How Does Agitation Frequency Affect a Negative? | Days of Knight 170211.7-044 

7:48 - Thanks for setting up the shot in a way to include your cat. Cats are always appreciated 🙏

I agree. The constant agitation looks the best. Very cool experiment!

I am so glad there are people like you on RU-vid to challenge these topics - thanks for taking the time to perform these tests A+

I think the general guideline when doing continuous agitation (like with a machine) is to reduce the development time by about 15% and go for there. The published times are generally based on intermittent agitation. However, the 15% is just a starting point. One has to go from there. Also, generally constant agitation will increase contrast. So, what one ends up as their final will depend upon how one likes to print or if one is scanning. Flatter contrast is generally better for scanning but not for printing.

Hey Azriel. I know you recording this a month ago, but wanted to come back in and say thanks again for this experiment. Seems like a little thing, but I've found it very liberating not stressing about agitation with the dozen or so rolls I've development since. Thanks for this video!

Excellent video! After 20+ years of shooting digital, I finally dusted off my original F1 and started using it again. Now confident that I remember what I'm doing with the camera, I'm starting to get back into the darkroom. I get the feeling your channel has already answered most of the things I've been wondering about, making my reeducation a breeze!

40 years of film work and never even thought to question the why... What a great video and test on film agitation. There have been a couple of times over the years where I have just plain messed up my dilution on my developer and have had to take a wild guess on times/agitation. I got lucky, but the agitation was my biggest concern. I see now that I have a lot more lee way in agitation. Great job and I look forward to following more of your videos

I'm still somewhat new to film development and have yet to get the results I was expecting. But I just tried the constant agitation method on 2 rolls using Rodinal 1:50 (7.5min) and 1:100 (20min). And I'm just blown away with the results! In all actuality, I wasn't agitating 100% of the time, but probably more like 80-85%. Took a few little breaks here and there. I also used standard tap water @20 deg. Thanks for taking the time putting this video together! New subscriber!

Thank you Tri-X roll, for your noble sacrifice. We appreciate it!

That's a really useful experiment - thanks for going to the trouble to do it and share it.

Thanks for doing this. You would expect lower contrast from the stand development because the developer close to the developed areas becomes exhausted and works less well. To really compare the different techniques, you have to adjust the stand development time to get good black/highlight areas. Scan at 2400 dpi with the lightest in-scanner sharpening ( I have an epson 4990, and am guessing yours is similar) Give each image the best settings when scanning ( give each its own back and white point ) Or better yet, make the best print you can with each and scan _that_ With stand development, you can expect to get tonal separation in both deep shadows and top highlights, but the overall 'tonality' of the image may be reduced ( I take 'tonality' to mean how real life' the image looks ) It will turn a linear response curve ( things like TMax) into a S-curve (tri-x) S-curves let you make exposure mistakes and still get decent images. The best 'tonality' comes with perfectly exposed linear response films, but if you screw up it looks awful.

Thank you for going through all the trouble in these experiments, I really appreciate all the info and with such meticulous attention given to the experiment is hard to dislike any of it. Keep it up, thank you again

Great video Azirel! I've been developing since the mid 70's and we were taught to agitate the entire time and so that's what I've always done with great results. That whole rolling/hand tumbling thing always seemed strange to me. Thanks for proving it out.

Another thing you might try is constant film development while changing the exposer time when shooting the film it will result in changing contrast curve much like the Zone system does with sheet film. I learned this method to use it on roll film so you I could have a roll of film with normal exposer and over exposer or normal exposer and under exposer. The results of this is on over exposer will push the tonal range a lot greater details in shadow details, while under exposer will keep the details in the highlights. Much like what we can now do in digital when shooting to expand or contract the tonal range EV steps.

one thing with Stand development is that you must extend the development time. to do Stand development correctly, you have to pretty much triple the time that the film is in the developer. if you only give the standard amount of time in the developer will never give correct results.

Your conclusion is what is already well published. I think a more interesting test would be to adjust development time for agitation methods so the density is the same from shot to shot. Then compare shadow and highlight detail

Outstanding test boss. You're an asset to the film community.

Excellent two videos. On a dull day, agitate more, on a really bright day agitate less, all things being equal. Now all I need is a basement darkroom.

I've just tested with agitations here at home and got way less grain when just using the little stir thing instead of doing real inversions of the tank. Developed with Rodinal by the way.

