Delta 400 & Rodinal

thefizz · Jan 24, 2005

I am trying out Delta 400 in Rodinal for the first time and want to know if I can trust the developing info provided by Ilford, i.e., 1:25 at 20C for 9 minutes.

I recently had the problem of thin negs when developing Delta 3200 in Rodinal as per Ilford instructions so will I have a similar problem with Delta 400.

Regards,
Peter

127 · Jan 24, 2005

I recently dev'ed some Delta400 and HP5 in Calbe R09 ("original" Rodinal) 1:40 using the MDC times of 13 and 12 mins respectivly. The HP5 came out great - rather grainy (as expected), but good contrast and density. The Delta was thin, and disappointing. I may have underexposed, but my exposure estimates are usually more accurate than that.

Ian

TPPhotog · Jan 24, 2005

I don't use Delta 400 very often as I prefer the older types (HP5+), However I used the Agfa recommended time of 1+25 @ 20C for 8 minutes for the roll this one came off.

Morten has cracked the Delta 3200 by shooting at Agfa times - Shoot at 1600 soup for 3200; shoot at 3200 soup for 6400. I've tried it and have some very nice negs.

TPPhotog · Jan 24, 2005

BTW I'm finding HP5+ pushed to 1600 has better contrast and smaller grain size than Delta 3200 pulled to 1600. When I have the time I'm going to try HP5+ pushed to 3200 to see how it compares directly with the Delta 3200 @ 3200.

Sorry I know this thread is about Delta 400 and Rodinal

FrankB · Jan 24, 2005

TPPhotog said:
Morten has cracked the Delta 3200 by shooting at Agfa times - Shoot at 1600 soup for 3200; shoot at 3200 soup for 6400. I've tried it and have some very nice negs.

Another digression (sorry!) : With Delta 3200 in DD-X I find exactly the same thing. I reckon the team at Ilford responsible for Delta 3200 either like (very) thin negs or are utter optimists!

rogueish · Jan 24, 2005

I have always found the times listed here pretty resonable and for most part my negs came out where I wanted them.
Some adjustment for personal taste may be required
http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.html
I used the times listed here for HP5 and Rodinal and was happy.
Opps! I also have used Rodianl and Delta 400 and Delta 100 at times listed, again was happy with the results.

thefizz · Jan 24, 2005

Thank you all for your help. I will try Ilfords guidlines as a test and adjust in the future if needed.

Peter

TPPhotog · Jan 24, 2005

Peter it's only a suggestion but I'd edge my bets and split the difference between the Ilford times and the Agfa times. That would make 8.5 as the starting point, as you may lose your highlights going with the Ilford times which is what I usually find.

thefizz · Jan 25, 2005

Thats just what I was thinking TPPhotog. I went for 8.5 minutes last night and the negs look good.

Thanks,
Peter

TPPhotog · Jan 25, 2005

Congratulations Peter, looking forward to seeing some of your results

kaiyen · Jan 25, 2005

TPPhotog said:
When I have the time I'm going to try HP5+ pushed to 3200 to see how it compares directly with the Delta 3200 @ 3200.

Yet another digression but...I've shot HP5 at 3200 and Delta 3200 at 3200, both souped in straight Microphen. It was the first time I'd used films at such speeds, and my development times were off - especially for Delta 3200, since I had not yet learned the "expose at 3200, develop for 6400" rule.

Contrast is waaaaay higher on the HP5, but grain is tighter. But that's not saying much, since Delta 3200 is known for having what some call "popcorn" grain. The obvious benefit of using the Delta, though, is that the reduce contrast gives much more shadow detail.

The gallery in which these images resides is located on pbase.my gallery on pbase with hp5 and delta 3200 The film notes are listed below each image, so you can find which ones are which film at what EI.

