Michael Hartley Loc: Deer Capital of Georgia

Has anyone, rpavich, or anyone else, used this 'monobath' solution he mentioned a few post back? Kinda sounds too good?

Darkroom317 Loc: Mishawaka, IN

Here are some good threads about them. I've not tried it

http://www.apug.org/forums/forum37/18177-monobath-developers.html

http://www.apug.org/forums/forum172/139428-new55-monobath-developer.html

Nightski

This is an interesting clip on monobath.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQDZdkqOW2g

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

Mono-bath is used for instant film like Polaroid 55. It's not for normal B&W film and I would not recommend any procedure that deviates from methods that are well documented. Even with the Polaroid films, additional steps are needed to improve the print or negative's archival potential.

You are pretty much stuck with: 1. develop, 2. stop, 3. fix, 4. hypo clear, 5. final wash, 6. rinse agent (like Photo Flo), and 7. hang it up to dry. This will insure archival quality if you do it correctly.

There is another approach that divides the developer into two steps. The most common uses Diafine. The advantages are that it is not sensitive to temperature and you can reuse the two parts indefinitely unless you contaminate Part A with Part B. The downside is that you cannot control contrast (it's fairly high) and you do not really achieve the touted increase in film speed - you still have to expose for the shadows if you want to hold the detail.

Yet another method uses highly dilute developer like Rodinal 1+100 or thinner or HC110(E). The film is left to stand in the developer for a long period of time (as much as an hour or more) with little or no agitation. This provides a compensating effect in which the highlights exhaust the developer immediately in contact with the film while the shadows continue to develop with un-exhausted developer. This method is tedious and something you should not try until after you have mastered normal B&W film development.

Nightski

In the youtube link I provided it does say that monobath is for instant film. I didn't really understand that, because my memory of instant film is the kind where the camera would pop a picture out right after you took it.

Selmslie, did you watch the youtube I provided in which Ted Forbes does a two step process? It's pretty interesting and Ted Forbes does quite a bit of teaching via youtube. He's very helpful. If you watch it, please share your thoughts on this process that skips the stop bath.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVGkaYlt1Sg

Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

I would expect that you have watched this, but if not I think you would enjoy it...

http://www.amazon.com/Ansel-Adams-Experience-Barbara-Feldon/dp/B000BITUFM/ref=sr_1_1?s=movies-tv&ie=UTF8&qid=1438896194&sr=1-1&keywords=Ansel+Adams%3A+American+Experience

corryhully Loc: liverpool uk

I like the rodinal 1-100 stand developing. I have developed film shot
At different iso in the same tank to great effect. It is very compensating.
Caffenol stand is also an excellent compensating developer.

Darkroom317 Loc: Mishawaka, IN

It is great for pushing film as well. But I would caution that it does give lower contrast negatives. Part of the point of it I know, but I would not use if for ordinary situations or when contrast and tonal relationships are critical.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

I did not watch the whole 20 minutes (about the total time it takes me to develop a roll from start to finish).

He did a lot of talking but it's not something I would recommend that you follow as a starter.

I noticed that he mentioned Rodinal http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rodinal , which is an ancient and revered formula. It is still made under the Rodinal trade name which was taken over by Adox. There are a number of nearly identical developers like R09 http://www.digitaltruth.com/store/cart/R09-One-Shot-Agfa-Rodinal-125ml.html Rodinal/R09 tend to produce more grain but sharper images than developers that contain sodium sulfite.

Like HC110, you can use Rodinal at many different dilutions, but I like to keep both at about 1+50 to get reasonable development times.

Nightski

Here is Ted Forbes on Stand Development. He has some beautiful images. Probably a video for you experienced folks.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJ4tZiOJiJA

Nightski

No I haven't, thanks! :-)

corryhully Loc: liverpool uk

I do tend to do an inversion half way through. It does kick
Kick up the contrast.

Darkroom317 Loc: Mishawaka, IN

I use running water instead of stop bath for film. This washes away the developer rather than neutralizing it. Some films, not Kodak or Ilford, cannot be used with acid stop bath. Either way it needs to done. Developer tracking over to the fixer in significant quantity will degrade it causing shorter life for the solution

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

You can change lenses?!?!
Heck....., you got a fancy camera!!!!
I thought you were using an Instamatic!!!! :lol: :lol:
SS

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

I mentioned a couple of things that might not have been brought up earlier.

Developer dilutions are usually expressed as 1+X meaning 1 part developer and X parts water. In old texts you might see this as 1:X, but the new notation is unambiguous.

Development times and dilutions for various film/developer combinations can be found at http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.php where you will also see some handy time/temperature conversion tables.

Don't be intimidated by the recommendation that you develop at 68F (20C). You can easily develop at room temperature if you convert the times. For example, 10 minutes at 68F usually converts to about 7 minutes at 75F.