Delta 3200 and Perceptol woes

[powermonkey]

Hi everyone. I recently tried shooting Delta 3200 and developing with Perceptol. I initially tried the recommended 18 minutes at 68' (stock solution), and then after my negatives turning out WAY too thin I tried 23 minutes on another roll, still yielding terrible results. Does anyone else have any experience with this combo? Can anyone recommend a better solution for shooting 3200 ASA? Thanks!



Pic related - it's about how under-developed both rolls appear to be.

 

[Rich Ullsmith]

Looks like 1 or 1 1/2 stop lacking exposure for the recommended development.

 

[samcomet]

If by solution you mean a liquid solution.....I've been shooting 3200 T-Max & Delta for years now and have come to the conclusion that Kodak P3200 in T-Max juice at 20 deg C. for the recommended time gives me the best possible result. The Ilford brand combo gives me rather contrasty and "grainy" looking negs. disclaimer: I know that the word "grainy" may be the wrong way to describe the look of the neg by strict definition, but for the sake of this post I will use it. I have had a lab in Paris process P3200 in Xtol with fab results too but I do not know the timing. Hope this helps. cheers, sam

 

[powermonkey]

Hmm, I can't seem to find P3200 in 120, but I might give the 35mm a shot next semester. Thanks for the suggestion!

 

[powermonkey]

Looks like 1 or 1 1/2 stop lacking exposure for the recommended development.

I might have to check my RB67's meter against another then. I hope it's not been giving me wonky readings in low light!

 

[Polovy]

I used it in the past - Delta 3200 that is - and had no problems with ID-11 - as per manufacturers instructions 10:30 min

 

[hobbes]

Doesn't perceptol belong to the group of developers which lower iso of a film? I guess so, that would explain 1-1&1/2 underexposure effect.. Roger Hicks used to expose his HP5+ to 250.. I'd do same with Delta 3200 (which true iso is at around 1200-1600 anyways)..

 

[hpulley]

Use Microphen stock, HC-110 1+15 or DD-X 1+4 with Delta 3200 for best speed.

Sent from my K080 using Tapatalk

 

[Roger Cole]

Use Microphen stock, HC-110 1+15 or DD-X 1+4 with Delta 3200 for best speed.

Sent from my K080 using Tapatalk

Or T-Max or T-Max RS, which work great with Delta 3200.

 

[powermonkey]

...I'd do same with Delta 3200 (which true iso is at around 1200-1600 anyways)...

That it may be, but I'd really like to get 3200 or higher out of it if I can.

Perceptol and high speed films are not sensible combinations.

Yeah. I was hoping that I could get the best of both worlds but sadly that didn't happen. I'll invest in some DD-X and try again later. Thanks!

 

[Роберт]

Perceptol (Ultra Fine Grain) developer is usefull on a slower speed film and then in a 35mm format to suppress the grain. You will loose one F stop in iso rate too.
So for D3200 take above advice:

Microphen stock, HC-110 1+15 or DD-X 1+4

or Xtol stock. These are all speed enhancing developers.

Greetz,

Роберт

 

[Willie Jan]

I too vote for microphen.
used it a lot with theatre work in the past
Shot it at 3200.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

I'll invest in some DD-X and try again later. Thanks!

Good choice! DD-X will be a much better developer for Delta 3200. Xtol is less expensive and a developer that is equally well suited for the job. Kodak TMax developers are very similar to DD-X, and they would do an excellent job as well.

Good luck,

- Thomas

 

[Roger Cole]

I get a very nice effective 3200 out of it, developing in T-Max 1+4 for the time recommended for 6400.

 

[pentaxuser]

If my memory serves me correctly I have yet to see a positive post on Perceptol and D3200 at anything like a speed of 3200 and yet Harman insist on quoting times for Perceptol at 3200 and even mention it in the accompanying marketing info as a suitable developer as a plus point for Perceptol.

Presumably at some stage the original Ilford( rather than Harman) actually tried it at the times quoted and found it to be acceptable.

If Ilford's experience had been bad then you'd think that it would not have quoted times for Perceptol or at the very least have stated that it could be used but was not recommended.

It is a puzzle and seems destined to remain so as I have yet to see any response on it from Harman via its R&D dept.

So are we all doing something wrong when using Perceptol and getting results that do not accord with Ilford's experience when it tested Perceptol and D3200?

pentaxuser

 

[Роберт]

Using an ultra fine grain type developer on an ultra high speed film sounds to me not very logical, independed what Ilford is testing.

Greetz,

Роберт

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

So are we all doing something wrong when using Perceptol and getting results that do not accord with Ilford's experience when it tested Perceptol and D3200?

I think a lot of people use Delta 3200 for hand held shooting in dark situations, like concerts, or late night street photography. I've done just that, illuminated by just the available ambient light from street lights and buildings, and have been able to cull enough contrast from the film to make them workable in the darkroom. I have either used Rodinal and standing development to get maximum shadow detail out of it, or something like Xtol 1+1 for a very long time, with reduced agitation (say every 3 or 5 minutes).
Using Perceptol for this type of photography is probably not going to work, so I wonder if these are the conditions that Ilford has tested the film in, or if it perhaps is a more normal lighting condition.

If the film instead is tested in daylight conditions, the very flat contrast of Delta 3200 would probably work just fine with something like Perceptol, because there will be less contrast and less deep shadows to fill with detail.

There's too much we don't know about how Ilford has tested the film in order to understand how they got to their results, and to surmise if we're even comparing similar work flows.

 

[Bertil]

Tried last winter Kodak TMZ (e.i. 800 -3200 iso) with D-23 (some 15-25 minutes in 20°C, reduced agitation, like Thomas "every 3 or 5 minutes).
The result was surprisingly nice, so I bought some more rolls for this winter (quite dark in northern Sweden in Dec-Jan!)
/Bertil

 

[hobbes]

..

So are we all doing something wrong when using Perceptol and getting results that do not accord with Ilford's experience when it tested Perceptol and D3200?

pentaxuser

There's perhaps nothing wrong in using anything with anything... However why would you like to bother yourself with using D3200 (real ISO of around 1600) with a iso downgrading developer that in results will yield in ~iso800 with a quite flat scene ..Why wouldn't you go and buy a cheaper D400/HP5+/TriX expose it @800 and put it in to cheaper Xtol 1:1

 

[Katie]

I shot one roll of Delta 3200 (@1600) and developed in stock ID11 and it came out spot on.

*

 

[hobbes]

Yeah, still.. in 35mm for @1600-2400 I'd go for TriX and D76/Xto 1:1 thou

(TriX @2400 in Xtol 1:1 @20C 18min.)

or..


(TriX @1600 in D23 1:0 @20C 17min.)

 

[snederhiser]

Hello;
Perceptol is a fine grain developer like the old Microdol-X. Shoot at 1600asa then develop at 15 to 18 minutes. Should come out fine. You lose half of the film speed using these developers. ID-11 or D-76 would be a better combo for about 12min at full strength. The faster films tend to be a bit grainy, and the rated speed seems optomistic. Steven.

 

[pentaxuser]

My experience with Perceptol leads me to suggest that even the 18 mins for an EI of 1600 is the absolute minimum. I'd be tempted to try at least 20-21 mins assuming that you'd still like to persist with Perceptol.

pentaxuser

 

[hobbes]

My experience with Perceptol leads me to suggest that even the 18 mins for an EI of 1600 is the absolute minimum. I'd be tempted to try at least 20-21 mins assuming that you'd still like to persist with Perceptol.

pentaxuser

Hi,
Two freshly developed films have been just hanged.. TX@1600 and TMZ@1600 both in D76 1:1 @20C for 18min and 16min respectively. Both look right on, with just the TMZ having lot higher base fog. Tmorrow I'll see about the grain, but I feel like TX will do the job fine.