Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,316   Posts: 1,536,709   Online: 944
      
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 41
  1. #11
    Rudeofus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,619
    Images
    10
    Delta 3200 with its comparatively strong grain is preferably used when it is dark, so the choice of developer should account for that:
    • You are ready to accept some grain but want to shoot at high EI, which calls for developers which can reach the maximum emulsion speed of this film. Think Microphen and its home brew variant ID-68, Xtol/Mytol/Mark Overton's D316/Ryuji Suzuki's DS-10, there are also some Crawley formulas for achieving maximum emulsion speed.
    • You could want to go beyond emulsion speed, i.e. push the hell out of it, grain be damned. Look for developers recommended for pushing, either the ones listed above, or, as I have been told but those more knowledgeable than me, D76 supposedly pushes better than any other dev. If you like to experiment, someone pushed Tri-X to EI 25600 with his "push soup". He uses a mix of proprietary developers, though, but only the HC-110 part is difficult to impossible to home brew for mortals, and chances are it could be replaced if one tries.
    • Another issue with night shots is their extreme contrast. It's not only from light sources in your frame, and from lack of a highly diffused fill light source (aka the sky), you also have to account for reciprocity failure with long exposures. To deal with this I had some very nice results with Delta 3200 and ultra low contrast developers (think POTA). The Film Developing Cookbook has a nice chapter on these developers, highly recommended!
    Trying to be the best of whatever I am, even if what I am is no good.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    North Yorkshire, England
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    720
    If you look on the Ilford website they give recommended film/developer combinations for all their films. I think you will find somewhere in there the ubiquitous ID11 is listed.

    Whilstm on the subject of film/developer combinations I found out a while ago that the times given on the inside of the box can be incorrect. That is how I know about the Ilford development sheets.

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,241
    Images
    225

    Developer for Ilford Delta 3200

    I've been using the massive dev chart app in my iPhone for push times, it seems fairly accurate haha, talk about a non-film device helping keep my film usage happy...


    ~Stone

    The Noteworthy Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    third stone from the sun
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    723
    Stand develop in rodinal 1:100 for more luminous shadows and controllable highlights. Or use a divided developer. In either event, a compensating developer will deliver the most printable results on traditional photo paper (ddx developed 3200 scanned is another story). If you don't like grain, shoot with slower film in more light.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,636
    Start with Ilford's recommendations. They recommend DDX and Microphen for Delta 3200 because these are both fairly active general purpose PQ developers that will give you excellent image quality, but a little more speed than say D76/ID11 (with only a slight increase in graininess). If you want a home mix option, try Ilford ID-68, which is a Microphen-type developer.

    If you have already been using a home mixed D76, no problem using it with both HP5 and Delta 3200. For Delta 3200, use Ilford's recommended time for stock D76/ID11 and adjust from there if you want to dilute it 1+1 or 1+3. Keep in mind these fast films are inherently lower in contrast than slower films so some experimentation will be required with dilute developers.

    I would not bother with D23 (or speed losing variants such as Perceptol) or the other home-brews OP specifically mentioned. Better off overall with D76/ID11.

  6. #16
    sly
    sly is offline
    sly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Nanaimo
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,355
    Images
    218
    If you are shooting 35mm, don't develop delta 3200 in Rodinal unless you like golfball sized grain.
    I use DDX. I was lucky enough to get a couple of cases of it cheap when they closed down the darkroom at the local community college. I'm afraid I can't give you advice on home brew devs, as my only experience is with pyro for LF negs.

  7. #17
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,866
    Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
    You guys are ruining my plans to get away from Kodak entirely... Tmax developer hmmm... Erg....


    ~Stone

    The Noteworthy Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I'm sure DD-X, which is probably similar, works as well or better. I've just always liked T-Max developer for the T-Max films so I had it. If you're just buying something for this film, I'd go with it or DD-X myself, or possibly Xtol. I would heed the advice for pushing to develop for one stop more than you expose for, however. I think the recommendations are for the least development that will do the job to keep grain from growing too much but I think both Delta 3200 and TMZ look better when given more development.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,241
    Images
    225

    Developer for Ilford Delta 3200

    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Cole View Post
    I'm sure DD-X, which is probably similar, works as well or better. I've just always liked T-Max developer for the T-Max films so I had it. If you're just buying something for this film, I'd go with it or DD-X myself, or possibly Xtol. I would heed the advice for pushing to develop for one stop more than you expose for, however. I think the recommendations are for the least development that will do the job to keep grain from growing too much but I think both Delta 3200 and TMZ look better when given more development.
    Wait is DD-X the equivalent developer to Tmax? I thought there was NO true equivalent?


    ~Stone

    The Noteworthy Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,636
    It is very similar in its working properties.

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,241
    Images
    225

    Developer for Ilford Delta 3200

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael R 1974 View Post
    It is very similar in its working properties.
    But I thought perceptol was better for fine grain? I'm about to put in an order so any info might change my purchase...


    ~Stone

    The Noteworthy Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Page 2 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