From: Scott Wainer (smwbmp@starpower.net)
Date: 01/29/03-04:45:40 PM Z
Sandy King wrote:
> One of the main reasons I developed Pyrocat was to experiment with
> stand development so your comments are very interesting. But my work
> with stand development has been a really mixed bag. With roll film I
> have had really good success and have managed to make negatives that
> have really extraordinary apparent sharpness because of the adjacency
> effect. However, developing this way is always something of a crap
> shoot because of 12 frames one or two or almost sure to be ruined by
> some type of uneven development. And sheet film haw been even more
> problematic.
>
> So, I would be very interested in hearing more of your specific
> working procedures with stand development.
Hi again Sandy,
Currently my experience with Pyrocat is limited to 35 mm processed in
daylight tanks and 4x5's using Kodak hangers doing the ol' dip-n-dunk. I
just ordered a Mamiya 645, so I will be testing 120's when the camera
arrives.
As you might remember I was testing for EI ratings and normal development
times a while ago and having a devil of a time with density readings. You
and others recommended testing procedures outlined in the BTZS book; I never
did get a copy of it - local sources can't get it - so i'll have to get it
through the website. I decided on another way to test, I found an 9 zone
scene and shot 3 rolls of each type of film (35mm) as follows:
frames 1-7 : normal exposure
frames 8-14 : +1/2 stop
frames 15-21 : +1 stop
frames 22-28 : -1/2 stop
frames 29-35 : -1 stop
I estimated development time for each type of film and developed
accordingly. If a roll looked thin or over-developed I increased or
decreased time accordingly for the next roll. When all rolls were developed
I compared them on a lightbox, found the negs with the best exposures from
each roll, and printed those exposures; all the while keeping detailed
notes. The exposures/development times that provided the best shadow detail,
mid-tone tonalities, and highlight seperations became my standards.
Where stand and semi-stand development (as I use them) comes in is when I
have a very contrasty scene (8+ zones) like sunlit snow against shaded wet,
black river rocks. For this I subjectively choose stand or semi-stand
depending upon the film type (currently Tech Pan, HEI, Pan F+, Delta 100,
Delta 400, Delta 3200, Arista 125, Arista 400, and SFX) and the look I want
in the final image. Each 36 exp roll (80sqin) uses 6 ml of each A & B stock
solution. For semi-stand I dilute Pyrocat 1:1:400 in distilled water for
twice normal development at 70F; agitate for the first 30 seconds and 10
seconds every 4 minutes. For stand I dilute 1:1:800 in distilled water for
90 minutes at 70F; agitate for the first 30 seconds - no agitation for the
remainder of the time. I have not found any development problems (eg,
bromide-type drag ect...) with any of the above films; Tech Pan is very
sensitive though - it likes to get really, really contrasty - here I usually
do stand at 30-45 minutes (or less). I did notice that with stand/semi-stand
the use of freshly made A & B solutions makes all the difference; I mix new
developer if it is over a week old.
I don't use stand or semi-stand for sheet film as I believe the size of the
material plays a part in "uneven" development. With the dip-n-dunk method, I
dilute 1:1:200 and agitate for 5 seconds every minute and adjust the time to
control contrast. With normal development times between 10-14 minutes there
is plenty of room for expansion and contraction. I noticed that if I
increased the agitation to 10 seconds I started to get excessive base fog.
Because of the size of the negative and the enlargement (16x20 or 20x24) I
don't worry as much about the edge effects for visual sharpness as I do with
35mm (I have printed 35mm Tech Pan at 40x60 with no grain and only slight
fuzz which I attribute to lens quality).
I generally lose a number of images to over/under exposure on each roll of
film but can't contribute them to development problems.
I hope this helps you, but I learned long ago that what works for one person
won't work for another.
Scott Wainer
smwbmp@starpower.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 02/21/03-10:44:17 AM Z CST