I can send 100% crops if anyone wants.

allan

Lee L · Jan 26, 2005

I was reading a Gainer article in PhotoTechniques today testing Rodinal with various forms of sodium. That's another topic, but apropos of this one, he mentions in the last paragraph (Jan/Feb 2002, p. 29) that with Arista D-Max (widely assumed to be Ilford Delta 400 or very similar), at 1+50 70F and 6 minutes he got a CI of 0.41, and at 12 minutes a CI of 0.53. He estimates that maximum achievable CI would be around 0.61 with Rodinal 1+50 and Arista D-Max. You may be hitting that limit if the films really are the same.

One form of sodium he tried in his tests was sodium ascorbate at 4 grams/liter, which was superadditive with the Rodinal and gave finer grain. With that combination, he diluted 1+50 and developed at the times for 1+25. Gainer doesn't mention it, but that could help with Delta 400 in Rodinal.

Lee

thefizz · Jan 26, 2005

Thanks Lee & Kaiyen.

TPPhotog · Jan 26, 2005

Allan, many thanks for the info and the link. Looks like it's going to be a difficult choice as both of them at 3200 have their own distinctive but beautiful quality. Horses for courses I think

titrisol · Jan 26, 2005

Yes, Mr.Gainer is an expert in "perverting" developers by adding ascorbate.
In this case it has nothing to do with sodium, but with the ascorbic acid itself (Vit-C)

There is an article in unblinkingeye about this and also several formulas, threads about the effects of ascorbate

Lee L said:
I was reading a Gainer article in PhotoTechniques today testing Rodinal with various forms of sodium. That's another topic, but apropos of this one, he mentions in the last paragraph (Jan/Feb 2002, p. 29) that with Arista D-Max (widely assumed to be Ilford Delta 400 or very similar), at 1+50 70F and 6 minutes he got a CI of 0.41, and at 12 minutes a CI of 0.53. He estimates that maximum achievable CI would be around 0.61 with Rodinal 1+50 and Arista D-Max. You may be hitting that limit if the films really are the same.

One form of sodium he tried in his tests was sodium ascorbate at 4 grams/liter, which was superadditive with the Rodinal and gave finer grain. With that combination, he diluted 1+50 and developed at the times for 1+25. Gainer doesn't mention it, but that could help with Delta 400 in Rodinal.

Lee

Lee L · Jan 26, 2005

titrisol said:
Yes, Mr.Gainer is an expert in "perverting" developers by adding ascorbate.
In this case it has nothing to do with sodium, but with the ascorbic acid itself (Vit-C)

The main intent of the exercize was to find exactly how different forms of sodium affected grain in Rodinal and D-23, testing some long-standing assumptions. He tried sodium chloride (non-iodized), sodium sulfite, and sodium ascorbate to test how they affected grain. He also expected, I'm sure, to get increased activity with the sodium ascorbate, but it was also the "best" at both retaining acutance and producing finer grain. Sodium for fine grain, ascorbate for superadditivity. On both counts it might help with HP5+.

Lee

titrisol · Jan 26, 2005

Yes Lee, adding a pinch of ascorbate to Rodinal helps a lot.
Specially with Tri-X and other fast films.

Some added fog-base is present, but adding some sulphite also eliminates these.

Lee L · Jan 26, 2005

titrisol said:
Yes Lee, adding a pinch of ascorbate to Rodinal helps a lot.
Specially with Tri-X and other fast films.

Some added fog-base is present, but adding some sulphite also eliminates these.

Interesting... Have you tried benzotriazole in this mix rather than sodium sulfite to cut the base fog with less disolving of silver grain edges?

Lee

titrisol · Jan 26, 2005

not really, my chemical pool is small these das and I haven;t got any Benzo.
Mybe Patrick Gainer can answer this himself.

He also proposes perverted HC-110 as shown here:
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Lee L · Jan 26, 2005

titrisol said:
not really, my chemical pool is small these das and I haven;t got any Benzo.

I'll give it a try when I get a chance. If you have a chemical pool and read Gainer's info you must at least have some PHPlus in stock, right?

