Developing Delta 400

I have been overexposing one stop and cutting development times by 20 per cent as described in Barry Thornton's book and been happy with the results. My standard films have been Tri-X and FP4. I recently shot a roll of Delta 400 in a point and shoot which autoread ISO at 400. I am wondering if I can safely increase development time by 10 per cent or so to give a contrast boost. Is the Delta as forgivivg in development as Tri-X? I will use D-76 either straight or 1:1. Thank uou.

If printing on multigrade paper, you should easily be able to account for the tonal scale compression of having more of the scene on the toe without having to alter negative development times.

No Delta400 is more like Tmax.
Id take 10% off development instead.
Ilford do a datasheet
http://www.ilfordphoto.com/products/product.asp?n=9&t=Black+&+White+Films#

Delta 400 is a great film. I also use it at Ei200 and develop in HC-110 for 12 mins in Dilution H. It is also easy to fool Dx coding with a sharp knife and some insulation tape. Just scrape and tape to re-write the code on the cassette.

Thanks everyone for the assistance.

IMO, when in doubt, ignore the internet (including APUGers) and follow the manufacturer's recommendations.

markbarendt said:

IMO, when in doubt, ignore the internet (including APUGers) and follow the manufacturer's recommendations.

Click to expand...

+100 at least.

If you shot it at box speed, develop per Ilford's recommendations and, unless your thermometer or some other aspect of your process are very off, you will get excellent results. They may not look exactly like what you are used to, but you will have no problems.

Now I admit I do something with my sheet films very similar to what you normally do - my zone system speeds usually come out close enough to half box speed that I'm tempted to just use that and save the testing - but that's different, and I shoot roll films at box speed unless planning some special purpose developer (Tri-X in Diafine, 1000 or 1250 depending on light, Pan F+ in Diafine at 64 etc.)

The only roll film I routinely give an extra stop of speed is Foma, and that's because, well, it needs it (and builds contrast quickly too, so more so than bigger brand films it benefits from this "half speed and cut development" approach.)

Delta 400 is a fine film. You'll be fine.

Roger Cole said:

The only roll film I routinely give an extra stop of speed is Foma, and that's because, well, it needs it (and builds contrast quickly too, so more so than bigger brand films it benefits from this "half speed and cut development" approach.)

Click to expand...

Suggest that Foma has two speeds box speed and data sheet speed! e.g.

http://www.foma.cz/en/catalogue-fomapan-400-action-detail-272

The little graphs on 2nd page of the PDF are interesting reading...

You might be shooting at 'box' speed.

It is easier printing a negative with silver in the shadows.

Actually even Foma works fairly well at box speed and instruction sheet development - as long as you don't have a very wide range scene with much in the highlights. It's not, in my experience, so much that shadows fall off the toe - though that will certainly happen if you have important detail in deep shadows - as that highlights will blow out pretty easily.

It's not bad film but does take a bit more...care, or old-school treatment, than Ilford or Kodak.

BTW, one exception to the "manufacturer's spec will usually work fine" thing would be Kodak's insane recommendations for Tri-X in HC-110. But as far as I've ever seen, all of Ilford's data should be fine.