Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,854   Posts: 1,582,936   Online: 1001
      
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 48
  1. #21
    rubyfalls's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    171
    Alright - thoroughly inspired. I'm going to shoot my kids -- wait, let me rephrase that. I'm going to do the holiday card photo shoot thing next weekend and will use both my trusty tri-x and a roll of delta 3200. It'll be a test run all around -- I just finished making a "pop-up" studio (fake walls) and am dying to try my lights. I do a music-themed thing with the kids every year; this year is punk rock. Wish me luck - if I get anything that isn't too horrifying, I will share.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

  2. #22

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Daventry, Northamptonshire, England
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    7,150
    Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
    No DD-X is generally better for D3200 than D-76 (which is similar to ID-11 by the way) because it's designed for T-grain emulsions.
    Interesting. Can you say what the evidence is that DDX is designed for T-grain emulsions?

    pentaxuser

  3. #23
    Chris Lange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    765
    Images
    33
    Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
    No DD-X is generally better for D3200 than D-76 (which is similar to ID-11 by the way) because it's designed for T-grain emulsions.

    Did you use DD-X for this thin batch?
    There is no truth to this, Stone. You're guilty of the same accusations you levy at others. As someone who has processed at least 100+ rolls of D3200 in d76 1+0 (120, with likely 50-75 more in 35mm, and that's still not that many) and made prints and scans of all sizes from the negatives, I would love to see your evidence.
    See my work at my website CHRISTOPHER LANGE PHOTOGRAPHY

    or my snaps at my blog MINIMUM DENSITY
    --
    If you don't have it, then you don't have it.

  4. #24
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,976
    Images
    226
    Quote Originally Posted by pentaxuser View Post
    Interesting. Can you say what the evidence is that DDX is designed for T-grain emulsions?

    pentaxuser
    http://www.ilfordphoto.com/products/product.asp?n=31

    It is designed to complement the features of all ILFORD films, ***especially the range of ILFORD DELTA PROFESSIONAL films*** which means T-Grain films...
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  5. #25
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,976
    Images
    226
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris Lange View Post
    There is no truth to this, Stone. You're guilty of the same accusations you levy at others. As someone who has processed at least 100+ rolls of D3200 in d76 1+0 (120, with likely 50-75 more in 35mm, and that's still not that many) and made prints and scans of all sizes from the negatives, I would love to see your evidence.
    See above.... Post... D-76 was designed before t-grain products so it was not designed specifically for them...
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  6. #26
    Chris Lange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    765
    Images
    33
    sorry but a developer has no way of distinguishing silver crystal shape.
    See my work at my website CHRISTOPHER LANGE PHOTOGRAPHY

    or my snaps at my blog MINIMUM DENSITY
    --
    If you don't have it, then you don't have it.

  7. #27
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,976
    Images
    226
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris Lange View Post
    sorry but a developer has no way of distinguishing silver crystal shape.
    Now you're just defending your wrong a statement with BS, some developers handle different types of grain differently, DD-X and Tmax dev as an example were DESIGNED to handle t grain emulsions ... And I just proved to you this by reference and you still refute it... Kodak says tmax dev is also designed for t grain film... So... :-p
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  8. #28
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    12,926
    Images
    60
    Stone:

    Ah, semantics.

    Possibly you would prefer the Ilford language for ID-11:

    "ID-11 produces excellent results with all films and is ideal where a wide range of films and film speeds have been used."

    In one way you are right. Ilford says this about DDX:

    "In particular it ('DDX') is recommended for use with DELTA 3200 PROFESSIONAL film rates (sic) at EI 3200/36."


    So if you are arguing that Ilford suggests DDX for Delta 3200 rated at EI 3200, you are correct.

    The excerpt you quoted says nothing about the relative suitability of other developers for use with "T-grain" developers. It might, in fact, be taken as saying that DDX is slightly less suited for use with non Delta films.
    Matt

    “Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”

    Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2

  9. #29
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,976
    Images
    226
    Quote Originally Posted by MattKing View Post
    Stone:

    Ah, semantics.

    Possibly you would prefer the Ilford language for ID-11:

    "ID-11 produces excellent results with all films and is ideal where a wide range of films and film speeds have been used."

    In one way you are right. Ilford says this about DDX:

    "In particular it ('DDX') is recommended for use with DELTA 3200 PROFESSIONAL film rates (sic) at EI 3200/36."


    So if you are arguing that Ilford suggests DDX for Delta 3200 rated at EI 3200, you are correct.

    The excerpt you quoted says nothing about the relative suitability of other developers for use with "T-grain" developers. It might, in fact, be taken as saying that DDX is slightly less suited for use with non Delta films.
    It is inference ... ALL delta films are T grain films... And only the delta line are t-grain films, therefore all delta films are t-grain and all ilford t-grain films are delta...
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  10. #30
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    12,926
    Images
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
    Now you're just defending your wrong a statement with BS, some developers handle different types of grain differently, DD-X and Tmax dev as an example were DESIGNED to handle t grain emulsions ... And I just proved to you this by reference and you still refute it... Kodak says tmax dev is also designed for t grain film... So... :-p

    Sorry Stone:

    Kodak's primary developer recommendations (see f4016 and f4043) for TMax 100 and TMax 400 are exactly the same: T-Max, T-Max RS, X-Tol, X-Tol (1+1), D-76, D-76 (1+1), or Duraflo RT, with no preference between those choices. There is also a partial recommendation (due to speed loss) for HC-110 (B), Microdol-X and Microdol-X (1+3).

    All currently available major developers were either originally designed with T-grain films being considered, or have been adjusted to perform well with T-grain films. To not do so would be folly.

    Developers do differ, but those differences are subtle and essentially differences of preference, not absolute suitability.

    If you like what DDX does for you, I'll support you 100% in your decision to use it. It is an excellent choice.

    As is ID-11/D-76.

    As an example, in contra-distinction, HC-110 (B) or Microdol-X would not be as excellent a choice with T-Max 400 if your goal was to maximize speed. If a small loss in effective speed does not concern you, then HC-110 (B) or Microdol would also be an excellent choice with T-Max 400
    Matt

    “Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”

    Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2

Page 3 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