Lee

titrisol · Jan 26, 2005

Something like that, I use arm and hammer washing soda
And I have sodium bisulfite from walmart pool dept.

Have access to a lot of Erythorbic acid from the lab (used for meat processing), but not benzo

modafoto · Jan 26, 2005

TPPhotog said:
Morten has cracked the Delta 3200 by shooting at Agfa times - Shoot at 1600 soup for 3200; shoot at 3200 soup for 6400. I've tried it and have some very nice negs.

This a VERY nice rule...Maybe a trial with Delta 400 is coming soon (shot @ 400, deved @ 800). I haven't done this film in Rodinal for some time, so it would be interesting

pentaxuser · May 15, 2005

Delta 400 and Rodinal

thefizz said:
I am trying out Delta 400 in Rodinal for the first time and want to know if I can trust the developing info provided by Ilford, i.e., 1:25 at 20C for 9 minutes.

I recently had the problem of thin negs when developing Delta 3200 in Rodinal as per Ilford instructions so will I have a similar problem with Delta 400.

Regards,
Peter

I have only just joined this site, having had exactly the problems exactly you anticipate with D 400. I shot a roll of D400 at a christening. I used a 1:50 dilution and the times Ilford recommend for rotary processing for D400 and Rodinal. The indoor negs were very thin and quite grainy although the outside shots were better albeit still a little thin. I wrote to Ed Buffalo at unblinkingeye.com. His recommendations were to rate D400 at 200 and use a minimum of 5mls of Rodinal to achieve a ratio of 1:50. I had processed in a Jobo rotary processor which he said probably accounted for the grain due to extra agitation as well as destroying the edge effect renown with Rodinal. So a hand tank is the preferred option with Agfa's recommended agitation.

The Agfa processing times suggest rating D400 at 250 but Ed favours 200 and he appears to be the king of Rodinal so should know what he is talking about.

As I have yet to put Ed's recommendations into practice and your post is a few months old I would appreciate hearing how you got on with Delta 400 and Rodinal assuming you have now tried it. It may help me when I next load D400

Thanks

Pentaxuser

FrankB · May 16, 2005

modafoto said:
This a VERY nice rule...Maybe a trial with Delta 400 is coming soon (shot @ 400, deved @ 800). I haven't done this film in Rodinal for some time, so it would be interesting

Just a thought, Morten; not sure about Rodinal but in DD-X Ilford's recommendation of ISO 500 and 9 mins works really nicely for me!

pentaxuser · May 16, 2005

Delta 400 and Rodinal

FrankB said:
Just a thought, Morten; not sure about Rodinal but in DD-X Ilford's recommendation of ISO 500 and 9 mins works really nicely for me!

Having seen your reply led me to 3 pages worth of this thread in varying guises. I am sure I hadn't seen all of these replies before. Maybe as a newcomer I haven't fully worked out how to navigate this site properly.One reply gave a digitaltruth site for combinations of film and rodinal. B Very useful. However most of the info agreed almost exactly with Ilford's own info on the combination of D400 with Rodinal which was what I used but got thin negs. However the Agfa site mentioned by Ed Buffalo at unblinkingeye is different in 2 respects.
1). It makes no mention of rating D400 at anything but 250 which is close to Ed Buffalo's rating of 200 and the tank/ hand agitation is 18mins at ISO 250 whereas the digitaltruth site gives 17mins.

Maybe that one extra minute is key or at least it is worth erring on the side of lengthening development.

The other explanation for my difficulties is that I have always produced over contrasty negs using ID11 without realising it( perfectly possible without other printers to compare notes with) and my negs in Rodinal are normal. However if this was the case then I'd have expected my analyser to have indicated mainly grade 1 prints with ID11 negs and this hasn't been the case.Most of my rodinal negs needed grade 4 which is a first for me.

So still can't reconcile all my evidence but have probably got as far as I can until I try again.

Pentaxuser

Delta 400 & Rodinal

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency