Same image with different ISO/development thread...

Juan Valdenebro

Juan Valdenebro

Truth is beauty
Local time
3:53 AM
Joined
May 23, 2009
Messages
4,353
In most soft light situations I expose Neopan400 at 200... These two frames were done on Neopan400 under identical light conditions (same minute): overcast sky. The first one was shot at ISO800, and the second one at ISO3200 (incident metering). Both were developed in Rodinal: the first one with my normal push development for ISO800 (1+50 with every next minute agitation) and the second one with stand development: 1+100, one hour, a few inversions in the beginning, and a few more at 30 minutes. Even though contrast on second frame is a bit higher as expected, negatives don't show it that clearly: ISO800 negatives have highlights on their place (dark grays, clearly far from black), but stand development ones have much less apparent contrast, with highlights reaching middle grays only (much lower highest density on negatives than ISO800 ones!)... Grain has the same size and character on both frames: typical crisp Rodinal grain... I find the film pretty usable at 3200 with stand development... The used photograph (my mother when she was 17) has pure white in some points in her face on the print.


http://www.flickr.com/photos/40894234@N07/6086957378/in/photostream

Cheers,

Juan
 
I hadn't noticed the difference in acutance: edges of "1969" look a lot sharper on the stand development (Neopan400 @ 3200) example...

Cheers,

Juan
 
I imagine the way density is built during stand development -because of the lack of agitation- is a more ordered one... Perhaps the continuous agitation of normal development helps for more chaotic grain because of constant chemical movement...

Cheers,

Juan
 
So, Rodinal stand dev (with certain films) is God sent? :) can we agree on this?

Juan, I do stand dev now too, just started, I don't have a dark room (I could sell my kidney to have one) how do you think these negatives with stand dev would work with wet printing? I have heard that negatives with stand dev is better for scanning but not desirable with wet printing in a dark room, would you agree with that? If so why? I haven't figured out why this would be the case.
 
Right now I'm 10,000 miles away from my enlarger... But from negatives, I'd say they can be wet printed... That doesn't mean they're better than well exposed and developed negatives closer to box speed, obviously... But I see stand development can help both for great contrast control and higher acutance while offering the photographer very high ISO options even with medium speed films... I'll gladly use that when I need it.

Cheers,

Juan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top