Delta 3200

[colrehogan]

I was hoping to do some available light (stage lighting) photography at a show that my dad will be in next month and was planning to use Delta 3200 in my F5. Should I just shoot at ISO 3200 or maybe push it to ISO 6400 (if the camera will let me)? I wasn't planning to use flash, btw.

Last year, I shot this show in di#$%&l and have had computer problems since then so the status of those files is that they are on a CD. I feel better having a page of negatives to go back to rather than some files on a hard drive/CD.

 

[modafoto]

I feel better having a page of negatives to go back to rather than some files on a hard drive/CD.

Don't we all.

Whether you choose 3200 or 6400 a good rule of thumb is to develop one stop more. E.g. 3200 should be developed for the time of 6400 and so on.

Morten

 

[colrehogan]

Don't we all.

Whether you choose 3200 or 6400 a good rule of thumb is to develop one stop more. E.g. 3200 should be developed for the time of 6400 and so on.

Morten

What does that do? (Sorry if that's a stupid question.)

 

[SuzanneR]

You mignt even be able to shoot it at 1600. Stage lighting can be pretty easy to work with. Will there be a rehearsal that you can get some meter readings with?

 

[colrehogan]

I was planning to evaluate the lighting with the in-camera meter that night. Never thought about going to the rehearsal. I don't know when they are, but can probably find out.

 

[modafoto]

What does that do? (Sorry if that's a stupid question.)

Not a stupid question.

I, and a lot of other D3200 users, have found dev times to be too short and resulting in thin negs. And one stop more development (can one say that?) gives better negs with D3200.

 

[FrankB]

What does that do? (Sorry if that's a stupid question.)

Not a stupid question at all.

Ilford's recommendations are usually pretty good (in my undemanding experience, anyway), but with Delta 3200 I reckon they've messed up a touch. If I process for the recommended time in DD-X I end up with very thin negs which don't print especially well. If I process at the time for the next speed up, the negs are much better. Your mileage may vary, but I've seen several people stating the same.

(Damn, Morten's a quicker typist than me! )

 

[colrehogan]

I'll either develop it in D76 myself or (more likely) have the local camera shop process it. Thanks for all your replies.

 

[Bighead]

I use 3200 religiously and if the light permits, I shoot at 1600... I find that over exposing a stop really gets those shadows to pop out. Maybe the over developing, recommended above, gives the same effect because I still develop as if it was shot at 3200....

BTW, your F5 will certainly shoot at 6400, if not higher...

 

[modafoto]

BTW, your F5 will certainly shoot at 6400, if not higher...

A little tip. I shoot @ 25000 with this film sometimes. My camera goes to 6400 and then I set exposure correction to underexpose by 2 stops. This gives me 25000

 

[kaiyen]

I agree that you need to take Ilford's dev times with a grain of salt. For some reason, I think the ones on the MDC are also off, but a quick comparison with the Ilford times can verify that.

Here it is at 6400 in Microphen:
http://www.pbase.com/romosoho/image/30277515/medium

Here it is at 3200 in Microphen:
http://www.pbase.com/romosoho/image/22567339/medium

And here it is at 1600 in Microphen:
http://www.pbase.com/romosoho/image/30277525/medium

My personal development information is at http://www.kaiyen.com/photo/pages/dev_chart.html

allan

 

[André E.C.]

When I use Delta 3200 for available light work, I shoot at EI 1600 and give N development.
It`s all a matter of taste!

Cheers

André

 

[BradS]

I too rate D-3200 at EI-1600 and dev for the time suggested for 3200...if that makes sense.

 

[Bighead]

A little tip. I shoot @ 25000 with this film sometimes. My camera goes to 6400 and then I set exposure correction to underexpose by 2 stops. This gives me 25000

Of course... But, what kind of results do you get with 25000??? Thats amazing... I'd love try that...

 

[modafoto]

Of course... But, what kind of results do you get with 25000??? Thats amazing... I'd love try that...

I have attached 3 neg scans from a film done @ 25000.

Morten

 

[Pastiche]

Morten -
the question then becomes... what are you developing with? (Rodinal right?)
I shoot FP5 @ 3200, Microphen @ 16min... and am itching to do to 6400...
Im not at all convinced that underexposing 1 stop will give me 6400....
Please expound...

Yours tully- soon to be a brother in chemistry.

Here's the thing... if you shoot 3200, and under expose by one stop, you are really @ 1600... then you are pushing film if you over develop....
So.... you say you are pushing to 25000... from wha?
and why under expose?.... dosent that just blow your highlights?
(dosent seem so from yr negs.)

WTF?

 

[modafoto]

what are you developing with? (Rodinal right?)
I shoot FP5 @ 3200, Microphen @ 16min... and am itching to do to 6400...
Im not at all convinced that underexposing 1 stop will give me 6400....
Please expound...

