developer for Delta 3200 @ 3200

Discussion in 'B&W: Film, Paper, Chemistry' started by samcomet, Feb 18, 2009.

  1. samcomet

    samcomet Subscriber

    Messages:
    292
    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    Groups:
    I've been using T-Max 3200 for years and loved it, but alas, it's no more....I'm now using Delta 3200 @ 3200 and have always thought the manufacturer knew their film stock/developer combo's best. I am a little disappointed with DDX it's resultant grain structure. Has anyone any empirical or anecdotal evidence for a better fine grain developer for D 3200 @ISO 3200? Thanks & cheers! sam
     
  2. Kevin Caulfield

    Kevin Caulfield Subscriber

    Messages:
    3,640
    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2004
    Location:
    Melb, Australia
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Hi and by the way welcome to APUG from Melbourne. I pretty much use Paterson FX39 as my standard developer and am happy with the results for Delta 3200 using the Paterson times.
     
  3. jim appleyard

    jim appleyard Member

    Messages:
    2,159
    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    This is news to me, or is it just an Aussie thing?
     
  4. Kevin Caulfield

    Kevin Caulfield Subscriber

    Messages:
    3,640
    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2004
    Location:
    Melb, Australia
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Well I have only ever used a few rolls of it and that was some years ago, but I just bought a couple of rolls of Delta 3200 two weeks ago and specifically checked whether TMax 3200 is still available and was told it isn't. So it may be an Aussie thing or may just be a poor customer service thing (quite likely). I'd be delighted to shoot the Kodak 3200 again.
     
  5. nworth

    nworth Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,256
    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2005
    Location:
    Los Alamos,
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
  6. Tom Stanworth

    Tom Stanworth Member

    Messages:
    2,027
    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2003
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Xtol 1+2 or +3. I am sure DDX is pretty good, but I find diluted Xtol gives better sharpness to the grain and produces just as much speed.
     
  7. 2F/2F

    2F/2F Member

    Messages:
    8,079
    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2008
    Location:
    Los Angeles,
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Hi,

    The grain structure does not "result" from the developer you use. That is determined by the manufacturer. You are probably just seeing the difference between Delta 1000 and T-Max 1000, and would get almost exactly the same look from any other developer.

    Graininess does have a lot to do with density, however.

    Also, any run-of-the-mill developer will push the highlights to 3200, but no developer will truly make this a 3200-speed film; at least in the ways that film speed is most commonly measured. I assume you know this already, but it's worth mentioning any time someone says they are using a film "at" a certain EI (and especially with this film, where the proper name of the product - "3200" - and the actual ISO are not the same).

    Differences between general-purpose film developers are not as noticeable as they are often made out to be. IMO, the best thing you can do is to make the film work with whatever developer you use for everything else. In my experience, the same developer/s I use for HP5, Pan F, FP4, and other films also work great with Delta 1000.
     
  8. Graham.b

    Graham.b Member

    Messages:
    197
    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2008
    Location:
    Swindon,,,,,
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Differences between general-purpose film developers are not as noticeable as they are often made out to be. IMO, the best thing you can do is to make the film work with whatever developer you use for everything else. In my experience, the same developer/s I use for HP5, Pan F, FP4, and other films also work great with Delta 1000.
    __________________
    I have to agree with 2F/2F, same dev for all my films. Tmax but there again all my films are Kodak, with a few exceptions 120 fuji.

    Graham
     
  9. pentaxuser

    pentaxuser Subscriber

    Messages:
    9,298
    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Location:
    Daventry, No
    Shooter:
    35mm
    You might like to try Perceptol. Ilford list a time for D3200 at "box speed" which I think is 18 mins but its on the Ilford/Harman site. It is used at stock solution so at best only 4 films per litre, even if your tank is a Jobo which gets away with 240mls per film. That's quite expensive but if D3200 was only an occasional film then it won't break the bank.

    There's a school of thought that says that the better dev time for D3200 is the one that applies to the next speed up so expose at 3200 and use the dev time for 6400. That's certainly good advice for DDX but may not be so applicable to Perceptol. I hope it isn't as you won't find a time for Perceptol for EI 6400 unfortunately.

    Unless anyone knows different? If you do then please tell.

    pentaxuser
     
  10. Barry S

    Barry S Member

    Messages:
    1,348
    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2007
    Location:
    DC Metro
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    I've shot a lot of Delta 3200 at EI 1600 and developed in XTOL 1+1. The real ISO of the film seems to be around 1200, but I think it still looks great at 1600. Pushed to 3200 it starts to fall apart a bit no matter what developer you use. Overall, I like it much better than TMAX3200 because the tonality seems smoother. With XTOL at 1+1, you're still getting some of the grain dissolving solvent properties of sodium sulfite. Using more dilute working solutions of XTOL will dilute out the sodium sulfite and give you a bit harder edged grain. It's all a matter of preference as to which you prefer.
     
