Delta 100 grain and sharpness

[DoryBreaux]

Just to be sure, you disabled ICE on your scanner, right?

Yep, I tried using it once just to see how effective it was. Never again.

 

[Ian Grant]

For some reason I've become very paranoid about temp control. I mix between 20.5 and 21.5 and by the time I pour it, its between 19.8 and 20.8. I check before I pour.

Temperature control is very important but it's important that all stages including washing are tightly controlled, you need to avoid changes of more than +/- 1ºC between each stage. It's actually very easy once you get the hang of it.

Ian

 

[miha]

DD-X is not a fine grain developer. I find ILFOTEC HC and ID11 to give finer grain in comparison.

 

[Ben 4]

DD-X is not a fine grain developer. I find ILFOTEC HC and ID11 to give finer grain in comparison.

+1
TMY and Delta 100 are my two main films in 120; I develop them both in ID11 1:1. Both are excellent, and TMY is extraordinary for a 400 speed film. But Delta 100 clearly has finer grain and more detail. With my grain focuser (Bestwell 25x) it is easy to spot and focus on the grain in TMY. With Delta 100, not so much; the grain (in 120) is much harder to find.

 

[bvy]

Maybe I'm misreading this, but it makes no sense to judge the grain and sharpness of a negative from a scan with ICE or other manipulations turned on. Besides that, I didn't think ICE worked for anything but color film.

And yes, DD-X is marketed as a fine grain developer.

 

[Svenedin]

Maybe I'm misreading this, but it makes no sense to judge the grain and sharpness of a negative from a scan with ICE or other manipulations turned on. Besides that, I didn't think ICE worked for anything but color film.

And yes, DD-X is marketed as a fine grain developer.

The OP is not using ICE. He said he made the mistake once but never again. Yes that’s right, ICE does not work on “normal” B&W films. It will work with chromogenic B&W like XP2.

 

[pentaxuser]

Shorter times and/or less agitation may make all the difference but I have a strong feeling that the problem and its solution lies within the Hybrid section

pentaxuser

 

[DoryBreaux]

@bvy I don't use ICE. I tried it once just to see how effective it was/wasn't.

@pentaxuser unfortunately I don't have another option as I do not have the space for a proper darkroom. Believe me I wish I did, but my current living situation doesn't allow for it .

Again thank you to everyone who's given their input here, I think I have a good idea of what path to go down now. Love this forum!

 

[bvy]

@bvy I don't use ICE. I tried it once just to see how effective it was/wasn't.

Right. I misread it.

I also made the mistake of using it once. When I saw smoke coming from my scanner, I stopped.

 

[DoryBreaux]

Right. I misread it.

I also made the mistake of using it once. When I saw smoke coming from my scanner, I stopped.

Oh I do so hope you aren't kidding . I like the idea of ICE but in practice... Ugh.

 

[bvy]

Oh I do so hope you aren't kidding . I like the idea of ICE but in practice... Ugh.

I'm kidding. I meant that it seemed like a lot of wear and tear on the scanner. It ran a LONG time, and it gave me a rather plastic looking image. I only scan for reference purposes anyway, and occasionally online sharing. And I don't have a huge dust problem to begin with.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I've developed Delta 100 in Xtol 1+1 and DDX 1+4 and my times are 8:30 and 9:30, respectively. Sweet film in those two.

 

[pentaxuser]

I've developed Delta 100 in Xtol 1+1 and DDX 1+4 and my times are 8:30 and 9:30, respectively. Sweet film in those two.

Interesting, assuming your temp is 68F then the time given by Kodak is 10.30 which is 24% more, thus quite a lot. I know nothing of scanning but I recall seeing at least hints from others with scanning skills that a lower time for good scanning can be better. Maybe that's the answer

pentaxuser

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Yes. I always develop at 20C for conventional developers... in BTZS tubes (usually), so temperature is usually bang on. These negatives print really well under a cold light head, and scan nicely, too.

 

[RattyMouse]

Temperature control is very important but it's important that all stages including washing are tightly controlled, you need to avoid changes of more than +/- 1ºC between each stage. It's actually very easy once you get the hang of it.