Dude, thanks for the vid. Special point for you smile when you getting films out of the tanks, i was smiling just as you did, felt like i spent few minutes with a friend doing some good experiment. gg, really

I'm glad I saw this. I started aggitating around 5x ever 30sec and loved the results. But of course being new to all this that wasn't "recommended". Saw this and it makes so much sense now. Thank you.

Results are more pronounced when doing reversal processing - you can really see the differences in straight positive projection : )

Holy crap! I think you've only just started to scratch the surface with your experimentation. You are now going to have to adjust the time, temperature, pressure, etc. The possibilities are endless.

I love these experiment videos. It seems like so much in film development is based on old wives tales and tradition; it's hard to separate fact from fiction. This suggestion might be a little boring, but how about an experiment with and without using a stop bath? I always just use tap water as my stop both and have never had any issues, so I'm wondering if there's any real benefit.

Good job on this boss, really good to finally see examples rather than reading about Theory, this should be required watching for all film photography students. Respect

Thanks for this video. This is a very good experiment. Nice work. Very useful and interesting. Sold on mo' agitation.

I've just bought a kit to develop B/W film, and after watching this video I'll agitate the shit out of my film, the constant agitation looks sooooooo cool, like an already edited in Lightroom version of the picture, amazing! And I prefer to "edit" pictures this way, it feels more fun than in Lightroom...

Thanks for the video Azirel! It's good to know that I don't need to worry as much as I thought about agitation.

Thank you! I have asked myself this question a lot of time and finally with your video I've found an answer!

Dear Azriel, Thanks a lot for your shown experiments. I thought about doing the same before finding your tests on youtube. So I saved not only some time. At the end I was really surprised about the results. brgds Thomas

Hey, Azriel, and thank you so much for all these great videos! I discovered your channel 4-5 days ago and i think i have watched all you videos. Here is what i really like about your videos: 1. They are long enough so that you can eat something while watching - no need to whipe that chicken off your hands and search for a different video - love that 2. Its so cool that you are experimenting with all factors of analog photography. In the beginning i actually thought there was a "correct" way to develope. Not a chance. 3. You are showing us how one can get great results with dirt cheap cameras. 620, 110, brownies etc. We all have them but i guess we never shoot them. Its easier to grab the working camera. So thanks for putting the spotlight on the old bangers. Lastly i have a suggestion for this series of developing you got going on. If you search "developing b&w at home" on youtube, open the 20 first videos im sure you will find almost 20 ways of agitating/stirring/whatever its called. I always wonder about that when i develope. Does it matter if i invert, use the stick, rotate while invert, "oooh dont shake it!!""never ever ever ever counter clock wize" (i made that last one up, but you thought it was real, right?). I should do that video my self, but i dont have a proper darkroom to make it scientific, and besides - you have this awsome series going on!

Thank you so much. After 30 I start to develop my films myself again.Its so nce to see negatives who tell already a story by them self. And afther your movie I move my tank as much I can for super dooper contrast.

Standard development times always presume using "normal" agitation. If you change agitation then you have to adjust dev times accordingly.

Very informative, helpful info. Thank you

What an eye opener, that is amazing, will go for constant agitation next time for sure. I am really a novice in developing and I have a lot of odd and very old film, some of it very slow indeed, so I am learning all the time all aspects of photography, great fun. Thank you.

This is very interesting..today June 21, 2021, I am going to develop a roll of ACROS ii black and white film using much more agitation than normal..perhaps 3 times the agitation..thank you for taking the time to do this experiment..peace brother..from MANHATTAN

Thanks for taking the time and doing this! Well done!

I use a JOBO rotary processor, where the tank is constantly rotated there and back. I would say it's pretty much equivalent to constant aggitation in youre case. JOBO says to reduce development times by about -15%, which I do with good results.

Great video and results, it will urge me to increase agitation. Thank you.

You should see an increase in Contrast and Grain with more frequent agitation. In my experience more vigorous agitation didn't seem to have as much effect on either. Changing the direction or style of agitation - twist, figure eight, inversion each time you agitate would help prevent getting directional streaks, usually seen near the sprocket holes.

I bet you can use that technique for making various photography prints to look aged; the non-agitated one appears to be an old style print/negative.

Good job, Azriel ! Interesting to see the difference.

