PDA

View Full Version : Semi Stand Development - What Could Have Gone Wrong...



IanBarber
6-Dec-2016, 16:13
I have been using semi stand development on 4x5 sheet film for about 6 week with some pretty good results apart from today.

My usual method for this type of development is


HC110 Diluted at 1:63
60 Minutes Total Development Time
First Minute Continuous Gentle Agitation
3 Gentle Agitations after 30 minutes


In the top portion of the sky and also on the bottom portion, I am seeing what appear to be lighter areas. My thoughts are that it is un-even development but not entirely sure.

Ignore the mark bottom right, this must have been from the clip I used when hanging the negative up to dry.

158358

loonatic45414
6-Dec-2016, 16:38
As there appears to be a light haze throughout the negative - light leak perhaps?

Sent from my 0PJA2 using Tapatalk

Richard Wasserman
6-Dec-2016, 17:09
I have never used HC110 developer, but the majority of problems I've had with stand development have been related to agitation within the first minute or so. I use Pyrocat so don't know if my experience relates directly to yours. I found that agitating vigorously for the first 2 minutes is crucial to avoid splotchiness and uneven development. Are you using trays, or hangers, or???

j.e.simmons
6-Dec-2016, 18:03
I agree with Richard. Lessening the frequency of agitation does not mean gentle agitation. I used to barely jiggle for agitation and got blotchy negatives. Switching to vigorous agitation for limited times took care of the problem.

sanking
6-Dec-2016, 18:23
I agree with Richard. Lessening the frequency of agitation does not mean gentle agitation. I used to barely jiggle for agitation and got blotchy negatives. Switching to vigorous agitation for limited times took care of the problem.


My experience also. The key for me with Pyrocat is vigorous, and fairly long (1-2 minutes), initial agitation, and then vigorous but short (15 -30 seconds) agitation for the other agitation cycles.

Steve Sherman is one of the masters of this type of development, hopefully he will see the thread and offer his insights.

Sandy

IanBarber
7-Dec-2016, 02:24
I have never used HC110 developer, but the majority of problems I've had with stand development have been related to agitation within the first minute or so. I use Pyrocat so don't know if my experience relates directly to yours. I found that agitating vigorously for the first 2 minutes is crucial to avoid splotchiness and uneven development. Are you using trays, or hangers, or???

Sorry, should have mentioned that I develop my 4x5 film using the Paterson Tank and the Mod54 Holder.

Interesting about the agitation method. Maybe, I was been a little to delicate with the way I did the agitations, maybe I need to increase the speed a little.

Steve Sherman
7-Dec-2016, 21:37
I have been using semi stand development on 4x5 sheet film for about 6 week with some pretty good results apart from today.

My usual method for this type of development is


HC110 Diluted at 1:63
60 Minutes Total Development Time
First Minute Continuous Gentle Agitation
3 Gentle Agitations after 30 minutes


In the top portion of the sky and also on the bottom portion, I am seeing what appear to be lighter areas. My thoughts are that it is un-even development but not entirely sure.

Ignore the mark bottom right, this must have been from the clip I used when hanging the negative up to dry.

158358

As Sandy graciously said I have done this type film development since 2003 so I can speak with some certainty about the technique.

As Richard and others have indicated, the initial agitation does need to be aggressive. Early in the discover many friends contacted me with problems of botchy negatives, I suggested a more vigorous initial agitation of at least two minutes, all indicated that solved the problem. Obviously, prior to any chemistry a water presoak of 4-5 minutes is mandatory. I would estimate my inversions of a 18" tube to be approx. 20 inversions in 30 seconds of time while twisting the tube in both clockwise and counterclockwise rotations.

Several questions / observations arise from looking at your technique.
What are you hoping to accomplish with this type film development ?
Why did you choose HC 110 as the developer ?

Observations:
Pyro developers work best with this type technique due in large part to the tanning effects of Pyro, whereas developers that have Sodium Sulfite as a component promote "silver migration" which diminishes acutance and I would hazard a guess that with 60 minutes in solution any gain in adjacency effects could be offset by the silver migration. I have dramatic side by side comparisons of Pyrocat HD versus HC 110 where each film was processed with continuos agitation in a tray. The acutance of Pyrocat HD negative is superior to non Pyro based developers. I am not suggesting that HC 110 won't yield a different look with reduced agitation techniques merely that Pyrocat will be considerably higher in acutance. Since 2003 I have used Pyrocat HD, ABC Pyro and PMK, in all forms of Reduced Agitation forms of development for a variety of reasons too long to share here the Pyrocat family of developers have produced superior Mid Tone / Micro Contrast than all others.

Many photographers don't completely understand how and why the technique can yield such dramatic results. The Reduced Agitation technique which is a broad descriptive term of Stand, Semi-Stand and Extreme Minimal Agitation schemes of processing film. I would suggest that a 1:63 is not that dilute and may in fact contribute to the uneven development of area of even tonality. Further, the technique to fully realize a change to the straight line of the film's curve along with adjacency effects relies on developer exhausting at the boundaries of differing tonalities. With extended time this phenomenon can repeat itself through several cycles. To realize the full effect of this technique it is not necessary to use Stand Development. Semi-Stand and Extreme Minimal Agitation schemes will produce dramatic results so long as the dilution results in developer exhaustion at some point before another agitation cycle introduces fresh developer.

