Development time for Neopan 1600 and DD-X

Discussion in 'B&W: Film, Paper, Chemistry' started by r.e., Jun 14, 2007.

  1. r.e.

    r.e. Member

    Messages:
    13
    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2007
    Shooter:
    Med. Format RF
    Neither Fuji nor Ilford give development times for Neopan 1600, rated at 1600, in DD-X. Digital Truth says 5 minutes at 20 degrees centigrade. Does anyone know from experience whether this is accurate?

    While I'm at it, and at the other extreme, I picked up a few rolls of Rollie Pan 25 and want to try a roll in DD-X. Any suggestions about development time?

    Thanks.
     
  2. john_s

    john_s Member

    Messages:
    1,099
    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2002
    Location:
    Melbourne, A
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
  3. hywel

    hywel Member

    Messages:
    76
    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2006
    Location:
    Malaysia
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    Did you try it? For how long, and how did it work out?

    I've seen the Ilford suggestion of 5 minutes but that does seem way too short. Fuji claim that it needs the same time as Neopan 400 at 400 and I give that 8 or 9 minutes in DDX 1+4. Yes I know Ilford suggest only 7 minutes but still 5mins for the Neopan 1600 seems way too short. Especially as my experience with Delta 3200 is that one should always develop it for the time for a stop more than Ilford suggest.

    Anyone else have any experience?

    I can't, I'm afraid, do any tests as I only bought the one roll (whilst overseas) to test to see if I liked it in a way I don't like the two '3200' films (in 35mm) so it really only has this one shot at being processed to shine.

    Thanks,

    Hywel
     
  4. hywel

    hywel Member

    Messages:
    76
    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2006
    Location:
    Malaysia
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    Judging by the lack of posts this isn't something many people are interested in trying. However should some other poor soul be foolish enough to try in the future I should advise that 9 minutes at 20degs is too much. Way too much. Unless you've got a big box of Grade 0 lying around. And a soft-working developer to go with it.

    The good news is that the film, or at least its grain, falls under my pain threshold in the way that Delta 3200 (in 35mm) is over it so I'm sure I shall be buying some more and as I develop everything in DD-X hopefully I'll be back here one day with a firm recommendation as to what a good time is. But it will be a lot less than 9 mins. Perhaps closer to 5 minutes and Ilford know what they are talking about?

    Hywel
     
  5. aparat

    aparat Member

    Messages:
    428
    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2007
    Location:
    Saint Paul,
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    If exposed at box speed, I have had great results with 5 min. at 20 C. It is my favorite combo for low-light photography.

    aparat
     
  6. pentaxuser

    pentaxuser Subscriber

    Messages:
    8,104
    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Location:
    Daventry, No
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Interesting aspect from this is that with Ilford and Kodak 3200 the general recommendation is that you expose at half box speed i.e. 1600 and develop for 3200. Clearly as Fuji is rated at 1600 box speed then going to the 3200 dev time doesn't apply in quite the same way although it would lead you to think there was some sense in taking this route based on the Ilford and Kodak experience. However it seems clear that best results are at stated dev times for box speed and any increase to 9 mins only makes sense if you rate at 3200.

    I like DDX and feel it is likely to be a good combo with more films than Ilford gives times for but unless there is a body of users out there with experience of other combos, I am unsure what to aim for in dev times.

    However at least I now know to be wary of going to 9 mins with Fuji 1600 unless I have rated it at 3200.

    I cannot compare Fuji 1600 grain with Ilford 3200 grain as I have yet to try Fuji 1600 but can add, for what it is worth, that the grain on D3200can be considerably reduced by development in Perceptol compared to ID11. Strangely enough for what is recognised as a slow speed fine grain dev, Ilford actually mention Perceptol as a dev to try with D3200 and they are not wrong in my opinion.

    Anyway thanks for this thread

    pentaxuser
     
  7. hywel

    hywel Member

    Messages:
    76
    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2006
    Location:
    Malaysia
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    pentaxuser,

    Thanks for at least seeing the logic in my decision to develop the Neopan 1600 @ ei1600 for the ei3200 time. Always feel a little stupid when you ignore an Ilford fact sheet and get it so wrong!

    Hywel
     
  8. twopointeight

    twopointeight Member

    Messages:
    9
    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2006
    Location:
    Seattle area
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I've used that combination for several years and several hundred rolls. I've settled into 800asa,. 5.5 minutes at 70 degrees for a slightly dense negative.

    Or 640 asa if I'm concerned about shadow detail.
     
  9. mr rusty

    mr rusty Subscriber

    Messages:
    743
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Location:
    lancashire,
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    A little archaeology on this thread for a now defunct film - I have just used DDX 1:4 @ 5 mins/20 degrees for Neopan 1600 @ EI1600 and the negs look good. (Film has been stored in my fridge. 7 rolls left.............)