Comments on Ilford Delta 100

[roteague]

I accidentally purchased a 25 sheet box of Ilford Delta 100 recently. I had intended to purchase a Polaroid B&W film for proofing, but I must have pushed the wrong button. Anyway, since I now have the film I thought I would give it a try and see what I can come up with. Unfortunately, I haven't shot B&W in many years. Your comments would be appreciated.

Thanks,

 

[Tom Hoskinson]

Hi Robert, I shoot Delta 100 in 120 roll and 4x5. It is a nice film that works well for me in Rodinal, PC-TEA (Gainer's Phenidone/Ascorbic Acid developer) and Pyrocat-HD. It has been reported by others to work well in the Ilford Developers and D76.

Delta 100 does not respond well to N+ and N- development. If you are into that mode of photography, you would be happier with Ilford FP4 or Efke 100 IMO.

 

[roteague]

Delta 100 does not respond well to N+ and N- development. If you are into that mode of photography, you would be happier with Ilford FP4 or Efke 100 IMO.

I probably should have pointed out that I don't have the facilities to do my own development, so I will be sending it out for developing. That means I won't be doing any N+ and N- type of development.

Thanks,

 

[Tom Hoskinson]

I probably should have pointed out that I don't have the facilities to do my own development, so I will be sending it out for developing. That means I won't be doing any N+ and N- type of development.

Thanks,

Robert, in that case I would look for a lab that processes in Xtol (closest commercial developer to Gainer's PC-TEA). Just my personal preference.

 

[Jim Moore]

Robert, in that case I would look for a lab that processes in Xtol (closest commercial developer to Gainer's PC-TEA). Just my personal preference.

I agree. I develop mine in XTOL 1:1

Jim

 

[PJC]

Tom Hoskinson wrote: "Delta 100 does not respond well to N+ and N- development. If you are into that mode of photography, you would be happier with Ilford FP4 or Efke 100 IMO."

Hi Tom, I agree that Efke 100 and FP4+ are nice films, but I'm surprised that you have not found Delta 100 responsive. I really don't use Delta 100 too much any more, but I used it extensively a few years ago. In Xtol, D-76 and Pyrocat HD I was able to get negatives for which ever process I was planning: conventional silver printing, or any of the alt process I do (Albumen, Van Dyke, Kallitype and Pt/Pd.)

I have a 30x40 print that was made from a Xtol developed 4x5 Delta 100 negative. Everyone that sees it is amazed by it, because it has the complete range of tones, wonderful shadow & highlight (snow) detail and you can put your nose to the print and there is no hint of grain.

Delta 100 is a very nice film, don't hesitate using it.

Regards, Pete

 

[Tom Hoskinson]

Delta 100 is a very nice film, don't hesitate using it.

Regards, Pete

Yes, it is a nice film. But in my experience, not with extreme SBRs and Azo contact printing.

 

[sanking]

Delta 100 does not respond well to N+ and N- development. If you are into that mode of photography, you would be happier with Ilford FP4 or Efke 100 IMO.

Tom,

I am curious that Delta 100 did not respond well for you with N+ and N- development. I don't use this film but I have tested it, in Pyrocat 1:1:100, and the tests indicate that it responds even better than FP4+ and Efke 100 to expansion and contraction development.

Wonder why are experiences are so different?

Sandy

 

[bjorke]

Given the hassles of being in Hawaii, you're probably stuck with Xtol anyway. 1+1 and slightly dwindle the agitation towards the end of the cycle...

 

[PJC]

Sandy King wrote: "Wonder why are experiences are so different?"

That's my experience and question too. Tom, I've also used Delta 100 to create AZO prints on G2 paper under low and high contrast conditions. Curious, what developer you were using with Delta? Weird.

Regards, Pete

 

[Tom Hoskinson]

Sandy King wrote: "Wonder why are experiences are so different?"

That's my experience and question too. Tom, I've also used Delta 100 to create AZO prints on G2 paper under low and high contrast conditions. Curious, what developer you were using with Delta? Weird.

Regards, Pete

Delta 100 4x5 sheet film (also 120 roll film) in Rodinal 50:1. I also have examples developed in Pyrocat-HD 1:1:100. All developed with 5 seconds of agitation per minute. I have duplicate shots on 120 roll film (same camera & lens but smaller area) 6x12 cm negs on J&C New Classic 400 and Delta 100. The J&C 400 handled the extreme contrast situation well, the Delta 100 did not.

Guess I need to run the film through the densitometer and see if I can figure out what gives.

 

[Jorge Oliveira]

I'm waiting for cans of Delta 100 and 400 I've purchased at Ebay, never used them before.

But from my past experience with TMX, it's very easy to blow highlights with tabular grain films.
Could this be the reason?

Jorge O

 

[Tom Hoskinson]

I'm waiting for cans of Delta 100 and 400 I've purchased at Ebay, never used them before.

But from my past experience with TMX, it's very easy to blow highlights with tabular grain films.
Could this be the reason?

Jorge O

Blown highlights were my problem, Jorge.

 

[roteague]

I have a 30x40 print that was made from a Xtol developed 4x5 Delta 100 negative. Everyone that sees it is amazed by it, because it has the complete range of tones, wonderful shadow & highlight (snow) detail and you can put your nose to the print and there is no hint of grain.

Delta 100 is a very nice film, don't hesitate using it.

Regards, Pete

How do those prints react to selenium toning? My preference in B&W is prints that show a full range of tones and detail.

Thanks,

 

[sanking]

Blown highlights were my problem, Jorge.

But if this is the case it indicates that the negatives were developed to a very high CI, which suggests that the film has excellent expansion capability but that development was too long.

 

[Tom Hoskinson]

But if this is the case it indicates that the negatives were developed to a very high CI, which suggests that the film has excellent expansion capability but that development was too long.

Good point, Sandy. I need to re-look at the negs and do some densitometry.

 

[Scott McFadden]

For a diffrent and slightly better result try
working with Sam Elkind's variation.
Xtol = 100 mL
water = 400 mL
Rodinal = 4 to 5 mL

Times @ 24 degrees C. are:
Tri-X (200) = 9 minutes.
Delta 100 = 10.5 minutes.
Verichrome = 8.5 minutes.

this post is Basically a cut and paste job but the results looked
interesting enough to me and since the suggestions have already included these I thought it'd be something you may want to try.

Your only a crackpot until you hit the jackpot - van braun


One day Ill come up with an idea all my very own - SMcFadden

 

[Julia819]

I only shoot Delta 100 in 120 and 35, but I am very fond of the film. I do find it is easier to blow out highlights with Delta than with a lot of other films, but I like the range od values and fine grain in delta. Give it a shot and just be careful with metering and developing times. I use D-76 with it BTW.

 

[Jim Chinn]

I have used Delta 100 in XTOL in various dilutions and have always got excelent results. Prior to XTOL I had used Rodinal and had problems controlling highlights but XTOL takes care of that problem.

I have also used Pyrocat-HD and although similar to Xtol it gives me great negatives at full film speed, while the Xtol usually gives best results (for me) at an ei of 50-80.

I don't think I would have the lab develop anything important without first having some test negatives develop. At least you can determine the best ei for the procedures and chemistry that they use.

 

[titrisol]

I have shot Dlta 100 a few times and developed it in IlfosolS, Rodinal and Id-11

I liked Delta, even though I prefer the traditional grain films. I found it lacked the "snap" I got from APX100.
Blown highlights tended to be a problem, no presoaking helped and agitating a tad less tha usual (once a minute) also helped.