Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,767   Posts: 1,516,462   Online: 894
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 20 of 20
  1. #11

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Daventry, Northamptonshire, England
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    6,836
    My experience with DDX and D3200 is that you should use the dev times for the next speed up i.e. if you are shooting at 3200 then go for the time for 6400. I can't say that this applies to P3200 but the two films are very similar and it is worth asking the question.

    Again and this is only my D3200 experience, I'd try and shoot at say 1600 if the light conditions allow.

    pentaxuser

  2. #12
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    6,932
    Images
    222

    Ilfotec HC vs DD-X for Kodak P3200?

    This is what I get for massive dev chart says at 6400, 3200, 1600, and 800... All ok DD-X

    I've found the times fairly accurate for development


    If that gives any indication?



    ~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
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  3. #13
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    6,932
    Images
    222

    Ilfotec HC vs DD-X for Kodak P3200?

    Also for comparison the HC times with P3200




    ~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
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  4. #14
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,747
    Quote Originally Posted by pentaxuser View Post
    My experience with DDX and D3200 is that you should use the dev times for the next speed up i.e. if you are shooting at 3200 then go for the time for 6400. I can't say that this applies to P3200 but the two films are very similar and it is worth asking the question.

    Again and this is only my D3200 experience, I'd try and shoot at say 1600 if the light conditions allow.

    pentaxuser
    Exactly my experience too, using in my case T-Max developer for both (which works great for both these films.)

    I think "develop for one EI higher" is safe advice for both. I think the development times were probably kept to the shortest that would work in most situations, aiming more for keeping graininess and contrast gain down than for best mid tone densities. Well TMZ is fine grained enough to make really good 5x7s and "old school gritty but nice) 8x10s from 35mm, and I've been shooting D3200 in 120 where grain, while visible, is just really not enough to worry about. Contrast is reasonable in both when shot at 3200 and developed for 6400, though I end up printing TMZ about one half to one and a half grades softer than my other negatives, on grade 2 or even 1.5 rather than 2.5-3.0. That's fine with me. I've never gone below 1.5 and multigrade papers still work fine at that contrast.

  5. #15
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Ignacio, CO, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,585
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by B&Wpositive View Post
    So DD-X has a shorter concentrate shelf life than HC?

    Now, what about developing times? I hate to play with something new all of a sudden and screw it up. With HC, I always have good results developing for one EI higher than the rated EI. (I guess the push EI values are not really based on middle gray tones, but something midway between white and middle gray.) For example, if I shoot the film at 3200, I'm developing using the EI 6400 time. Always 1 EI higher in development than rated speed. If I get some DD-X and just follow this rule, would I get good results? I was hoping the negs might be similar in look to those developed with Ilfotec HC, but less contrasty/blocked-up and a bit less grainy...and thus easier to scan. (I get a lot of noise/grain and have trouble getting even a hint of shadow detail when scanning P3200 developed in Ilford HC at EI 6400.)

    Does DD-X with P3200 at EI values from 1600 to 12,800 sound like a safe experiment for images that I care about considering my experience with Ilfotec HC? If it's no trouble making the conversion to DD-X from HC, and the resulting images are a half a stop better, I'd consider it a successful outcome and small risk.

    Finally, what is the dilution when using DD-X? For HC, it's 1+31. And what are the development times for Kodak P3200 in DD-X like?

    Thanks again.
    Yes DD-X has a shorter shelf life.

    Dilution for DD-X is 1+4

    I'd say DD-X is a very safe experiment.

    I generally use Ilford's numbers to start with. http://www.ilfordphoto.com/Webfiles/...7124733149.pdf
    Mark Barendt, Ignacio, CO

    "We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Anaïs Nin

  6. #16
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    6,932
    Images
    222

    Ilfotec HC vs DD-X for Kodak P3200?

    Quote Originally Posted by markbarendt View Post
    Yes DD-X has a shorter shelf life.

    Dilution for DD-X is 1+4

    I'd say DD-X is a very safe experiment.

    I generally use Ilford's numbers to start with. http://www.ilfordphoto.com/Webfiles/...7124733149.pdf
    Do you have an updated sheet with the Ilfsol 3 times? Looks the same as the dev chart I listed but curious if it is.


    ~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
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  7. #17
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Ignacio, CO, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,585
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Mark Barendt, Ignacio, CO

    "We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Anaïs Nin

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    373
    Is the image quality gain with DD-X over HC noticeable at EI values above 1600?

  9. #19
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    6,932
    Images
    222

    Ilfotec HC vs DD-X for Kodak P3200?

    Thanks!


    ~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
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    427
    Kodak HC-110 and Ilford Ilfotech HC are mixed in ethylene glycol (if I remember correctly), no water, so that they are rather impermeable to oxygen. This leaves the syrup with enormous shelf life.

    However, I've been very happy with the shelf-life of open bottles of Ilford Ilfotec DD-X. Have almost always gotten a year with no problem in by cool basement. I did have a crystallization event in one bottle that had about 20% left in a cold winter, had to ditch that. But I've never had it fail, and never felt that old DD-X was giving me under-developed negatives. I like everything about DD-X except the price. (You won't catch me mixing 36 ounces of it to feed my 4x5 Nikor tank.)

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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