PC-512BoraxDelta400-8min15s002.jpg

The EI 200 looks much better. It isn't so much that the shadow detail is better although it is but more that in the 200 shot the intensity of the sunshine seems to be illuminating the scene more naturally in the way that sunshine of that intensity should

Mind you that's quite a drop in speed to get the better look

Well, the scan is both frames together (Ei 400 and Ei 800) and unadjusted, so we are probably looking at something like EI 300 average - one side lighter, one side darker, monitors permitting. My usual testing sequence is -1, 0, +1, +2 stops from my planned exposure. I think I swapped the frames around looking at the negative? One time I wish the scanner mount revealed frame numbers 8-(

I feel EI 400 is a good choice, EI 800 if shadow detail is not as important. 1 stop over also works, but risks highlights blocking. Though Delta 400 has a shallow shoulder. Anyway, I will do up my actual measurements for the Forum thread.

Thanks I had read it wrongly. I misread the EI ratings and thank goodness as it restores my faith in getting "box speed" from this developer. If it hadn't been as intensely sunny as it was the 800 shot would have looked fine and perfectly normal. The shadow detail loss is very small

In fact it begs the question: Had you shown only the 800 version, might it have looked natural enough for me not to have thought that the sunshine intensity was slightly "wrong" ?

I think the answer is probably yes as I would not have put on my "comparison glasses"