agitation: I do it different; it works, so why is it the oddball way?

I'm just curious. When I first got into developing, I encountered 2 types of agitation at once; the typical techniques (which of course vary a little according to manufacturer, etc.), and, since I shot a lot of Technical Pan in Technidol, I also encountered the 'up and down', non-inversion technique reccommended by Kodak for this combination. That is the only time I've run across this (the 'up and down' technique), but I have had far greater results with it for e very combination I've used (old emulsion, new, old developer, new, pyro, Technical Pan and on and on), than the inversion technique.

I've avoided teaching seminars on Basic Black and White Processing because of this, since in my experience I am the only person who uses this agitation technique--and I am uncomfortable teaching students something I myself have little faith in, i.e., the inversion technique.

I have never had uneven development with it; whereas I have with the tried-and-true "normal" way.

I have never encountered overall density errors with a known combination; whereas with the "Normal" technique, again, I have.

This isn't a question of "if it works for you, use it", but rather I'm curious why so many people look at me sideways when I tell them how I agitate, when everything points to the conclusion that "my" technique is so...predictable.

I can't imagine that, if someone else were to use it, their results would differ much (I am far from methodical about it...); nor can I imagine I am doing the regular, inversion technique so differently than others (actually, I learned that in a class, and everyone did it essentially the same way...).

Just looking for feedback (& maybe some assurance that we all live on the same planet...?)? Or maybe I need a life...:-(

[ Previous | Next ]