Pushing Delta 3200 to 6400 or 12500 in Microphen?

Discussion in 'B&W: Film, Paper, Chemistry' started by Stuggi, Dec 20, 2011.

  1. Stuggi

    Stuggi Member

    Messages:
    91
    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2008
    Location:
    Helsinki, Fi
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Has anybody tried this? Ilfords tech sheets seem to indicate that it is indeed possible to do, but I can't really find any info online on what kind of quality you can expect from this combo, and what agitation scheme that should be used.
     
  2. piu58

    piu58 Member

    Messages:
    793
    Joined:
    May 29, 2006
    Location:
    Leipzig, Ger
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Delta is pushed already two stops if you use 3200ASA. I guess that very little of o photo remains if you push it further.
     
  3. Rudeofus

    Rudeofus Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,569
    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I pushed MF Delta 3200 with HC110 (which is certainly not the best dev for pushing high speed films) all the way up to 8000 and liked the results a lot. There are plenty of examples on flickr where Delta 3200 was pushed all the way up to 12800 and 25600 with high speed devs. You will not get results comparable to Delta 100 in broad daylight, but there is subject matter where Delta 3200 @ 12800/25600 looks great, especially dramatic night shots.
     
  4. Stuggi

    Stuggi Member

    Messages:
    91
    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2008
    Location:
    Helsinki, Fi
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Yeah, I have both HC-110 and Rodinal from before, and I've never been quite satisfied with them for pushing, so that's why I'm thinking of testing Microphen when I saw that Ilford recommends it for pushing Delta 3200.

    BTW, if Delta 3200 is already pushed 2 stops when shooting it at 3200ASA, what's the difference between it and Delta 400?
     
  5. steven_e007

    steven_e007 Member

    Messages:
    829
    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Location:
    Shropshire,
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I think Delta 3200 actually has an ISO rating of 1000?

    I guess Delta 3200 is also a fairly low contrast film, so it can be pushed to gain speed without the highlights blocking up so quickly.

    Delta 400 pushed two stops would be pretty contrasty for the same subject matter.
     
  6. Stuggi

    Stuggi Member

    Messages:
    91
    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2008
    Location:
    Helsinki, Fi
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Yeah, noticed that my quick ASA calculation was missing a stop (3200ASA - 2 stops = 800ASA and not 400ASA). That's what you get when you try to divide by 4 at 05:40 AM in the morning. :smile:
     
  7. Rudeofus

    Rudeofus Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,569
    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Funny thing, I just ran across this thread and the thread starter seems to have gotten usable results from pushing Tri-X all the way up to ISO 12800 with Rodinal. I have no idea whether this also works for Delta 3200, though, but I'm going to try this at some point.
     
  8. keithwms

    keithwms Member

    Messages:
    6,073
    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2006
    Location:
    Charlottesvi
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I wouldn't push D3200 so much for 35mm, I tended to rate it much lower than 3200 anyway. But for larger formats, go nuts and let us see your results! I would *guess* that if you want to get 6400 out of it, you need to expose it for double time, i.e. meter as if it were 3200.

    My guess is that the delta films simply won't push very well. I'd be inclined to go to hp5+ or neopan for this. The massive dev chart has times for neopan 1600 out to 12800.
     
  9. pentaxuser

    pentaxuser Subscriber

    Messages:
    8,202
    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Location:
    Daventry, No
    Shooter:
    35mm
    No D3200 will push OK.As others have said it is designed to be pushed as it's true speed is probably about 1250 in a speed increasing developer. For dramatic night shots where no shadow detail would be expected then 6400 or even 12800 will be possible. Don't expect any shadow detail and don't go to these speeds unless acceptable shutter speeds cannot be achieved at a lower EI.

    pentaxuser
     
  10. gandolfi

    gandolfi Member

    Messages:
    1,804
    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2005
    Location:
    Denmark
    Shooter:
    Large Format Pan
    Delta 3200 is one of my favourite films - I rarely expose under 12.500 iso..

    a couple of results:
     

    Attached Files:

  11. kraker

    kraker Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,257
    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2005
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Gandolfi, those are some nice examples! Could you tell us more about the above shots (or about the way you work with Delta 3200 in general)?
     
  12. baachitraka

    baachitraka Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,313
    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2011
    Location:
    Bremen, Germany.
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Very nice shots indeed. Please throw some more light on the developer and EI.
     
  13. Dave Martiny

    Dave Martiny Member

    Messages:
    122
    Joined:
    May 24, 2006
    Shooter:
    35mm
    You might try to check with Lex Jenkins over at photo.net. As far as I know, he's still a moderator of their black and white forum. He's a big fan of Microphen as a speed enhancing developer and has always been very helpful in answering questions like this.
     
  14. michael_r

    michael_r Subscriber

    Messages:
    6,539
    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2010
    Location:
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    All depends on what you call "usable results" of course. You can't "push" more than a very small amount of shadow speed onto a film even with greatly extended development. It just builds contrast in the information already on the film.
     
