the hundreds of different recipes to use, I decided to put together my own tutorials. First one is on the basics of how film developing works and the second is on stand development with Rodinal. I tried to be as understandable as possible as this is directed more towards people just starting out souping their own film, or with no experience with stand dev. I'd love some feedback as to whether I succeeded or not 🙂

Tutorial #1: Film Developing Basics

Tutorial #2: Stand Development with Rodinal

Thanks for looking 🙂

 

[ferider]

The second, and more subtle benefit, which even people that have used stand development before sometimes fail to realize is this: it doesn’t matter AT ALL what film brand or speed you use.

Tri-X 100 = 1 hour

Tri-X 100 pushed two stops = 1 hour

: :


I strongly disagree that film speed doesn't matter, DA. If this would be true, you would have no impact on how your photos come out, which area in which Zone, etc.

Also, I find the use of dilution (1:100, or whatever) confusing for new-comers - all that matters is the quantity of developer which is being exhausted, in ml.

I agree that film brand doesn't matter as long as shot at nominal speed. So for example, 3ml per roll of Neopan 1600 at ASA 640. Etc.

I push/pull by changing quantity of developer.

The other thing that is important, IMO, is what the development target is. Anything can be leveled in PS. Good development will result in good negative scans (if you shoot for scanning like me), right off the scanner, meaning that levels will be nicely distributed. Like this, for instance:

Roland.

 

[Disaster_Area]

Interesting... how much do you adjust your developer amount by? I've had no problems so far souping with 3.5ml of developer and a pushed roll in with a non-pushed roll or a roll of ISO 100 in with a roll of 400, but maybe I can get better results than I'm getting.

 

[haempe]

You wrote sometimes about Tri-X 100, what do you mean?
Tri-X 400 @ EI 100?

 

[Disaster_Area]

Ahhh.. thanks for catching that.. I meant to write T-Max 🙂 Changing that...

 

[ferider]

Interesting... how much do you adjust your developer amount by? I've had no problems so far souping with 3.5ml of developer and a pushed roll in with a non-pushed roll or a roll of ISO 100 in with a roll of 400, but maybe I can get better results than I'm getting.

See here, for example: http://www.flickr.com/photos/cchiopris/sets/72157610266094791/

Roland.

 

[Disaster_Area]

@Roland interesting, I'll have to try that next time. I definitely agree that you have to develop for your target, I really like the way stand-dev'd negs scan... a little low on contrast but a really nice tonal range that's easily picked up by scanners.

 

[Joe Vitessa]

Well-written and thorough description of stand development. Thanks for posting this resource.

Joe

 

[SciAggie]

I enjoyed reading the tutorial. You answered a point that has puzzled me with regard to a specific amount of developer per roll. I had wondered how to use 3/3.5 ml per roll and stay 1:100 in my two reel tank as it only holds about 500 ml - I see now just use a larger tank.

Thanks again.

 

[johannielscom]

@Roland interesting, I'll have to try that next time. I definitely agree that you have to develop for your target, I really like the way stand-dev'd negs scan... a little low on contrast but a really nice tonal range that's easily picked up by scanners.

Can't agree more with you there! Stand dev in Rodinal is giving me real nice tonality when scanning, while 'regular' methods of developing are more contrasty and as a result get harder contrast scans.

 

[Disaster_Area]

yeah... depending on how bright your scanners bulb is, it can be really hard to punch through really contrasty highlights that a good enlarger wouldn't have problems with... stand dev gives me much more scannable highlight detail while still allowing the shadows time to develop

 

[lewis44]

Question???

If 3.5 ml exhausts a 35mm 36 exposure roll, I would think that the amount of water makes no difference.

If I use a 1 roll stainless tank and it holds 8 oz of liquid and mix 3.5ml with 8 oz of water I should get the same results, shouldn't I ???

I've been happy with HC110 and Across 100, but have wanted to try the Rodinal, so I ordered a bottle.

 

[Moriturii]

You wrote that Rodinal Stand Dev liket his might not be good for making prints in a darkroom but rather better if you scan pictures, why? :-(

 

[DNG]

Rodinal Stand gives a slightly lower contrast but with a full tonal range. Good for scanning... you can bring up contrast in editing later, but, you will have a full tonal range.

 

[srtiwari]

Recently tried this with 3 ccs of Rodinal in small tank, and liked the results, though slightly overexposed- will try lower exposure next time.
Since "Develop to exhaustion" is the principle, is there a reason that people have not tried stand development with other developers, such as D76 or HC110 ?

 

[cliffpov]

Thanks so much for the link. Enjoyed reading it and it will make the process of developing my film much more enlightening now.

 

[Disaster_Area]

@srtwari - Yes, Ansel Adams developed the technique (at least he's credited to have in many places) using HC-110, many people use Xtol as well

@Lewis44 - The mixture has to be sufficiently dilute so that the highlights can exhaust while the shadows keep developing, if it's too concentrated, they won't exhaust the developer around them and stop developing while the shadows continue to. You might be able to get away with a stronger solution, but 1:100 seems to be the sweet spot according to popular opinion, and I know people who regularly use 1:150 or 1:200 as well.

@Moriturii yeah, what DNG said, because you get a compressed tonal range with less contrast, you'll have to print on higher contrast paper and maybe do some dodging and burning to get a print with the contrast you're used to. Also, scanner bulbs aren't as bright as enlarger bulbs (usually) so if you have a dense contrasty negative you may loose detail in the highlights because it just can't shine through the areas sufficiently. Stand dev tends to give you less dense highlights because of the exhaustion principle in play so you get more detail when scanning. And like DNG said, you can easily bring back the contrast later in PP, but you'll have a nice tonal range to work with when you do.

 

[wotalegend]

I remember reading somewhere recently (can't remember exactly where) that with Rodinal you need at least 10ml of concentrate to develop a film, yet you say you use only 3.5ml. I am confused.

 

[Disaster_Area]

I'm not sure where you read 10ml... that seems a bit much... the lowest I usually see is 3ml and the highest is 4-5ml per 35mm roll... maybe your source was talking about large format film?

Either way, I know it can't be a 10ml minimum as I've been getting great negatives using 3.5ml for years 🙂

Maybe Rodinal comes in different strengths in different places? I know that's the case with HC-110, but I'm pretty sure the rodinal formula has been pretty much unchanged since its introduction.

 

[charjohncarter]

I didn't see, as I scanned your tutorials, where you covered the reason for stand/semi stand development. It is tempting to use stand or in this case semi stand to simplify the world. I do something similar with just minimal agitation. Mostly I do it because where I live and where I vacation it is scenes that will require highlight suppression (compensation). But luckily as someone above said you can rescue almost any negative with proper scanning and levels. I do that almost every day.