I am very appreciated in your effort, that you made very very good knowledge VDO in film processing!

I tried it and I guess it makes a difference. I will stir the tank uninterrupted every time now on. Thanks !

That was extremely interesting. The bottom line, for me, is what is the best default method that gives and 'on average' better result. There seems to be a slight trade off in grain but given the neural filters in PS, grain is no longer as influential (should one choose so). I am also led to consider how totally important exposure is. With digital, you can get away with the proverbial murder but film is very, very unforgiving.

This was helpful. Thanks

THANK YOU!! I've always wanted to do this but never could be bothered going though all the rigmarole. :)

Great video and very useful to help us to understand what many of us do mechanically :) Thanks man!

so great. going to try higher agitatation freq in my next roll now that i've seen this.

Excellent Azriel, many thanks for this video. I always wondered what the effect would be concerning agitation, and now i know. Many thanks. Liked and subscribed. Keep up the good work.

This is fantastic! I have always wondered this exact thing. I had heard that constant agitation would cause overexposure issues because you are constantly recycling the solution vs allowing it to naturally exhaust between cycles. It doesn't look like thats the case at all (at least with hc110). Love the experiment!

Pozdravujem zo Slovenska , užitočný článok , k uvdenému len toľko , že na trvalé miešanie alebo preklápanie vývojnice som prišiel už v roku 1986 keď som spracovával farebný nemaskovaný film ORWO 21 a ktorý bola dodávaná vyvolávacia sada chemikálií pri doporučenej teplota 30 stupňov celzia .Miešanie nebolo zvlášť uvedené. Súprava chemikálií bola určená na 4 ks filmu 135 alebo 120 a množstvo pripravených roztokov bolo len 400 mililitrov. Vlastnil som vyvolávací tank na 5 ks cievok na 135 film , tak som raz riskol vyvolávanie s trvalým preklápaním a výsledky boli prekvapujúce. Kontrast , sýtosť farebnosť boli prekvapujúco dobré , filmy boli jasnejšie ako v doporučovanom servise .Držím palce v ďalšej tvorivej práci.

Thanks, very nice info here

Great video, I think jobo figured that out since it constantly agitates. But then again without your video, I wouldn't have a reason to consider that. Thank you for that .

This is amazing! Thanks!

The stand development really needs to go way beyond the usual recipe regarding developing times. Or I should say, now we see the reason :P

Great work, Azriel!!

Amazing results!! thanks for sharing!

You are awesome ! Thanks for this Another option would be Crazy agitation like shaking violently the entire time

Thanks. Now I have to try it for myself 😀👍

Thank you for this video, very informative!

love the TNG figures

Great experiment and very helpful, thanks!

I'm so glad to have found these videos. I'm curious why you compare them by scanning rather than by printing them in the dark room? I mean, since the scanner does some auto adjusting.

Great video Azriel !!!! Keep it up man :)

Interesting experiment! Thank you very much for sharing.

Just viewed your video, much thanks for your work. I was always worried of agitating too much, it looks like not enough is more of concern.

This video SAVED my roll of HP5 that I accidentally pulled 2 stops instead of pushing. I owe you one... my band is touring through Calgary in September, would love to treat you to some Tubby Dog to repay the favour!

Nice test, but ....... You should print the negs with an enlarger. Which enlarger ? Three different types. 1. Double condensors. 2, Single condensor. 3. Cold light. Not satisfied ? Start printing on bromide paper. Which paper ? Two different types 1. Single graded paper. 2. Multi grade paper Which brand? Good luck !

thank you for this video, I thought I was agitating to much ( 5 sec every 30 sec) but every thing worked out fine. I kinda like the look of the constant ag. I will try in on the next roll I develop. thanks much, BTW I am a new subscriber to your channel and I like it very much keep up all my hard work I don't have to do. :)

Excellent and very informative video

So I think the best way for me to develop Agfa scala as negative is to do constant agitation, which will give me nice clear contrast! Thanks Asra! I normally use Rodinal or R09 one shot, so will share my results once done it!

