Page 3 of 3
Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 1:38 pm
by juan
Stand development is not NO agitation - at least in modern parlance. In fact, even Atget talked about agitating a plate in Hubl paste. Read Berenice Abbott. Then go read Mortensen.
juan
Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 4:17 pm
by Ornello
juan wrote:Stand development is not NO agitation - at least in modern parlance. In fact, even Atget talked about agitating a plate in Hubl paste. Read Berenice Abbott. Then go read Mortensen.
juan
"Stand development" does indeed mean no agitation after the initial one or two minute period. Read
Developing by Jacobsen and Jacobsen.
Re: I have been using rodinal for my stand development. But I'm really curious to know how to use Fx39 for the same.
Posted: Tue Dec 21, 2021 1:47 pm
by Shutterbug
Ornello wrote: ↑Fri Jul 14, 2006 4:00 pm
pirateoversixty wrote:Thanks to you all for prompt responses. Jay, have found your answers to other peoples queries to always be quite straight - ahead, no bs. Would appreciate any guidance you can give. I do shoot medium format and and 35mm, Neopan 400 in both. (LF just doesn't suit my temperament). If your elixer would help me get the best from this film, I would appreciate it.
TIA
Jim
Well, I don't have any idea why you brought up stand development. Did you hear about that somewhere? It is not ideal for roll films.
I love Neopan 400. I use Acutol and FX-39 on it.
Re: Alternative developers for stand development
Posted: Wed Dec 22, 2021 5:27 pm
by Ornello
Don't. Stand development works properly only with glass plates lying horizontally in the developer. Since the plate is perfectly horizontal, the by-products of development (which are heavier than the developer solution) have nowhere to go. Thus, they remain where they are formed, and reduce the rate of development where they form. This was used in the very old days when glass plates were used extensively. It is not suitable for roll film, which is held vertically in a spiral. It will produce streaks.