  15. keithwms

    keithwms Member

    Messages:
    6,073
    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2006
    Location:
    Charlottesvi
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Very nice results Gandolfi, thanks for sharing.

    Sure would be nice if the massive dev chart had embedded examples.

    The thing about pushing, though, is that it can always be done but the resulting tonality in the print depends so much on enlargement factor... and then there is the issue of reduced ability to handle contrast.

    It'd be nice if we had a look at what happens to the sensitivity curve under push. I guess it tends to pure knee and toe, with a shorter linear range at lower slope.

    Anyway, good to see examples!
     
  16. baachitraka

    baachitraka Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,313
    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2011
    Location:
    Bremen, Germany.
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Delta fan(s) are still waiting for you answer Mr. gandolfi, regarding the developer and EI of those pictures you have posted.
     
  17. Rudeofus

    Rudeofus Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,569
    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Gandolfi, subscribe me, too, to the list of folks who want to learn which soup you use.

    Apart from that, I found some info about a "Super Soup" invented by Donald Qualls which supposedly pushes Tri-X all the way up to 12800. To my great surprise nobody has posted anything so far about using this super soup for some of the modern high ISO films like TMZ or Delta 3200. Since Delta 3200 @ 6400 in HC-110 looked almost grainless to me (6x7 enlarged to 18x24cm) I am highly tempted to try this super soup, too, like the Rodinal mega push, grain be damned!

    One more thing: according to this thread you may gain a stop or so by developing the film very soon after exposure (unless you do this already).

    @Michael R 1974: of course you are right, simple pushing rarely raises the shadows (it can make negatives printable, though). There is, however a difference between developers, e.g. Xtol is said to achieve twice the speed of Rodinal with the same film. I may be completely off here, but if one lowers his demands for small grain, nice characteristic curve and reasonable acutance, one could be able to find developers which achieve even higher speed than Xtol.
     
  18. Roger Cole

    Roger Cole Member

    Messages:
    5,480
    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2011
    Location:
    Atlanta GA
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I shoot it regularly at 3200 and develop per the Ilford instructions for 6400, in Kodak T-Max developer. I love the results, and even shadow detail looks pretty good. I'm sure giving more development would get a nicely usable 6400 out of it. I too would like to learn what Gandolfi used for his 12500.

    I have preferred TMZ in 35mm because I can usable results at 6400 (to be fair, I haven't tried this with Delta 3200) and a bit less grain, and I started with it. When I got a medium format camera I had to find something else for really high speed. I need to try Delta 3200 in 35mm and see if I can just settle on that for both.

    I recall reading decades ago in Pop Photo about people using HC-110 replenisher to push Tri-X to speeds like 12500 or even more. HC-110 replenisher is gone but Freestyle does sell something similar as Legacy Pro. I googled a bit and found a suggested dilution/time/temp for this combo for Tri-X at 5000. It might be fun to play with it using TMZ and Delta 3200 and see how far you can go with usable results.
     
  19. michael_r

    michael_r Subscriber

    Messages:
    6,539
    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2010
    Location:
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    XTOL gives more speed than Rodinal, and slightly more than say D76. And compensating acutance developers give more speed than XTOL - at least with traditional films. Once you are pushing, all bets are off. All you're doing is developing to higher contrast. This will raise shadow contrast a little too, which can make very low densities somewhat easier to print, but you can't put anything on the film that wasn't there to begin with. So pushing really only gives you a small increase in EI. So XTOL, being somewhat "faster" than Rodinal, might allow you to achieve the push without quite as much loss in image quality, but not much in reality. Grain can increase dramatically with overdevelopment, and XTOL is not much better than any other general purpose developer in that department. The XTOL/Rodinal example is not very good anyway since those two developers are not really comparable under normal circumstances.

    Bottom line is once you're into pushing territory, and particularly extreme pushing, the normal speed of a developer becomes less and less relevant.

    For what it's worth, with normal development of most films, I have found Ilford DDX to be the fastest general purpose developer out there, with excellent image quality. It is slightly faster than XTOL. Although it should be noted the speed differences between most general purpose solvent developers, with development to the same contrast, are generally overstated in my opinion.
     
  20. warejn

    warejn Member

    Messages:
    13
    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2012
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Wow, those are great!
     
  21. pecama

    pecama Member

    Messages:
    17
    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Location:
    Koper, Slove
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Hello master gandolfi :smile:

    It has been a long time since we talked, but indeed I am following your work here, FB,... Do you develop D3200 at 12500 in HC110 as usual or do you use microphen? Right now I have some rodinal left (I suppose it is going to give me crazy grain) or some Microphen, which one would you suggest will work better? Also I have got to figure out if Microphen is replenishable and/or reusable!

    Cheers to DK from Martin from Slovenia!