Stand Development Part 2

In this second installment on Stand Development I will outline some basic equipment needed, proper agitation techniques and other necessary processing information…

Stay tuned for the Part 3 in a few days!

Viva la Revolution- Stephen

20 thoughts on “Stand Development Part 2

  1. Stephen, Thank you for sharing all of this. One comment on the video, it is really hard to hear you on it. I have the audio cranked everywhere it can be cranked and it is still rather difficult to hear. Any chance some adjustments can be made?

    1. Video is something I’m really trying to make perfect for the site as I think it works best… I have tried several different cameras and recorders all with mixed results… Kodak has a new one the Zi8 which comes out in Sept that has an input for a stand alone mic and it records in HD+… I’m trying to see if I can get one for posts here on FR… I will do the next post using a different setup… thanks for letting me know.


  2. hi stephen,

    when is this episode viewable in itunes?
    for some reason it’s very bumpy on a mac!
    have more trouble with video on wordpress.


    1. Sorry for the issues… wordpress had been really good so far but this last video has been plagued with issues. I will post the next video on a different site and bring it in. iTunes should have it by now so I will have to check and see what is wrong with the settings…

  3. Hi Stephen
    Any chance of posting this video on YouTube, as it is not on iTunes and and it will not play for me on WordPress?

  4. I bought Axel’s “Iridescent Light” and tried the Rodianl/Xtol formula on Fuji Acros, and it was a disaster. Way over developed and bromide drag that could almost be artistic! I thought I must have done something wrong, or that the formula in the book had the wrong amounts. But then I found this site and followed everything to the letter – pre-wet, amounts (including the small amount of borax and ascorbic acid), agitation, temperature, time. The Acros had been rated at 125. Again, it was a disaster. Same problems, and this time I lost some really good shots. I did, however, also try the same formula and technique with Efke 100 (rated at 100) and it wasn’t bad. No problems at all, but I wouldn’t say the results are brilliant.

    since both you and Micahel Axel make a point of using the Rodinal/Xtol formulation with Acros, I’m keen to get it right. Any suggestions as to why we are getting such different results with the same formula?

    By the way, my benchmark has become Prescysaol EF, which in all my years experience, gives the sharpest results of any developer by a country mile – nothing I’ve ever used comes near it. In my opinion, Barry Thornton’s obsession with sharp negatives really paid off.


    1. If you are following my steps exactly with agitation and dilution then everything should be perfect… I have run over 50 rolls with the setup and perfect every time. One thing to try is to cut back on the time as I mention to say 2.5 hours but it sounds like your issues are bigger…. did you mix the Xtol correctly and measure the very small amount to Rodinal exactly…. an increase in agitation beyond what I demo will increase density and contrast a lot… the bromide drag should be gone with the pre wet… are you using metal tanks?

  5. Hi Stephen,

    I did follow your steps exactly, and as I said, had already followed Michael Axel on a previous occasion with the same results. And yes, everything was measured very precisely. For the Rodinal I used a finely calibrated syringe that only takes a maximum of 3mls. I used distilled water. Agitation was also exactly as you suggested. Gentle roll and tilt as per the video, and for the prescribed time. And temperature controlled throughout at 20 degrees. I did use a metal tank.

    What I don’t understand is why it worked for the Efke 100 and not for the Acros. The same the first time round, it worked for the FP4, and not for the Acros. (And in neither case did I develop the films together.) I’ll try once more at a shorter time and see if it works.


    1. Peter, I had some similar results.

      My first roll of tmy2 shot at iso 500-640 was pretty good– wonderful sharpness and fine grain, but a little on the thin side, with some shots loosing to much in the shadows.

      No prob. I shot the next roll at 400– too dense, less sharp and grainier but usable.

      Did a roll a couple rolls of tmy in xtol stock at box speed to make sure that was working fine– perfect results, but not quite as sharp and luminous as the successful stand negatives, but still fantastic for the speed.

      Tried some tx at 200m — massively overdeveloped, grainy

      My tentative conclusion is that getting the agitation dialed in is the most important factor– the first time I was super gentle. The succeeding times I assumed I had it down and may have been a little rougher than I thought.

      I’ll keep working on it for sure.

      1. agitation is a huge factor… I am working on a quick post for Rodinal and Acros, Tmax 100 and Efke 50 all with a focus on agitation that provides the best possible results… more soon…

  6. A couple of observations as I continue to get this dialed in–

    if both density and grain become a problem the issue seems to be over agitation

    too much contrast/fried highlights but ok grain– too much time and/ or too high temp

    filters– with old tech films a yellow filter gives normal contrast, but with new tech films like tmy, and especially acros even a mild yellow filter can give a dramatic contrast boost– which may or may not be desirable– so this needs to be taken into account when experimenting with the process.

  7. After some more controlled testing I’ve decided that the filters thing was largely spurious, and probably had more to do with factors related to metering etc. Subject colour makes some difference, but there is little change in overall contrast with anything except a dark red filter.– one less thing to worry about.

    Also found that using conventional development with higher dilutions of xtol gives me a lot of the sharpness and silvery tones of stand development. The possible limitation being that the curve of the neg is not as linear so it’s probably less idea for maximum flexibility when printing digitally. I love the tones with TMX in Xtol 1:1 so far.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s