Yours tully- soon to be a brother in chemistry.

Here's the thing... if you shoot 3200, and under expose by one stop, you are really @ 1600... then you are pushing film if you over develop....
So.... you say you are pushing to 25000... from wha?
and why under expose?.... dosent that just blow your highlights?
(dosent seem so from yr negs.)

WTF?

I used HC-110 for this as Rodinal is giving up with I hit 3200 with this film.

I underexposed heavily to be able to handhold the camera during the shoot. I definitely blow highlights and get detail-less shadows. But I like this low-fi grain-filled stuff.

 

[eatfrog]

if you shoot 3200, and under expose by one stop, you are really @ 1600...

No, 3200 and under exposed by a stop is 6400.
1600 needs more light than 3200. More light = more exposure = over exposed.

 

[Pastiche]

Thanks... I think I had the brain on Park at the time I was writing... Of course you are right. I've got my head wrapped up in the gears of my Olympus OMPC, and the darn thing's ISO setting knob wont let me go past 3200... and neither will it allow me to set the exposure compensation to -1 stop....
Guess I should have stepped back and recaled theory, rather than twiddling with the camera....

 

[john_s]

I'll either develop it in D76 myself or (more likely) have the local camera shop process it. Thanks for all your replies.

I think the local camera shop is likely to be a disaster with this film, unless you know (= have seen with your own eyes) what they can do with this film.

Ideally, a test roll at rehearsal and do it yourself. You don't want a rerun of last year! I speak from experience.

Paul Butzi has an article worth reading:

http://www.butzi.net/articles/articles.htm

and scroll down to Theatre Photography 101

 

[fhovie]

I was moved by this thread - I never used microphen before so I grabbed some chems and mixed some up. I fetched up some Delta 3200 that has been frozen since 2002 - expired 2003 and ran a test roll at 3200 - developed 9.5 min at 75F. Well - this stuff needs to be fresh - BF+F was at .64 and zone 3 was at .68 zone 5 was at .75 zone 8 was at 1.36. Not very contrasty stuff - looks like the common wisdom here is correct - I will shoot the next roll at 3200 and develop for 13min @75F. That should give me the CI I am looking for for grade 2 and give me better shadow separation. As far as the base fog - I have 10 fresh new rolls from B&H that will show up this afternoon. I had been forgoing using this stuff to use TRIX at 1600 in 510Pyro or XTOL which worked good but I could only capture an SBR of 6 in a DR of 1.25. It looks like this will work well for light as found for indoor and shade. In 6x6 grain shouldn't be too bad. It never was bad before. I never liked the kodak 3200 - much coarser grain!

 

[colrehogan]

I shot a roll or two of the Kodak 3200 and didn't particularly care for the grain either. I have shot Delta 3200 before, just not under these conditions. The local camera store did fine with this roll (I have no idea how they developed it though). I'll have to see if I can go to a rehearsal and/or see under what conditions they do the rehearsal under. For all I know, they have the lights on in the room (not like during the performance). The show is a Barbershop Chorus show.

Thanks for all the comments. I shall have to print out this thread tomorrow at work.

 

[Andre Reinders]

This may help (then again it may not):

Before I got into developing my own b/w film, and when I had less knowledge about photography and cameras, I was asked to take some photos of a local band, in a local club.

I bought 1 roll of Fuji Superia 1600, and 1 roll of Ilford Delta 3200. I waited until I was at the club to choose the film speed. I set both at 3200 based on the limited light I had. My technique was to meter the face, overexposed by 1 stop, and then lock the exposure and recompose. I tried to follow the hand holding rule about having the shutter speed equal to or greater than 1/focal length. The equipment I had was Canon Elan 7N, 28-105mm f3.5-4.5 lens, and 50mm f1.8 lens. I was right next to the stage (which was about 3 feet high). It was suggested to me to NOT use too small an aperture because the DOF may be too limited to keep focus if the individuals are moving a bit. I probably kept around f3.5-f5.6.

A local lab handled the processing. The following link gives you an idea of what I got - I did not play with the images to improve them, and they were scanned from the 4x6 inch prints.

http://www.anycities.com/reinders/galleries/event/blissin/blissin.html

Let me know if you have any questions....

 

[kaiyen]

Andre,
A good question though is..do you know the specifics of how the d3200 was processed?

allan

 

[Andre Reinders]

Yes - that is a good question. All I know is that when I dropped it off, I was asked what ISO I shot it at - I replied 3200. I don't know what developer they used - or what times. Would a lab use a standard set of rules/guidelines for dev? I would not call it a pro lab, but it is certainly not a 1 hr photo place. More of a mom and pop small chain. They knew enough to ask what the film was shot at, so I would have to assume their dev process rated it at 3200 anyway.