DD-X: intergalactical champion

NB23 · Apr 8, 2014

I'm a D76, HC-110, T-MAX developers fan. I even like Ilfosol for slow speed films. Rodinal, only sometimes but not anymore.
Ever since I've started reprinting my whole collection on fb papers with the highest procedure standards as possible, and within my skills, i've come to the conclusion that rodinal is good only for slow films and not to be used whenever there's HC110 or especially some D-76 around.
I haven't used X-TOL enough but I was blown away whenever I've used it.

Yes, D-76 with Tri-X is legendary. But tonight I realized how much better DD-X is. I'm absolutely blown away. Each and every aspect is superior: contrast, speed, flexibility for printing.

The difference jumps at me. It's THAT obvious.

DD-X is more expensive? Comes out 50 cents more expensive per roll? If you care about the results, it's the best 50 cents you'll ever spend.

Now about XTOL...

Amfooty · Apr 8, 2014

How long will the bottle stay good for once opened? I'm a stand-developing Rodinal nut and from a cursory search, DD-X seems like a good alternative. The only problem is I'm shooting a low volume of film and still have not finished a 500ml bottle of Rodinal I opened 4 months ago.

Roger Cole · Apr 8, 2014

If it's like other Ilford liquids, it will last a heck of a lot longer if you immediately pour it into a better bottle. I lost half a bottle of Warmtone paper developer to the crappy air seals their lids make once the foil is removed. I now pour it into two 16 ounce brown bottles (the usual darkroom ones, nothing heroic) and squeeze all the air out before re-capping and I've kept it for nearly over a year and a half with no problems.

Doesn't mean DD-X will do as well of course, but I'd be careful with the bottle before blaming the developer for poor shelf life.

TheToadMen · Apr 8, 2014

I recently found a new professional lab and they used DD-X. I was blown away by the results, so I'm gonna try it myself as well.
The official leaflet says:
"Storage ILFOTEC DD-X
24 months in full tightly capped bottles.
6 months in half full tightly capped bottles."

For fact sheet, see: http://www.macodirect.de/ilford-ilfotec-liter-p-1671.html?language=en

Bert from Holland
http://thetoadmen.blogspot.nl

Roger Cole · Apr 8, 2014

I've always liked T-Max and T-Max RS which are supposed to be similar. I may give it a try.

Simon R Galley · Apr 8, 2014

'Intergalatical Champion' may be a little 'spurious' to claim in our advertising....

But.... where there is a will there is a way !

Cracking dev though I have to say... but I would say that would'nt I.

Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited ( Terrestrial Division, Mobberley, CHESHIRE. UK ).

darkosaric · Apr 8, 2014

Always dilute 1+4, or 1+9 is also ok? Single shot?

pentaxuser · Apr 8, 2014

darkosaric said:
Always dilute 1+4, or 1+9 is also ok? Single shot?

No doubt the 1+9 fans will reply anyway but it is worth doing a search here on APUG. There have been a number of threads. I think that the MDC(Massive Development Chart) lists times for 1+9.

1+9 is certainly more economical. The key question is does it produce as good negs as 1+4. You may get varying answers and in the end can only try it yourself to find out. There is little or nothing to lose because my understanding is that 1+9 produces at least OK negs which will be very printable even if you decided that 1+4 is marginally better.

pentaxuser

darkosaric · Apr 8, 2014

Thanks . I just bought 20 films Fomapan 100, usually it goes in Rodinal, but I will give it a try in DD-X.

@NB23 - here is one joke for you: I don't see on Massive Development Chart times for Polypan F in DD-X

Roger Cole · Apr 8, 2014

If it really is like T-Max developers...some people like 1+9 but I didn't care for it. 1+6 is nice though and still more economical than 1+4. I ended up using 1+5 for no other reason than I could use Kodak's times for 1+4 and get results I liked. Basically I tweaked the dilution instead of the time, because I was lazy that way.

TheToadMen · Apr 8, 2014

darkosaric said:
Thanks . I just bought 20 films Fomapan 100, usually it goes in Rodinal, but I will give it a try in DD-X.

If you do so, please let us/me know what your results/conclusions are. I'm planning to do the same.
I'm gonna order me some Fomapan to test and want to use DD-X.
I'm going to Denmark this summer and want to start testing hen. I'm getting me a Hasselblad SWC shortly and will have it CLA'd. I'm gonna use Fomapan then to shoot the surroundings and some street photography as well.
So if I may learn from your experiences ...
Thanks,
Bert from Holland
Http://thetoadmen.blogspot.nl

darkosaric · Apr 8, 2014

TheToadMen said:
If you do so, please let us/me know what your results/conclusions are. I'm planning to do the same.

OK. Since I know exactly how it looks in Rodinal (using this combo for years) - it will be easy for me to see the difference. I will be using 35mm films.

gone · Apr 8, 2014

I'm curious as to how DD-X blows away D76 with Tri-X? Is it the tones? The sharpness? Are you seeing a big difference with the prints? Are you shooting it at box speed? W/ D76 (or TD-16) I shoot it at 200-250.

I'm always up for trying something different, but not sure what you mean by better. Honestly, I have tried quite a few developers and haven't seen anything better than the classic combination. Nothing scientific, just what looks good to me. I use Rodinal w/ Tri-X occasionally, and like it for its unique grain look, but it's not something I'd use every day.

