Yet another thread concerning "stand development" and Rodinal

[mwooten]

Another thread concerning "stand development" and Rodinal 🙂

I've tried the stand development a couple of other times with the Freestyle label of Tri-X (I never can remember its proper name). The results seemed just a bit underdeveloped. The ratio I used was 1:125. This time, after reading a few of the other threads about this development method, I used developer to water ratio of 1:100 with a presoak of a couple of minutes, and just to keep things completely unscientific I also changed the film to a discovered roll of Acros 120 that I shot about four years ago. I used my normal agitation style at the beginning for about a minute, and gave the tank a "coffee cup" swirl for around thirty seconds at the half-way mark. (More complete details of the development method can be found on Keith's thread located HERE.)

One of the best things in my humble opinion about stand development is the ability to be able to watch playoff NBA and NHL while the film soaks in the developer.
I do like the results that this technique gives, and will use it in the future.

 

[Mablo]

I was recently doing stand development with Rodinal 1+100. I think that I left the rolls standing for something like 45min. A shortish presoak and initial agitation for 30 sec then I just left the tank standing there. Film is the new Rollei Superpan 200. At least with this film the stand dev is in my liking.

 

[mwooten]

Nice wood grain Mablo.

Here are a couple more from my "shot but never developed" box. Same technique as in post #1. Ilford Pan F @50.

 

[Tom A]

I prefer 2 hours stand development as I can watch a movie on a DVD and most Hollywood offerings is about the right lengths!
Some times stand development work fine - but sometimes it will flatten contrast a bit too much.
I did a series of tests earlier this year with Rodinal and adding Sodium Sulphite to the mix (Bill Pierce trick). Worked fine. I also did a batch with constant agitation for a shorter time. Film was Neopan 1600 rated @ 1200 for the test. Check Flickr under the tag " Neopan 1600" for samples.

 

[Ducky]

I use the Rodinal stand method all the time now. 1+100 with a 30sec. initial mild agitation and then leave it for an hour. I use it on everything, including an old fuji color roll which gave nice contrast bw.

 

[wupdigoj]

My own experience with stand developing. I tried 1:100 and 1 hour, and found gross overdeveloped and blocked highlights. After several tries, the best results for me are:

Fomapan 200: 1+150. Water pre-soak.1 minute con. agitation. 1 hour stand. 20ºC
Tmax 100: 1+160. Same.

I really used fomadon09, which is supposed to be identical to rodinal, but with less dilution. The dilutions above are plain rodinal equivalents. The real (f09) ones are 1+120 and 1+130. I also observed you can exposed foma 200 at 800 iso and obtain good printable negatives just using 1+100 dilution (rodinal equivalent, 1+80 with f09).

The results are just great to my taste. Almost invisible grain and very sharp negatives, very easy to print for me.

I wonder why different people report so different results (under of over developed negatives) with this stuff and method.


Javier

 

[Ducky]

I wonder why different people report so different results (under of over developed negatives) with this stuff and method.


Javier

The only variables would be water quality and temp. I use local water, rated very high quality, at room temp-probably 21c or 70f.

 

[wupdigoj]

The only variables would be water quality and temp. I use local water, rated very high quality, at room temp-probably 21c or 70f.

Could it be related to the amount of developer used, as has been suggested?. I use 5+600 ml in foma 200 (120) and 3+390 ml with tmax (35 mm, 36 exp). Would I obtain different results with the same dilution and different amount of solution?. For the moment I will stay with these values, they work well for me <img>. I also use local water, also good quality I think.

Javier

 

[Ducky]

I have never used anything but 1+100. I'll have to try 1+125 to see if there is a difference.
Agitation may also be a variable if it's inconsistent. I use a gentle 30 sec at first and then nothing till I gently dump the developer and gently rinse in room temp water.
I also use a medicinal syringe/dispenser I got from the drug store. They pack them in kid's liquid medicines. Very accurate when measuring cc amounts.

 

[dwaoka]

With high dilutions always remember to have at least 5-7ml of Rodinal per film, maybe thats why some people report underdeveloped negatives. I didn't try stand yet (I just got back to dev my own b&w two days ago after few years) but I will try it next week for sure.
Peter.

 

[ludoo]

I just developed my second roll of APX100 using stand development with Rodinal 1:100, and I noticed the same thing I got with my first roll: many shots are overexposed. Shots with lots of contrast and really dark areas like this one came out well (apart from the not really sharp old Zeiss Taxona and crappy Canoscan 2700F)



The shots taken outside are overexposed by maybe one stop, possibly more. Something that I did not notice when developing with 1:50 and traditional times/agitation. Maybe I should try exposing APX100 at 200 or 400 for bright sunny scenes. Any ideas?