Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,928   Posts: 1,585,187   Online: 721
      
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 43
  1. #31

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    montreal qc canada
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5
    ilfrod dd-x

  2. #32
    Vincent Brady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Co. Kildare - Ireland
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,008
    Images
    172
    I find that Delta 400 developed in stock ID11 for 9.5 minutes gives me excellent results except when I make a mess of the exposure.

  3. #33
    piu58's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Leipzig, Germany
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    605
    ID11 is the normal beginners' recommendation. This is a metol-hydroquinone developer. Unfortunately, there seems no such developper exist in liquid form. Perhaps because of the short shell life.

    You can go with one of the liquid phenidone developers, which are the "murderer" ones. Phenidone was detected as developing agent in the 40ies. Here we hve DDX from Ilford, or Ultrafin Plus from Tetenal or TMax developer from Kodak or LP Supergrain form Laborpartner or perhaps some more. Not each of these contains the pure phenidone some use a derivate of it, mostly pyrazolidone.
    One of the powder equivalents of these developers is Microphen.
    ---
    Uwe Pilz

  4. #34

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,104
    I would stay away from calling ID-11 a beginner's developer. It is every bit as professional a developer as anything else. There is no such thing as a beginner, intermediate or professional/expert developer. A beginner can start with virtually any well formulated developer as long as he practices with it.

  5. #35
    Vincent Brady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Co. Kildare - Ireland
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,008
    Images
    172
    Thank you Michael for your support in my opinion. I was too annoyed to reply myself. I've been involved in photography for 35 years and what counts with me is the final image and how satisified I am with it. If Ilford recommend ID11 to develope Delta 400 that's good enough for me. I have not seen any other photos developed differently to make me question my choice of developer.

  6. #36

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,104
    I hope Piu58 was not offended by my comment. I just think we need to be careful in how we describe materials - particularly in a thread started by a newcomer to the process. Calling ID-11 a "beginner's" developer implies some sort of tradeoff of image quality for ease of use, and to me that is dangerous because it is the kind of thing that can give a beginner the impression there are "higher quality" or more "professional" alternatives. We all know where that idea leads...

  7. #37
    Leigh B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Maryland, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,035
    Images
    1
    Folks,

    We're veering off on a totally stupid exercise in semantics, which has no relationship whatsoever to the original intent of Piu58's post.

    Identifying something as a "beginner's developer" means only that it will produce good results on a wide variety of films using
    standard techniques, not requiring extraordinary measures such as tight temperature control or precise timing.

    It means nothing beyond that. The same could be said for D-76.

    - Leigh
    “Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something.” - Plato

  8. #38
    piu58's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Leipzig, Germany
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    605
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael R 1974 View Post
    Calling ID-11 a "beginner's" developer implies some sort of tradeoff of image quality for ease of use...
    - For every film you fnd a producer's information for the devloping time. That is not the case for many devs.
    - I recommend a rather compensating developer fort the first steps. It forgives some of the processing errors we all made in our erlier days.
    ---
    Uwe Pilz

  9. #39

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,025
    DDX. When used at 1+7 or 1+9 it is much more economical and the negs look the same.

  10. #40
    Steve Smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Ryde, Isle of Wight
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    8,715
    Images
    122
    Quote Originally Posted by RattyMouse View Post
    as well as try the ISO3200 to see if that is a viable option for low light shooting.
    Delta 3200 is actually an ISO 1000 film which can be pushed to EI 3200 (and further).


    Steve.
    "People who say things won't work are a dime a dozen. People who figure out how to make things work are worth a fortune" - Dave Rat.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin