Delta 3200 developed by lab - question

[MMfoto]

Weird film re exposure and developing, in my opinion!

It really is. But I'm genuinely grateful it exists. Some of my favorite images wouldn't exist without it.

 

[loccdor]

In case you were interested in how Delta 3200 film base looks when compared to HP5 in a staining developer (510-pyro), I have these examples on hand taken at the same settings from my last development:

Note the different formats which might make this a bit apples and oranges. But I never use Delta 3200 in 35mm.

Delta 3200 (120) .................................................................................... HP5+ (35mm)

 

[warden]

This thread needs more photos

Here's a kid with jet black hair. My main concern was showing detail in the hair and eyes.

Hasselblad/150mm + 16mm extension
Natural light - heavy overcast day and smallish aperture (probably f8 - f11 but I have no notes)
D3200 metered @ 640 using my iPhone
I have no notes on how I developed it
Can't remember if I used a tripod, but probably.

The first image is a scan but I made darkroom prints of this negative with no problem.

 

[MattKing]

This thread needs more photos

Particularly where the photo is accompanied by an image of the negative! Thankyou!

But notice a couple things about the example you chose.
While the rendition of the face and hair is excellent, the rendition in the more highlighted areas of the shirt is - to use the word I used earlier - fairly lousy.
In many cases of course highlight rendition is as or more important, so it is important to choose your subject accordingly if you are going to use the film this way.

In essence, I would say you need to chose a tool - the film and exposure choice - that serves your particular needs in a particular circumstance.

These 3200 films are great for what they are designed for, but a bit less flexible than more typical films.
But if you don't have a lot of light to work with ....

 

[warden]

Particularly where the photo is accompanied by an image of the negative! Thankyou!

But notice a couple things about the example you chose.
While the rendition of the face and hair is excellent, the rendition in the more highlighted areas of the shirt is - to use the word I used earlier - fairly lousy.
In many cases of course highlight rendition is as or more important, so it is important to choose your subject accordingly if you are going to use the film this way.

In essence, I would say you need to chose a tool - the film and exposure choice - that serves your particular needs in a particular circumstance.

These 3200 films are great for what they are designed for, but a bit less flexible than more typical films.
But if you don't have a lot of light to work with ....

I like seeing the negative and curves layer too if available. (You can see on the curves layer I had to tame the highlights due to heavy exposure.) This was a thick negative, and it would be nice to have a note about how I developed it. I exposed for shadow detail but don't know if I shortened development for highlights. Looks like I may not have. Maybe I can find that print later.

 

[calico]

In case you were interested in how Delta 3200 film base looks when compared to HP5 in a staining developer (510-pyro), I have these examples on hand taken at the same settings from my last development:

Note the different formats which might make this a bit apples and oranges. But I never use Delta 3200 in 35mm.

Delta 3200 (120) .................................................................................... HP5+ (35mm)

View attachment 417151 View attachment 417152

Very interesting. I would say the difference in darkness between them is very similar to what I saw in my 400 ISO negs vs Delta 3200. Thank you!