Ronald Moravec · Apr 8, 2014

DDX is great if fresh. Stays clean after it is bad. Xtol is the same. Ilford hides the "good to" date in the lot # so maybe it is like buying spoiled or short dated milk. After you ruin the first roll, you WILL give up.

JW PHOTO · Apr 8, 2014

I went through two bottles and have no complaints at all. Good film speed, good grain and all the sharpness you need. I'd use it right now, but I don't like the cost in comparison to the developers I use now and shelf life isn't anywhere near as good as what I'm souping with at present. Also, there is nowhere in the whole state of Michigan, as far as I know, to buy it. That means there is a shipping cost tacked onto the already higher price. If I could walk into a store and buy it off the shelf it would be great. Truth is, you really can't walk into a photo store and buy much of any developer, 'cause there just isn't many stores left that handle film or chemistry. Still, it's probably the best "all-around" store bought developer I have ever used. I also used it at 1:6 and 1:7 and liked it better for my type of work. Each to his own I guess. JW

darkosaric · Apr 8, 2014

Ronald Moravec said:
DDX is great if fresh. Stays clean after it is bad. Xtol is the same. Ilford hides the "good to" date in the lot # so maybe it is like buying spoiled or short dated milk. After you ruin the first roll, you WILL give up.

I have bottle of APH09 (practically = Rodinal) opened for more than one year, since I use 1+100 dilution.
But for DD-X I am planing to use whole 1 liter in an week or two. Just to be on the safe side.

Thomas Bertilsson · Apr 8, 2014

Choice of developer is subjective, and the best developer is the one you're used to, the one you know how to bend to fit your goals.

DD-X is a fine product. But it isn't 'better' than D76, HC-110, or Rodinal. It's different.

gone · Apr 8, 2014

Ah, thank you for that Michael and darkosaric. Then I see no need to add it to what I already use and understand. The short life is a deal killer too, as I'm getting at least 3 months stock life w/ my D76 variation of TD-16. It will probably go longer, but that's the point where it ran out. The negs at the end looked exactly like they did at the beginning. Seems to tolerate higher heat beter too, but Florida summers will be the true test. We're only into the high 80's now.

pentaxuser · Apr 8, 2014

Michael R 1974 said:
I don't know where you're getting the "short shelf life" from, but it should last plenty long. See page 10 of the following:

http://www.ilfordphoto.com/Webfiles/2011427124733149.pdf

That's the puzzle for me too. I was a regular user of DDX until I moved to Xtol on cost grounds only and I never noticed any tendency to short life. A 1L bottle used to last quite a number of months while remaining in its original bottle. All I used was a squirt of Protectan to exclude air on top but it may not have been needed

OP, you must make up your own mind but I'd have no worries about it if you can get through it in less than 3 months

pentaxuser

NB23 · Apr 8, 2014

Thomas Bertilsson said:
Choice of developer is subjective, and the best developer is the one you're used to, the one you know how to bend to fit your goals.

DD-X is a fine product. But it isn't 'better' than D76, HC-110, or Rodinal. It's different.

Yes, the good old "subjective" thing.
But I saw such a tremendous improvement over D76, even. I judge my films + developer combos on how well and easily they pri t. With DD-X my prints snap right where they shoud.

DD-X probably has the ability to make polypan-F, the worst film on the planet, look good. Darko, you will test this for us

Thomas Bertilsson · Apr 8, 2014

NB23 said:
Yes, the good old "subjective" thing.
But I saw such a tremendous improvement over D76, even. I judge my films + developer combo on how well abd easily I print them. With DD-X my prints snap right where they shoud.

DD-X probably has the ability to make polypan-F, the worst film on the planet, look good. Darko, you will test tuis for us

Great! Then this is the developer you should be using. Whatever helps you sustain your final out put and vision is best.

For me, DD-X negs are no easier to print the way I like things to look.

JW PHOTO · Apr 8, 2014

pentaxuser said:
That's the puzzle for me too. I was a regular user of DDX until I moved to Xtol on cost grounds only and I never noticed any tendency to short life. A 1L bottle used to last quite a number of months while remaining in its original bottle. All I used was a squirt of Protectan to exclude air on top but it may not have been needed

OP, you must make up your own mind but I'd have no worries about it if you can get through it in less than 3 months

pentaxuser

You guys are right about shelf life being long enough. If I were using it as my only developer shelf life would be a nonexistent problem. Still, it's not even close to Rodinal and my Pyrocat developers, but it does have a different look. Good or bad? JW

darkosaric · Apr 8, 2014

NB23 said:
DD-X probably has the ability to make polypan-F, the worst film on the planet, look good. Darko, you will test this for us

I will, just for fun, if nothing else

StoneNYC · Apr 8, 2014

I've had a 1/4 bottle if DD-X sit for 3 months before I used it and no issues.

I do aways store it in a glass bottle, not in the crappy plastic bottles they come in...

But that and keeping them in the basement (55-60 degrees) and 3 months was no issue...

MartinP · Apr 9, 2014

I wonder if the improvements in results noted are due to people exposing their film at their usual EI then gaining half a stop, or more, of shadow detail through using DDX ? Might be worth trying more light and the previous developer too.

DD-X: intergalactical champion

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency