Delta3200 (120) -- *bleah*

[Chazzy]

Colin, I'll be very interested to hear how the prints came out, since I've thought of trying the film myself (for existing light indoors with 120 film).

 

[geoferrell]

I like the Delta 3200 and have seen some difference in the negatives past the 3200 level. I think the gray tones come out in printing even though they make look fogged.

 

[Mark Antony]

Awesome - love seeing your shots with this film, everyone, thanks for sharing. Very inspiring. Never get enough looking at grain, and what beautiful grain this stuff has. I would not complain one bit if this thread morphed into a 3200 Group......

You asked for it

Delta 3200 Rodinal rated at 6400

the film is a classic

 

[Tom Kershaw]

Mark,

Is that a film scan or a print scan?

Tom.

 

[VaryaV]

Mark - you got me! This film gives a veil of beauty to the whole image taking it out of the ordinary. It has a softness in the tones that is quite remarkable. Noting especially the top banner, the mic, and the man in the left corner (WOW) - mysterious and very compelling.

Beautiful.

So, I have yet to rate this at 6400 (only 1600 and 3200) guess what I'll be up to this weekend?.... ha ha ha.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

That's a very nice results, Mark. I used the film a few times with HC-110 and processed about 20% longer than Ilford's recommended times.
To me, this film has to be coaxed into behaving the way I like it, but after you figure it out, it is indeed unique. A beautiful film, especially in 120 format.

Attached a scan from a 645 negative, using a Mamiya 645 with a 150mm lens. Shot at EI 3200.

 

[Colin Corneau]

Some very nice results here, folks. I'm definitely going to try DD-X with this film.

 

[whlogan]

I agree with some of the suggestions above.... develop it in Ilford's DDX. It is pretty expensive, but is the real developer of choice for Delta 3200 @ 3200. Diafine IMHO is a non- starter for 3200.

Logan

 

[chriscrawfordphoto]

Delta 3200 and is competitor Kodak's Tmax 3200 both have very high base fog levels, even with fresh film (this gets worse with outdated, which is why the films have short expirations). It is normal, you just print through it.

 

[ic-racer]

James & Mees "Theory of photographic process" (4th edition) implies that exposure of the film to light alters the fog level. So, although you can 'print through' the fog in the processed film, during the exposure the characteristic curve is altered slightly. I suspect this is a pretty subtle effect, however, my own tests have shown that outdated fogged film is slower. A few years back I tested some way outdated HP5 and got like EI 125 vs a control of EI 200. So, almost a stop slower. Base fog was round 0.7! Wonder if anyone else has noticed these effects.

 

[Mike Té]

Delta 3200 rated at EI 12,800 developed in Microphen

I've persisted with the Delta 3200 despite being disappointed in the flatness and finally got better contrast and finer grain (without eliminating the grain, which I like) by rating it at 1600 (which, according to 2F/2F, is still pushing it) and developing it in Microphen for 2 stops BEYOND box speed (12,800).

I've understood that Microphen is pretty similar to DDX; correct me if I'm wrong.

I'm finally happy with this film:

 

[Mark Antony]

Thanks for your comments everyone, Tom it was a scan, although I have printed them I think that was done on an Epson flatbed.
tmike I've been told that DDX is effectively liquid Microphen, seem logical although I'm sure DDX is better.
Here is a shot of my brother lighting courtesy of a laptop on the ebay page- no other light.

the above is the most extreme lighting I can come up with developed in Microphen stock for 2 min
Mark

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

I shot a roll of 35mm D3200 week before last and processed in Rodinal. The grain looks very nice, I think. Just thought I'd post it here. Exposed at EI 1,000. Rodinal 1+25. Agitation every minute, but should have agitated every 30s and reduced time somewhat for increased contrast. These negs are a little flat.

- Thomas

 

[2F/2F]

...rating it at 1600 (which, according to 2F/2F, is still pushing it)...

It is according to the International Organization for Standardization, not to me.

Also, rating it at 1600 simply underexposes it. Nothing is "pushed" or "pulled" until you develop.

 

[Willie Jan]

I experience the same in the past with the delta 3200 120 film.
I used it for theatre work, developed it with microphen.

I got a film that was 3 years old and had some (very) high temperature in the summertime in the attick of a house.
I think high temperature is the cause of the fogging of this high speed film.
I always put them in the fridge and get it out 24H before using it.

 

[Mark Antony]

Thomas
Thats a nice result, I normally wouldn't use Rodinal with D3200 because of the defined grain but had to on a couple of occasions when my Microphen ran out.
I have found (by accident) that reduced agitation- which means one gentle rolling agitation and 1:25 dilution giving a little more time than suggested by MDC (say 20%).
That said for mission critical work I'm with Willie Jan and use Microphen.
Mark

 

[Iwagoshi]

This is my first time using a high speed film, and the first time I pushed the development, so I really don't have an educated opinion of Delta 3200, yet, but here are the results. Delta 3200 @1600, f4@1/250, HC110b for 9-minutes, fixer 10-minutes. Rollei 6006, 150mm.

Ben Simon, Conductor, San Francisco Chamber Orchestra, 4/10/09.

By fog-base do you all mean the overall gray-ishness? I thought it was a fixer or washing issue that I could not clear. Also, on the monitor I wasn't sure whether I was looking at big grain or scanner anomalies.

Terry