Stephanie Brim
Mental Experimental.
I shot my roll of Pan-F today: some double exposures of the new energy windmills and some shots of my room plus some of just the windmills. Thought I'd try stand development for this one. Any tips? Should I dilute or not?
Edit: So everyone knows, I'm already done and the results are down farther. So don't tell me what I should do and other developers to use anymore...this was an experiment to decide whether or not D76 could work as a stand developer 1:1. The conclusions I could make are down in post #9.
Edit: So everyone knows, I'm already done and the results are down farther. So don't tell me what I should do and other developers to use anymore...this was an experiment to decide whether or not D76 could work as a stand developer 1:1. The conclusions I could make are down in post #9.
Last edited:
Stephanie Brim
Mental Experimental.
I'm going to leave it for 40 minutes in 1:1 solution. Should be good then...I think.
Experimenting is fun sometimes. I'll post results.
Experimenting is fun sometimes. I'll post results.
FrankS
Registered User
Stephanie, excuse me for being critical, but it just seems to me that you are getting way ahead of yourself, experimenting with this and that, without building a foundation first. Stand development and processing colour film in B+W chemistry...
You know what I mean? Why not do some normal/non-experimental stuff first and get things sorted out before moving on? Sorry, this is just an observation of mine and not meant as a put-down. It just seems that you want to run and fly before you walk. I suppose I was the same at your age. If experience has taught me anything it's that there is no substitute for experience, and that you simply have to put in time walking before you run and fly. You have to pay your dues.
You know what I mean? Why not do some normal/non-experimental stuff first and get things sorted out before moving on? Sorry, this is just an observation of mine and not meant as a put-down. It just seems that you want to run and fly before you walk. I suppose I was the same at your age. If experience has taught me anything it's that there is no substitute for experience, and that you simply have to put in time walking before you run and fly. You have to pay your dues.
Last edited:
Stephanie Brim
Mental Experimental.
I've done lots of normal/nonexperimental stuff...I just don't put it online. The experimental stuff is what I really like. Developing film isn't all that hard if you watch your time/temperature enough and have exposed correctly. Doing experimental stuff gives me the challenge I need.
And by the way, they turned out. I don't know how well yet due to the fact that my negative carrier is in the boyfriend's car (he's bringing it to me tonight), but I'll post scans of my favorites.
And by the way, they turned out. I don't know how well yet due to the fact that my negative carrier is in the boyfriend's car (he's bringing it to me tonight), but I'll post scans of my favorites.
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
Stephanie: What dilution did you use? I agree with RJ- ... 1:1 would give you overdeveloped (as opposed to overexposed, but I understood what he meant) negs. I'm prepared to be surprised, though. Do you have your Rodinal yet? If so, give it a try on the next go-round with Pan F+. I've got some Pan F+ in one of the SPs right now. Don't know when I'll finish the roll, as there's lots of work to do in the house ... stripping wallpaper, painting, new floor in the kitchen, etc.
Stephanie Brim
Mental Experimental.
I unfortunately don't expect the Rodinal for another few days. I have one roll of Pan-F left so I'll be using that next week and then developing in Rodinal, most likely at 1:100.
The negatives aren't overdeveloped. Some may be a little, but most of the frames are at least good. Do note that this was a test roll, though, and that there are double exposures on the roll.
The negatives aren't overdeveloped. Some may be a little, but most of the frames are at least good. Do note that this was a test roll, though, and that there are double exposures on the roll.
Finder
Veteran
Stephanie Brim
Mental Experimental.
Coffee is my next experiment.
Anyway, I've made some conclusions.
D76 1:1 works fine as a stand developer, but shorter times are needed...I'd suspect 35-40 minutes to be what you need for things to fully develop. 50 minutes was too long. I also experienced a bit of bromide drag, so there is a possibility that semi-stand development would be a better idea with D76 1:1. I'm going to try it 1:3 next for 1.5 hours and see if that helps.
The directory for the photos is here: http://pleasewipeyourfeet.com/photowhore/windmills
In my opinion, some of the photos turned out rather interesting. If they weren't doubles there's a good chance that they'd be fine right now. My favorite is one of the last ones, 035.