  11. BobNewYork

    BobNewYork Member

    Messages:
    1,067
    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2008
    Location:
    Long Island,
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Gotta support Xtol. 1+1 or greater dilution and keep the agitation gentle. I've always used 2 full inversions every minute - works well.

    Bob
     
  12. zinnanti

    zinnanti Member

    Messages:
    92
    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2009
    Location:
    Santa Clarit
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    I like Ilfosol-S for Delta 3200. It's finicky, but provides great detail and highlight control. If you use it, follow the develop time on the 3200 box.

    Ilfosol-S is a one shot developer.

    Ilfosol-3 is similar to Ilfosol-S.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 19, 2009
  13. 2F/2F

    2F/2F Member

    Messages:
    8,079
    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2008
    Location:
    Los Angeles,
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    This is just because of variation in processing between folks in the real world and Ilford, combined with the fact that the film in question is a very flat film, not to mention differences in various other details, PLUS the fact that most people don't actually test with this film (or any film) and like to use rules of thumb (like the one you mentioned) instead. You can find your development times the same way you find N, N+1, N+2, etc. for other films...or whatever way you want, really, to get the negs to your desired density and contrast.
     
  14. Sponsored Ad
  15. OP
    OP
    samcomet

    samcomet Subscriber

    Messages:
    292
    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    Groups:
    thanks for the welcome!

    I had a look at the "Massive Development Chart" and they give it @ 1+5, 11 mins. So I think that I shall give it a go...however I do have to ask if you've ever done a side to side look at DDX AND FX 39? cheers for now. sam
     
  16. OP
    OP
    samcomet

    samcomet Subscriber

    Messages:
    292
    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    Groups:
    maybe just in Oz....?

    Not sure but it is still listed on Kodak @ Rochester although my supplier here says it's not available any more.....? cheers, sam
     
  17. Kevin Caulfield

    Kevin Caulfield Subscriber

    Messages:
    3,640
    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2004
    Location:
    Melb, Australia
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Hi Sam. Yes, I think that is the Paterson time and that does work, for me anyway. I've never used DDX. The reason I went to FX39 years ago was that it was quite succesfully compared with other developers in the then-still-good Practical Photography.
     
  18. OP
    OP
    samcomet

    samcomet Subscriber

    Messages:
    292
    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    Groups:
    Yes I would second that. The film IMHO is much better than the Delta. Who did you try to buy it from....I tried Vanbar.
     
  19. OP
    OP
    samcomet

    samcomet Subscriber

    Messages:
    292
    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    Groups:
    Thanks for that but I was wondering if anyone had tried non-Ilford developers and to get better quality negs.....
     
  20. OP
    OP
    samcomet

    samcomet Subscriber

    Messages:
    292
    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    Groups:
    Tom - thanks for that one, I'll give that one a go too! cheers, sam
     
  21. OP
    OP
    samcomet

    samcomet Subscriber

    Messages:
    292
    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    Groups:
    I take your point and thanks! I shoot a lot at night and my "grain" issues are in black sky which of course tends towards clear on the neg. In the denser parts of the neg (bright bits) there is not so much of a problem. For my own satisfaction I might try some dip tests keeping in mind what you have said. cheers! sam
     
  22. OP
    OP
    samcomet

    samcomet Subscriber

    Messages:
    292
    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    Groups:
    thanks Graham he does make sense to me.
     
  23. Kevin Caulfield

    Kevin Caulfield Subscriber

    Messages:
    3,640
    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2004
    Location:
    Melb, Australia
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Yes it was Vanbar I tried to buy it from.
     
  24. ntenny

    ntenny Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,304
    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2008
    Location:
    San Diego, C
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    With a number of people suggesting Xtol, has anyone tried it in PC-TEA? It generally produces results said to be similar to Xtol, but I've never tried using it as a push developer and I have no idea what would happen.

    -NT
     
  25. OP
    OP
    samcomet

    samcomet Subscriber

    Messages:
    292
    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    Groups:
    so let me try to understand this...in my blacks (night sky) which tends towards thin and noticeable grain on the neg, a longer development time would thin thin out as the developer eats away at the emulsion?
     
  26. OP
    OP
    samcomet

    samcomet Subscriber

    Messages:
    292
    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    Groups:
    Baz - I'm gonna try a dip test...I've seen Xtol 1+2 @ 20 mins and stock @ 7.5 mins....what time do you use. oh and BTW thanks for the reply. cheers, sam