I characterize how and why the technique works as follows: Dilution allows Extended Time which allows Infrequent Agitation which allows Developer Exhaustion at the boundaries of differing densities which leads to Adjacency Effects which gives the Impression of not only higher Acutance but increased Micro Contrast.

IanBarber
8-Dec-2016, 02:38
In reply to Steve Sherman.

It appears that in my original post, I made a typo by saying that the dilution was 1:63 when in fact it was 1:160 (6ml of HC110) total chemistry was 1000 ml



Several questions / observations arise from looking at your technique.
What are you hoping to accomplish with this type film development ?
Why did you choose HC 110 as the developer ?


What are you hoping to accomplish with this type film development ?
I was under the impression that using this method would allow me to develop different types of films in the same Paterson tank at the same time and also this method would help control bright highlights.

Why did you choose HC 110 as the developer ?
After reading up on stand and semi-stand, HC110 seemed to be the developer that was mentioned over and over again which in itself got me interested because this is the developer I use for all my developing.
I have now just purchased some XTOL but I was not going to use this for semi stand.

Workflow
I only 4x5 at the moment and all my work is scanned and then printed via an Epson R3880 printer. I have no enlarger or facilities at the moment to try wet printing. Once I have a better understanding of initial developing and working with negatives, I may think about contact printing but at the moment, trying to understand the developing and initial exposure control is enough to keep me occupied.

Please feel free to shoot me down in flames if my understanding of this process is completely wrong, I need to learn and someone that fully understands and practices the technique is the person which has my full attention.

loonatic45414
8-Dec-2016, 03:54
Mr. Sherman: Would the overall quantity of developer in the tank make a difference? After all, the molecular action of water provides a micro agitation as seen when someone places a drop of dye on the water's surface and it disperses. With the idea that the developer is in fact in some sort of constant motion, adjacent solution may become depleted, however the notion that developer activity completely stops until some sort of agitation takes place would be contradicted. My theory is that not just dilution but overall quantity would also have an effect and agitation after some point would theoretically add nothing to the process. Just wanted your real life experience input regarding this. Thanks.

Sent from my 0PJA2 using Tapatalk

loonatic45414
8-Dec-2016, 04:09
My experience is that insufficient pre-soak & agitation would be characterized by areas of insufficient development. What we see here is evidence of localized overexposure and/or overdevelopment. Mr. Sherman, is it consistent with your experience that this occurs?

Sent from my 0PJA2 using Tapatalk

loonatic45414
8-Dec-2016, 04:22
I would also like to expand on my discussion of molecular activity, that perhaps dilution is not as critical as the overall number of ions (quantity of concentrate present) available to the emulsion. The amount of water present only serves to delay the activity as it takes ions longer to come in contact with the film.

Sent from my 0PJA2 using Tapatalk

IanG
8-Dec-2016, 04:27
Workflow
I only 4x5 at the moment and all my work is scanned and then printed via an Epson R3880 printer. I have no enlarger or facilities at the moment to try wet printing. Once I have a better understanding of initial developing and working with negatives, I may think about contact printing but at the moment, trying to understand the developing and initial exposure control is enough to keep me occupied.

Please feel free to shoot me down in flames if my understanding of this process is completely wrong, I need to learn and someone that fully understands and practices the technique is the person which has my full attention.


How are you actually processing the sheets, as in dish, tank etc and what type, volume etc.

Ian

IanBarber
8-Dec-2016, 04:33
How are you actually processing the sheets, as in dish, tank etc and what type, volume etc.

Ian

I process up to 4 sheets at a time attached to a mod54 holder in a Paterson tank and add 6ml of HC110 to 994ml of water

IanG
8-Dec-2016, 04:42
I process up to 4 sheets at a time attached to a mod54 holder in a Paterson tank and add 6ml of HC110 to 994ml of water

That's what I expected and I think that's the issue here, not ideal for semi-stand development and you'll get better development from the edges in causing unevenness.

Ian

IanBarber
8-Dec-2016, 04:44
That's what I expected and I think that's the issue here, not ideal for semi-stand development and you'll get better development from the edges in causing unevenness.

Ian

Are you suggesting that tray development would be a better solution Ian

IanG
8-Dec-2016, 05:17
Are you suggesting that tray development would be a better solution Ian

You need to read how Steve Sherman works, but yes. However you aren't really using it for the right reasons.

See Steve's points here



I characterize how and why the technique works as follows: Dilution allows Extended Time which allows Infrequent Agitation which allows Developer Exhaustion at the boundaries of differing densities which leads to Adjacency Effects which gives the Impression of not only higher Acutance but increased Micro Contrast.

Then remember he's often using the technique with ULF (formats larger than 10x8) and contact printing.

Ian

Steve Sherman
8-Dec-2016, 05:21
In reply to Steve Sherman.

