Delta 3200 and Perceptol woes

Discussion in 'B&W: Film, Paper, Chemistry' started by powermonkey, Nov 1, 2011.

  1. powermonkey

    powermonkey Member

    Messages:
    7
    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2010
    Location:
    WV
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Hi everyone. I recently tried shooting Delta 3200 and developing with Perceptol. I initially tried the recommended 18 minutes at 68' (stock solution), and then after my negatives turning out WAY too thin I tried 23 minutes on another roll, still yielding terrible results. Does anyone else have any experience with this combo? Can anyone recommend a better solution for shooting 3200 ASA? Thanks!

    Delta 3200 Perceptol007 - small.jpg

    Pic related - it's about how under-developed both rolls appear to be.
     
  2. Rich Ullsmith

    Rich Ullsmith Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,040
    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2007
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Looks like 1 or 1 1/2 stop lacking exposure for the recommended development.
     
  3. samcomet

    samcomet Subscriber

    Messages:
    222
    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    Shooter:
    35mm
    If by solution you mean a liquid solution.....I've been shooting 3200 T-Max & Delta for years now and have come to the conclusion that Kodak P3200 in T-Max juice at 20 deg C. for the recommended time gives me the best possible result. The Ilford brand combo gives me rather contrasty and "grainy" looking negs. disclaimer: I know that the word "grainy" may be the wrong way to describe the look of the neg by strict definition, but for the sake of this post I will use it. I have had a lab in Paris process P3200 in Xtol with fab results too but I do not know the timing. Hope this helps. cheers, sam
     
  4. powermonkey

    powermonkey Member

    Messages:
    7
    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2010
    Location:
    WV
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Hmm, I can't seem to find P3200 in 120, but I might give the 35mm a shot next semester. Thanks for the suggestion!
     
  5. powermonkey

    powermonkey Member

    Messages:
    7
    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2010
    Location:
    WV
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I might have to check my RB67's meter against another then. I hope it's not been giving me wonky readings in low light!
     
  6. Polovy

    Polovy Member

    Messages:
    3
    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2011
    Location:
    Reading, Ber
    Shooter:
    35mm
    I used it in the past - Delta 3200 that is - and had no problems with ID-11 - as per manufacturers instructions 10:30 min
     
  7. hobbes

    hobbes Member

    Messages:
    63
    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2007
    Location:
    Warsaw, Pola
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Doesn't perceptol belong to the group of developers which lower iso of a film? I guess so, that would explain 1-1&1/2 underexposure effect.. Roger Hicks used to expose his HP5+ to 250.. I'd do same with Delta 3200 (which true iso is at around 1200-1600 anyways)..
     
  8. hpulley

    hpulley Member

    Messages:
    2,214
    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2010
    Location:
    Guelph, Onta
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Use Microphen stock, HC-110 1+15 or DD-X 1+4 with Delta 3200 for best speed.

    Sent from my K080 using Tapatalk
     
  9. Roger Cole

    Roger Cole Member

    Messages:
    5,480
    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2011
    Location:
    Atlanta GA
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Or T-Max or T-Max RS, which work great with Delta 3200.
     
  10. michael_r

    michael_r Subscriber

    Messages:
    6,542
    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2010
    Location:
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Perceptol and high speed films are not sensible combinations. Even at 1+3 Perceptol loses about a stop unless you develop long enough so that the extra-fine grain effect is totally lost. In any case, you can't make Delta 3200 a fine grain film with Perceptol or any other ultra fine grain developer. All you'll get is grain that is less well defined, but still very prominent. It is best to start with a film that inherently has the image characterisitics you want. They can then be enhanced, or slightly modified by an appropriate developer. But using an ultra-fine grain developer on a grainy film is a mismatch. If you're shooting Delta 3200 it's either because you need the speed or you want the look of a fast film. You'd be much better off with DD-X or XTOL.
     
  11. powermonkey

    powermonkey Member

    Messages:
    7
    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2010
    Location:
    WV
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    That it may be, but I'd really like to get 3200 or higher out of it if I can.

    Yeah. I was hoping that I could get the best of both worlds but sadly that didn't happen. I'll invest in some DD-X and try again later. Thanks!
     
  12. Роберт

    Роберт Member

    Messages:
    333
    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Location:
    Ukraine - Netherlands
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Perceptol (Ultra Fine Grain) developer is usefull on a slower speed film and then in a 35mm format to suppress the grain. You will loose one F stop in iso rate too.
    So for D3200 take above advice:

    or Xtol stock. These are all speed enhancing developers.

    Greetz,

    Роберт
     
  13. Willie Jan

    Willie Jan Member

    Messages:
    1,932
    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2004
    Location:
    Best/The Net
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    I too vote for microphen.
    used it a lot with theatre work in the past
    Shot it at 3200.
     
  14. Sponsored Ad
  15. Thomas Bertilsson

    Thomas Bertilsson Subscriber

    Messages:
    15,206
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2003
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Good choice! DD-X will be a much better developer for Delta 3200. Xtol is less expensive and a developer that is equally well suited for the job. Kodak TMax developers are very similar to DD-X, and they would do an excellent job as well.

    Good luck,

    - Thomas
     
  16. Roger Cole

    Roger Cole Member

    Messages:
    5,480
    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2011
    Location:
    Atlanta GA
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I get a very nice effective 3200 out of it, developing in T-Max 1+4 for the time recommended for 6400.
     