Ian

I can't see how poor temp control for something such as washing matters. I have processed hundreds upon hundreds of rolls of film in the past 6 years and very often (especially while in China during summer) my tap water comes out very warm. I would process my film at 20 C (using ice to cool the tap water) and then wash with water that was up to 26 C or higher. I never saw any poor side effects from this lack of temperature control.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I can't see how poor temp control for something such as washing matters. I have processed hundreds upon hundreds of rolls of film in the past 6 years and very often (especially while in China during summer) my tap water comes out very warm. I would process my film at 20 C (using ice to cool the tap water) and then wash with water that was up to 26 C or higher. I never saw any poor side effects from this lack of temperature control.

I had the same issue in Japan, where tap water would be a constant 30C during the summer months. Back then I was very anal about wash temps, so I would temper a bucket full of water at 20C, and employ Ilford's soak and dump method. I still use this method in Canada, but I'm not too picky about the temperature, as long as it's not below 20C. Usually between 20 to 26C.

 

[Tony-S]

I can't see how poor temp control for something such as washing matters. I have processed hundreds upon hundreds of rolls of film in the past 6 years and very often (especially while in China during summer) my tap water comes out very warm. I would process my film at 20 C (using ice to cool the tap water) and then wash with water that was up to 26 C or higher. I never saw any poor side effects from this lack of temperature control.

Variation in temperature can lead to reticulation. So I've read. I've never done that experiment.

 

[Craig]

The few times I have scanned D100 it has come out very grainy. I think there is something inherent in the scanning process that adds grain that doesn't show up in a wet print.

That said, my favourite combo is D100 and Xtol, it gives lovely tones on wet prints.

 

[RattyMouse]

Variation in temperature can lead to reticulation. So I've read. I've never done that experiment.

This is clearly NOT true, as I have close to 1000 rolls of film without even the slightest sign of reticulation.

 

[Svenedin]

This is clearly NOT true, as I have close to 1000 rolls of film without even the slightest sign of reticulation.

I think the emulsions many decades ago were susceptible to this but for all practical purposes is very unlikely with quality modern films. I seem to recall reading about someone who wanted to produce reticulation for artistic purposes and found it very difficult to achieve. He had to practically boil the film and plunge it into iced water to achieve it and even then it wasn't much of an effect. I have to admit I am careful about dev/stop/fix temperatures but that washing happens at whatever temperature the tap water is at. Usually this is much colder and my negatives from over 30 years ago show no ill effects (yet). However, knowing that my cold water is not so effective at removing fixer I do extend the Ilford Archival sequence. I've never seen reticulation.

 

[markbarendt]

Reticulation is caused by a significant difference in temperature from one bath to another, say developer at 80f and stop at 65f.

Consistent temp from bath to bath is the fix.

 

[bvy]

This is clearly NOT true, as I have close to 1000 rolls of film without even the slightest sign of reticulation.

That clearly makes it not true.

 

[pentaxuser]

Rattymouse was able to keep the range of temps to within 6C so about 68-78F or 10F . This may not be enough with modern films especially the likes of HP5+ to have much, if any, effect. Ian Grant, a very experienced person in all things processing has said that there is such a thing a micro-reticulation which can be triggered by quite a low range of temps.

I am able to keep my temps to within 1 degree C so I can presume I have had no experience of it. However I wonder how difficult it would be to spot under a grain magnifier with 35mm film and more importantly whether it would be apparent at say 5x7 - my normal enlargement - or even 8x10.

I am unclear how you spot this micro-reticulation but that may well deserve another thread

pentaxuser

 

[Svenedin]

Rattymouse was able to keep the range of temps to within 6C so about 68-78F or 10F . This may not be enough with modern films especially the likes of HP5+ to have much, if any, effect. Ian Grant, a very experienced person in all things processing has said that there is such a thing a micro-reticulation which can be triggered by quite a low range of temps.

I am able to keep my temps to within 1 degree C so I can presume I have had no experience of it. However I wonder how difficult it would be to spot under a grain magnifier with 35mm film and more importantly whether it would be apparent at say 5x7 - my normal enlargement - or even 8x10.

I am unclear how you spot this micro-reticulation but that may well deserve another thread

pentaxuser

I have not heard of micro-reticulation. Thank you for posting

 

[Ian Grant]

This is clearly NOT true, as I have close to 1000 rolls of film without even the slightest sign of reticulation.

It can lead to surface defects also known as micro reticulation the outcome is increased apparent graininess in enlargements and scans. The actual film grain hasn't been affected but printing through the surface artefacts increases the apparent graininess. With 120 films you have an anti-curl layer on the rear of the film and this can be affected as well.

Poor temperature control is the key to minimising grain.

Ian