It appears that in my original post, I made a typo by saying that the dilution was 1:63 when in fact it was 1:160 (6ml of HC110) total chemistry was 1000 ml



What are you hoping to accomplish with this type film development ?
I was under the impression that using this method would allow me to develop different types of films in the same Paterson tank at the same time and also this method would help control bright highlights.

Why did you choose HC 110 as the developer ?
After reading up on stand and semi-stand, HC110 seemed to be the developer that was mentioned over and over again which in itself got me interested because this is the developer I use for all my developing.
I have now just purchased some XTOL but I was not going to use this for semi stand.

Workflow
I only 4x5 at the moment and all my work is scanned and then printed via an Epson R3880 printer. I have no enlarger or facilities at the moment to try wet printing. Once I have a better understanding of initial developing and working with negatives, I may think about contact printing but at the moment, trying to understand the developing and initial exposure control is enough to keep me occupied.

Please feel free to shoot me down in flames if my understanding of this process is completely wrong, I need to learn and someone that fully understands and practices the technique is the person which has my full attention.

Unfortunately the internet is a double edge sword, meaning there is so much information out there on any one topic there is bound to be some erroneous information, particularly with the topic of this type development. I have seen videos where it is suggested that Stand Dev. can process many different contrast scenes in one tank and through some magic all the various highlight densities come out exactly where they need to be. Nothing could be farther from the truth, think about it, if all the film is developed at the same time with the same chemistry and the same agitation technique and the same dilution then the only variable is the contrast differences at the time of exposure, how then could the resulting highlight densities be the same. There is more to this answer when comparing Stand to other forms of Reduced Agitation techniques then I've detailed here but I am running out of time this morning.

Probably the biggest obstacle to overcome for me at least is the topic has become so debated by those who have had success and from what I see by those in much larger numbers who have failed and taken to the keyboard to discount the technique as just smoke and mirrors. That likely is the reason I don't much bother with the forums much any more.

So, to offer my real world thoughts on your questions, as I said HC 110 may provide a different look using your work flow, rest assured Pyro based developers are superior in so many ways to non Pyro developers especially for Silver Gelatin printers where end result acutance is highlighted to a much greater degree than most other alternative processes.

Secondly, if you are scanning your negs you can closely approximate adjacency effects using the Curves function in PhotoShop. Although because processing film in a Reduced Agitation technique accomplishes this completely organically and experts within the PhotoShop community have told me Curves accomplishes the Unsharp mask effect through a Logarithm and is sub par to the effect done organically in wet film processing. As you say, learning to expose correctly and understanding film development maybe you best approach before pursuing an advanced technique such as this. Also, if Pyro is not in your immediate future I would suggest trying Rodinal in the non Pyro family of developers.

Lastly, as I closely look at the pix of your negative on a larger desktop as opposed to a mobile device I would offer, and this is based on experience, the higher density areas could well be your fingers grasping at the edges of the film to transfer to Stop Bath or the next step in your work flow. The added heat and more importantly I have found the pressure from my fingers during the extraction of the film to stop bath produces density marks just like I see in your negative.

To the other poster about molecular structure, not much time before I have to leave for work but your point if I understand what your suggesting is: Yes there does need to be a certain amount of inhernet developer in the solution to continue to reduce the film over the length of time in chemistry. As I said, the process relies on a very delicate relationship of dilution and time between agitation cycles for the process to yields significant adjacency effects.

RSalles
8-Dec-2016, 09:23
Just as a side note here about HC-110 and stand development: I had several negative density unevenness on open sky areas, the ones with no details at all like clouds or buildings, with sky main grays falling around Zone VI/VII. Negatives as Ilford FP4+, HP5+, Foma 100 and Shanghai GP3.
I have addressed this issues changing from HC-110 to Agfa Rodinal 150:1 or 200:1 dilution at 20ºC, time from 60 to 90mns of stand or semi-stand.
To worsen things, I was developing those sheets on a Yankee Agitank (very well known for uneven negatives with small agitation cycles, but mainly because the large amount of developer this tank can be filled with). I hadn't have any issues after that, Rodinal being a great option around here where I live, but hi Steve, in the next moths Pyro will be my next bet, the results you're getting are really impressive,

Cheers,

Renato

Cor
15-Dec-2016, 05:55
Lastly, as I closely look at the pix of your negative on a larger desktop as opposed to a mobile device I would offer, and this is based on experience, the higher density areas could well be your fingers grasping at the edges of the film to transfer to Stop Bath or the next step in your work flow. The added heat and more importantly I have found the pressure from my fingers during the extraction of the film to stop bath produces density marks just like I see in your negative.

interesting remark, Steve!
On a perhaps related note: I experienced a strange phenomena in my semi stand approach (Fomapan 100 in PyrocatHD) I saw (in print) black stripes/smears at the upper edge of the 4*5 neg. were the notch code is.

Under or undeveloped in the neg, black in the final print. It took me a surprisingly long time to realise that I caused these marks with my finger tips either when inserting or more likely when removing the film.
Supposedly the grease on my fingertips "blocked" development of the exposed emulsion. I do do a pre-wash.I now wear gloves when inserting and removing film, no more artefacts !

I have never seen it with any other film/developer combinations in a regular development route.

Best,

Cor