  17. michael_r

    michael_r Subscriber

    Messages:
    6,542
    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2010
    Location:
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    That makes sense too. T-Max developer gives good speed. DD-X always seemed to me to be very similar to T-Max in its working properties. Bottom line is whether DD-X, T-Max, Microphen or XTOL, the results with this film will be superior to Perceptol, especially in the speed department.
     
  18. pentaxuser

    pentaxuser Subscriber

    Messages:
    8,200
    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Location:
    Daventry, No
    Shooter:
    35mm
    If my memory serves me correctly I have yet to see a positive post on Perceptol and D3200 at anything like a speed of 3200 and yet Harman insist on quoting times for Perceptol at 3200 and even mention it in the accompanying marketing info as a suitable developer as a plus point for Perceptol.

    Presumably at some stage the original Ilford( rather than Harman) actually tried it at the times quoted and found it to be acceptable.

    If Ilford's experience had been bad then you'd think that it would not have quoted times for Perceptol or at the very least have stated that it could be used but was not recommended.

    It is a puzzle and seems destined to remain so as I have yet to see any response on it from Harman via its R&D dept.

    So are we all doing something wrong when using Perceptol and getting results that do not accord with Ilford's experience when it tested Perceptol and D3200?

    pentaxuser
     
  19. Роберт

    Роберт Member

    Messages:
    333
    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Location:
    Ukraine - Netherlands
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Using an ultra fine grain type developer on an ultra high speed film sounds to me not very logical, independed what Ilford is testing.

    Greetz,

    Роберт
     
  20. Thomas Bertilsson

    Thomas Bertilsson Subscriber

    Messages:
    15,206
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2003
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I think a lot of people use Delta 3200 for hand held shooting in dark situations, like concerts, or late night street photography. I've done just that, illuminated by just the available ambient light from street lights and buildings, and have been able to cull enough contrast from the film to make them workable in the darkroom. I have either used Rodinal and standing development to get maximum shadow detail out of it, or something like Xtol 1+1 for a very long time, with reduced agitation (say every 3 or 5 minutes).
    Using Perceptol for this type of photography is probably not going to work, so I wonder if these are the conditions that Ilford has tested the film in, or if it perhaps is a more normal lighting condition.

    If the film instead is tested in daylight conditions, the very flat contrast of Delta 3200 would probably work just fine with something like Perceptol, because there will be less contrast and less deep shadows to fill with detail.

    There's too much we don't know about how Ilford has tested the film in order to understand how they got to their results, and to surmise if we're even comparing similar work flows.
     
  21. michael_r

    michael_r Subscriber

    Messages:
    6,542
    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2010
    Location:
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    That is the point. There can be a significant margin between "optimal" and "acceptable". Both Ilford and Kodak list suggested procedures for using nearly every developer they make with nearly every film they make. The materials are certainly flexible, but some are more universally adaptable than others. Certain combinations will inherently be better matched than others. Depending on how you define acceptable, and what look you're going for, you can certainly develop Delta 3200 in Perceptol. Develop D3200 long enough in Perceptol, and you'll get more speed, but not the best image quality either material is capable of. Particularly in the case of Perceptol, trying to get anywhere near box speed with any film, even at 1+3, will obliterrate its ultra-fine grain effects. So you'd be better off in that case with something like XTOL. Perceptol and D3200 are two extremes - ie super high speed, grainy film, and a slow, ultra-fine grain developer. Acceptable results are likely possible, as implied by the combination being published by Ilford, but other possibilities are better.
     
  22. Bertil

    Bertil Subscriber

    Messages:
    183
    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2007
    Location:
    Northern Sweden
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Tried last winter Kodak TMZ (e.i. 800 -3200 iso) with D-23 (some 15-25 minutes in 20°C, reduced agitation, like Thomas "every 3 or 5 minutes).
    The result was surprisingly nice, so I bought some more rolls for this winter (quite dark in northern Sweden in Dec-Jan!)
    /Bertil
     
  23. hobbes

    hobbes Member

    Messages:
    63
    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2007
    Location:
    Warsaw, Pola
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    There's perhaps nothing wrong in using anything with anything... :smile: However why would you like to bother yourself with using D3200 (real ISO of around 1600) with a iso downgrading developer that in results will yield in ~iso800 with a quite flat scene :smile: ..Why wouldn't you go and buy a cheaper D400/HP5+/TriX expose it @800 and put it in to cheaper Xtol 1:1 :smile:
     
  24. Katie

    Katie Subscriber

    Messages:
    764
    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2010
    Location:
    Texas, USA
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I shot one roll of Delta 3200 (@1600) and developed in stock ID11 and it came out spot on.

    * img989.jpg
     
  25. hobbes

    hobbes Member

    Messages:
    63
    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2007
    Location:
    Warsaw, Pola
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Yeah, still.. in 35mm for @1600-2400 I'd go for TriX and D76/Xto 1:1 thou :smile:
    BIG35wwa_tx2400xtol1118_5.jpg
    (TriX @2400 in Xtol 1:1 @20C 18min.)

    or..

    BIGtx1600d23_1.jpg
    (TriX @1600 in D23 1:0 @20C 17min.)
     
  26. snederhiser

    snederhiser Member

    Messages:
    164
    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2010
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Hello;
    Perceptol is a fine grain developer like the old Microdol-X. Shoot at 1600asa then develop at 15 to 18 minutes. Should come out fine. You lose half of the film speed using these developers. ID-11 or D-76 would be a better combo for about 12min at full strength. The faster films tend to be a bit grainy, and the rated speed seems optomistic. Steven.