Rodinal

[@Tsudkyk]

Happy I found this video, I’ve had this question for a while but I’ve never done a side by side comparison.

[@ChrisVidouras]

Very interesting video, and a very lovely image either way. Stand development has definitely saved some of my film photos. Also that chart is very interesting, no wonder I like Xtol so much! hahah
As a bit of constructive criticism, I think having some text labels on the video underneath each of the images giving the dev details would simplify things for the viewers.
Stay awesome and cheers from Greece!

[@TheNegative]

Yeah XTOL is great! I definitely like that developer. Also in that chart it’s clearly the best choice haha. And thanks for the tip, I’ll add those in for the next one. Thanks for watching and cheers from California. :)

[@Brunovdvoorde]

I also agree about adding text labels! Nice video!

[@samzphotos23]

Very beautiful photos!

[@MusicAndPhotosbyPablo]

After trying stand dev once, I decided I like my contrast. But this was a super interesting comparison, thanks!😊

[@TheNegative]

I’m with you on that! It’s a fun experiment but I don’t think the results are ideal!

[@EK-dt4kc]

Many thanks! Very helpful video!😊

[@2252269]

Thanks, subscribed. Could you advise whether it makes sense to do 90 minutes stand dev instead of 60 minutes with HP5+? I do 60 minutes with 1 gentle agitation at 30 minutes. Ingeneral I like contrast but details come first.

[@erichstocker8358]

Nice comparison

[@NordicLab]

Thx for info, really helpful

[@joncaradies3155]

Great video ! Keep up the good work ... :D

[@TheNegative]

Thanks for watching! :)

[@JLSTibu]

How do I say this... You're a god on earth for stating the exact stop you metered the shadows for instead of saying something completely annoying and technically less usefull like "I OvEr ExPoSeD TwO StOpS". Like yeah, kinda useless information to say how many stops you overexposed using some random avg meter that could be tricked by anything in the scene. Instead you decided to give actually usefull data on your exposure. Thank you.

[@TheNegative]

Hahah yes! I can’t do the averaging meters! I like to know where my shadows are or it gives me anxiety for the outcome. Also I feel that the term over or under exposing is kinda arbitrary. If one stop down is a better fit then that’s the case. Calling it “under” exposed sounds so cruel! Haha

[@veronica10321]

Nice video 😃

[@lensman5762]

Stand development is supposed to control the highlights and bring out more detail, but in this comparison the highlights are better controlled with standard 1/25 development. Something is not right. Have these negs been scanned on a flatbed?

[@TheNegative]

Yeah it definitely didn’t come out as expected. I plan on trying this test again with better exposures and a different film. I’m not super crazy about the Pancro 400 film. Yes flatbed scan.

The stand developed one seems to have much denser highlights as well. Are you sure that the increased shadow detail is from being stand developed? What if you let it in 1:25 a bit longer? I think this comparison only make sense if the midtones have equal density.

[@TheNegative]

Yeah. Stand development will further increase shadow detail. The highlights are denser too but it was a 2 hour stand so it was probably a little too long.