Originally posted by ChrisPlatt IMO the risks involved in stand development equal any potential benefits.
I have never understood its appeal. Maybe it's some kind of Zen thing?
Chris
IIRC the claim is that the highlights develop fast, then the developer in proximity to the film becomes exhausted; after this, the shadows then develop slowly but extensively by diffusion and one can end up with an improved result. Because the developing time is very, very long, small variations on the order of thirty to sixty seconds (e.g. pour-out time for large Patterson tanks) are not critical, nor is temperature (within sane limits) - and the volumes of developer used are very small.
In addition, Rodinal - which is the go-to for this system - is supposed to have an unusually long shelf-life once opened, so it also benefits photographers who don't get into the darkroom much, don't want their solutions going bad on them, and want to economise on developer.
I have no doubt there is currently a hipster element to it.
I would be interested to hear you expound upon the risks. One thing I can say for sure - as with Caffenol (which I also have yet to try), it's not something I'd trust once-in-a-lifetime pics with until I was confident in the process.