The windmills were erected in the last couple of summers by MidAmerican Energy to power various areas of the US. They are a sight to see and range for a good 200 miles, but close to us is the largest cluster...about 15 miles from town. My boyfriend and I had a lot of fun shooting there, but it was so damn cold yesterday that I wasn't able to get all the shots I wanted. We'll be going back sometime after it warms up this spring to do a serious shoot.
Anyway, I've made some conclusions.
D76 1:1 works fine as a stand developer, but shorter times are needed...I'd suspect 35-40 minutes to be what you need for things to fully develop. 50 minutes was too long. I also experienced a bit of bromide drag, so there is a possibility that semi-stand development would be a better idea with D76 1:1. I'm going to try it 1:3 next for 1.5 hours and see if that helps.
The directory for the photos is here: http://pleasewipeyourfeet.com/photowhore/windmills
In my opinion, some of the photos turned out rather interesting. If they weren't doubles there's a good chance that they'd be fine right now. My favorite is one of the last ones, 035.
The windmills were erected in the last couple of summers by MidAmerican Energy to power various areas of the US. They are a sight to see and range for a good 200 miles, but close to us is the largest cluster...about 15 miles from town. My boyfriend and I had a lot of fun shooting there, but it was so damn cold yesterday that I wasn't able to get all the shots I wanted. We'll be going back sometime after it warms up this spring to do a serious shoot.
titrisol
Bottom Feeder
Bromide drag will be a problem with D76 stand-dev.
I believe for stand development D23 or Rodinal would be best.
I believe for stand development D23 or Rodinal would be best.
Stephanie Brim
Mental Experimental.
I found that out.
I'm glad I did this experiment mainly because I learn better by doing than by reading things on the internet. Hands-on experience teaches me quicker and more efficiently than reading alone. I understand what Frank is saying, but I also believe that you can't get a good foundation in anything unless you're willing to experiment after you've learned the basics of something.
Anyway, my Rodinal should be here by Thursday and then I get to test out my Tri-X at 12800...may bump it up one more just to see what happens, too. I have two rolls that I got dirt cheap at the drug store my sisters work at. I'm interested to see what results I get. I'm also interested in the fact that at ISO 12,800 I could handhold the camera in a -2 light situation with a 50mm lens pretty easily. *That* is trippy.
I'm glad I did this experiment mainly because I learn better by doing than by reading things on the internet. Hands-on experience teaches me quicker and more efficiently than reading alone. I understand what Frank is saying, but I also believe that you can't get a good foundation in anything unless you're willing to experiment after you've learned the basics of something.
Anyway, my Rodinal should be here by Thursday and then I get to test out my Tri-X at 12800...may bump it up one more just to see what happens, too. I have two rolls that I got dirt cheap at the drug store my sisters work at. I'm interested to see what results I get. I'm also interested in the fact that at ISO 12,800 I could handhold the camera in a -2 light situation with a 50mm lens pretty easily. *That* is trippy.
Stephanie Brim
Mental Experimental.
One thing before we go on discussing: 001 to 036 isn't how they came off the reel, but how they came off the scanner. I didn't scan them in order. Had I done that, we may have had a better idea of things...I'll do this again with another roll and scan IN ROLL ORDER from the first image onto the reel to the last. Will that help?
RJ: And that was a great post. Thanks.
RJ: And that was a great post. Thanks.
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
So, RJ-, what is the definition of stand development? I'm truly curious; my hunch is it has something to do with dilution and exhaustion, not just lack of agitation.
I agree regarding experimentation, sharing the results and observations. And I will be sticking with Rodinal, at least initially, for my stand development experimentation. After that, maybe Amidol with sheet film.
I agree regarding experimentation, sharing the results and observations. And I will be sticking with Rodinal, at least initially, for my stand development experimentation. After that, maybe Amidol with sheet film.
Stephanie Brim
Mental Experimental.
Ah...I didn't soak the film. I should have done that. I completely forgot about it when I was working on this.
I did read that stand development generally uses higher dilutions, but I wanted to see the results in a lower dilution. It seemed to work...to a point. Drag seems to be an issue at the lower dilution, moreso than what I've read at the higher dilution and that was expected. I think the main problem is the fact that 1:1 really isn't good for stand development.
So conclusion is this: dilute 1:2 or more for stand development if you use D76.
Thank you for posting that, RJ. Very enlightening and exactly what I needed last night...wish you had been around. I still think I would have done this, though...curiosity killed the cat and such.