I love this channel and the experiments! Thanks so much dude!!! :)

I agree that a scanner may auto correct the result, I think that happens with my nikon scanner. I think proper proof wet printing is the absolute best measure to evaluate a negative. then let the scanner do its magic to give you a good image

Awesome, I was looking forward to this video after the last one. I'm really glad I decided to become a patreon. Back to the subject though, to me it seems like grain might have also been affected. Looking at the background it seems like the constant agitation has more pronouns grain than either the stand or normal agitation. All in all quit an interesting test. I'm definitely going to try something similar using my own set up to see if I can improve my current technique

Late to the party...for my future reference...the girl on the left side of the image has no white smile in either the stand or normal agitation frequency, but on the constant or consistent agitation image the white smile is obvious. in addition, the constant or consistent agitation has a less gray cast over the entire image. It is more 'clear' of cast. Being that rate of agitation is not a factor (prior video) just keep the 'fresh' developer coming in contact with the emulsion; constantly.

Stand gives low contrast and no bromide streaks if you are lucky. 10 sec per minute gives a nice normal contrast DEPENDING ON TIME IN DEVELOPER. CONSTANT AT THE SAME TIME will Require one paper grade softer or a diffusion rather than condenser. Two inversions per 15 sec is same as constant. Control your contrast by time, never fooling with fast or slow agitation or intermittent vs constant agitation.

Thanks, very useful experiment

hey brother i'm from indonesia and i very like with your content thanks very much

Thank you !! Interesting experiment.

nice video!!

You should do more videos outside. We like seeing Alberta in all her glory.

I really wish you would’ve filled the gap between the stand and the normal agitation. I would’ve been really curious to see how some intermediate (semi-stand) agitation would’ve worked, let’s say 1 agitation every 5 minutes. I would also expect each to need different times. P.S. I suspect stand could’ve been a lot better with longer time. Could it be underdeveloped?

Hey Thanks for that experiment 👍 really nice to see the difference But I am just guessing, that the results will be different with different Films. But how knows 🤷‍♂️ Keep on the good work

I subscribed just cause of the bad ass intro music.

Interesting experiment and useful to many......

interesting results.. i use constant agitation with cinestill DF96

Very very cool video and experiment! I was surprised by your results which is awesome. I really want to do this same experiment with color film, the instructions say that agitation differences can wildly shift colors. I had some developing issues with my 120 black and white film where the edges were always lighter than the center of the image, across all cameras so not light leaks, I think I narrowed this down to me using the twiddle stick and doing constant or too much agitation, I went back to inverting the tank to agitate and the problem disappeared, I think with the larger film, perhaps the twirling motion created stagnation in the middle of the film vs fast moving fluid on the edges, or something?

Thank you for this instructive video. I liked your testing procedure and carefulness to the details however you could have pointed out more critical aspects as film speed variation, highlights contrast, grain and sharpness. In theory stand development should create more of a broad shoulder in the highlights I.e. less contrast there, more grain and sharpness. I'm curious about film speed.. you could set the darkest point to black with levels and then see which frame retains the most shadow detail.

Very interesting. I might give constant agitation a shot just to see what type of results I get.

I would have like to see the results of this in relation to how much grain the agitation created in the film, Guess I need to do something similar to find out for myself.

Interesting and supprising agitation experiment, how about comparing film that has been shot & developed same day ,& shot but developed say a month later, does it make a difference ?. Many say ilford pan f should be processed immediately, is that right? or is it possible to expose then store in fridge to develop later.

Constant agitation will over develop the film by about 15%, so if you use a Jobo or other consatant agitation developing technique, reduce the development time by 15% to get the "correct" result.

@8:17 - the results... contrast increased with little and constant agitation. No agitation left a very grey result with no bright whites or dark blacks.

Good job. I like the way you work. What about using a high acutance developer such as Rodinal and repeating the experiment? I prefer stand development using Rodinal as it increases shadow details and sharpness in my landscape photos.

great video

Very interesting!! Did you also do inverting and agitation with the knob?

You should do more experiments with film, for example: developing color film in black and white chemicals, trying different Caffenol-C recipes and so on.

Thank you!

This is as expected, no? No agitation (stand development) means developer in contact with the emulsion gets exhausted and without movement, stays that way. Constant agitation means the emulsion is always in contact with fresh developer. So it’s not really that stand development is “bad”. If the scene dynamic range is super wide, e.g., shooting into a cave mouth under noon desert sun, stand development is exactly what’s called for. That translates as much of the recorded scene dynamic range into corresponding density changes on the developed film. That’s how to express those 14 stops on the film.