I did read that stand development generally uses higher dilutions, but I wanted to see the results in a lower dilution. It seemed to work...to a point. Drag seems to be an issue at the lower dilution, moreso than what I've read at the higher dilution and that was expected. I think the main problem is the fact that 1:1 really isn't good for stand development.
So conclusion is this: dilute 1:2 or more for stand development if you use D76.
Thank you for posting that, RJ. Very enlightening and exactly what I needed last night...wish you had been around. I still think I would have done this, though...curiosity killed the cat and such.
FrankS
Registered User
"So conclusion is this: dilute 1:2 or more for stand development if you use D76."
I'm thinking MUCH higher dilution (than 1:2), according to RJ's excellent explanation.
I'm thinking MUCH higher dilution (than 1:2), according to RJ's excellent explanation.
Last edited:
Stephanie Brim
Mental Experimental.
What most people use (according to my research I did last night while my stuff was in the soup) is 1:3. Research included photo.net and some other things that came up on Google.
I'm wondering what something like 1:5 or 1:7 would do...perhaps *that* should be my next experiment. Wonder how much stock is recommended per roll...that would limit my ability to dilute. My largest tank is 20 ounces.
I'm wondering what something like 1:5 or 1:7 would do...perhaps *that* should be my next experiment. Wonder how much stock is recommended per roll...that would limit my ability to dilute. My largest tank is 20 ounces.
Stephanie Brim
Mental Experimental.
No...no I can't. Uses a developer I've never used. And this, of course, isn't stand development. It's semi-stand development or development with extremely minimal agitation. Stand would be initial agitation and then nothing after that. Semi-stand is initial agitation and then a very small amount (say, once every 5-10 minutes) for the remaining time.
The main reason for doing stand or semi-stand development is to bring out the shadows without completely blowing the highlights. This is why my test worked, but didn't really *work*. The highlights were blown, but I'm still convinced that it may be because I used too long of a time for the dilution and it could have also been the fact that the roll was double exposed. When done right you will get good shadow detail without blowing out highlights. When I try this again with a roll that isn't double exposed I'm going to dilute more (1:3 or 1:5, haven't decided) and leave it for longer.
His test shows (albeit not well due to scanning not being a great way to show this off) this concept. But it will be different depending on developer, film, exposure, etc.
Really, I think that results of a test like that are better looked at in person due to the fact that scanning technology isn't really all that great. Prints are going to look better than scans.
There are tons of variables in testing like this. One person isn't going to get exactly the same results as another person. The other thing about that is that it was an accidental test.
Don't know if that helps any. I love that forum lots, but sometimes they get a bit confusing.
The main reason for doing stand or semi-stand development is to bring out the shadows without completely blowing the highlights. This is why my test worked, but didn't really *work*. The highlights were blown, but I'm still convinced that it may be because I used too long of a time for the dilution and it could have also been the fact that the roll was double exposed. When done right you will get good shadow detail without blowing out highlights. When I try this again with a roll that isn't double exposed I'm going to dilute more (1:3 or 1:5, haven't decided) and leave it for longer.
His test shows (albeit not well due to scanning not being a great way to show this off) this concept. But it will be different depending on developer, film, exposure, etc.
Really, I think that results of a test like that are better looked at in person due to the fact that scanning technology isn't really all that great. Prints are going to look better than scans.
There are tons of variables in testing like this. One person isn't going to get exactly the same results as another person. The other thing about that is that it was an accidental test.
Don't know if that helps any. I love that forum lots, but sometimes they get a bit confusing.
Stephanie Brim
Mental Experimental.
Also, just want everyone to know that I'm trying part two. Tri-X this time in D76 1:3 for an hour...any comments on time this time? Longer? Shorter? Dilution/time is taken from a photo.net post.
titrisol
Bottom Feeder
How did this one turn out?
Stephanie Brim said:
Stephanie Brim
Mental Experimental.
Shots from that are here. It worked better this time with hardly any overdevelopment. Only some shots were...and I believe it was more that I overexposed those shots than overdeveloped the negatives. The fact that some were fine and others were off suggests that. The entire directory is here: click!
titrisol
Bottom Feeder
Very nice, very nice
Even the ones that seems to have blown highlights will probably print fine in a wet darkroom
Even the ones that seems to have blown highlights will probably print fine in a wet darkroom