Fuji acros 100 in ilford DDX ?

Discussion in 'B&W: Film, Paper, Chemistry' started by Mr Worry, Feb 5, 2009.

  1. Mr Worry

    Mr Worry Member

    Messages:
    19
    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2009
    Shooter:
    35mm
    I was looking online for a suitable developer for Fuji acros 100 and cant seem to find any made by fuji them selfs. So i took a look on the massive dev chart and seen that some people have used DDX and i was wondering if anyone here has but with what results ?:confused:
     
  2. Jeff L

    Jeff L Subscriber

    Messages:
    615
    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2006
    Location:
    Toronto ON
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I did two rolls of Acros 120 in DD-X and thought it was beautiful. This is great film and combo, so smooth. I have not developed it in anything else.
     
  3. Poohblah

    Poohblah Member

    Messages:
    437
    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2008
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I've gotten good results with Acros 100 bathed in HC-110 1+63 8 minutes 2 inversions every minute.
     
  4. OP
    OP
    Mr Worry

    Mr Worry Member

    Messages:
    19
    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2009
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Just wondering jeff what ratio did you dilute it to 1-4 ? and how many inversions temp etc.
     
  5. Gary Holliday

    Gary Holliday Member

    Messages:
    824
    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2006
    Location:
    Belfast, UK
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    DDx is quite expensive, so I tend to keep it for developing Delta 3200. My normal dev for Acros is in Rodinal which is just superb. I think this film loves being bathed in all developers!
     
  6. Poohblah

    Poohblah Member

    Messages:
    437
    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2008
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    What dilution/time do you use for Acros/Rodinal, and what format of film? I have some Rodinal sitting around that hasn't seen much use, might as well try it out on one of the 14 rolls of Acros that I have in my fridge...
     
  7. Gary Holliday

    Gary Holliday Member

    Messages:
    824
    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2006
    Location:
    Belfast, UK
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I use this film for high contrast/ high key portraits, so they get a special time for my over exposure at 1+25, so not for general use.

    According to developing diary, for normal use Fuji Acros @EI 100 1+50 for 10 mins and very slow agitation in Rodinal.
     
  8. titrisol

    titrisol Member

    Messages:
    1,672
    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2004
    Location:
    Raleigh NC
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Yes DDX is perfect for Acros
    Look for the PhotoTechnique magazine that included a BTZS test of Acros in DDX (2002 I think)

    If my memory is correct 1+9 for 6-7min was the right combo for 100 speed.
     
  9. titrisol

    titrisol Member

    Messages:
    1,672
    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2004
    Location:
    Raleigh NC
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
  10. r-brian

    r-brian Member

    Messages:
    654
    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Location:
    Albuquerque, NM
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I do my 120 Acros in Rodinal 1+100, 18 min, 20 C at box speed. Lovely film; it has become my standard film.

    Edit: I should have mentioned 2 easy inversions every minute. I have also stretched out agitation to every 3 minutes for the last 6 minutes of developing time. For high contrast situation, it gives a slight compensating effect.
     
  11. Photo Central - AT

    Photo Central - AT Member

    Messages:
    26
    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2008
    Location:
    Winnipeg, MB
    Shooter:
    35mm
    As many here have confirmed, DDX and Acros are a wonderful combination. I tend to dilute mine a little more than 1-4, though that 's certainly a good benchmark to start with. I tend to prefer 1-9 myself, as mentioned earlier. If you're looking for a less expensive solution, you may want to try Acros with Perceptol. A good customer of ours has had a lot of success with that combination after a little bit of tweaking.

    Cheers,

    Andrew Toews

    Photo Central Inc
    DarkroomCentral.ca
     
  12. emeraldcity_grain

    emeraldcity_grain Subscriber

    Messages:
    38
    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2008
    Location:
    Pacific NW
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I have that Photo Techniques article that several people mentioned. The author, Fred Newman, used the following setup for the test.

    Fuji Acros
    Ilford DDX 1+9 dilution
    75 degrees F (he lives in Arizona)
    Jobo processor
    2500 series reels/tanks for roll films
    - 135 film for 7'20" - film speed 100
    - 120 film for 7'35" - film speed 100
    3000 series tank for 4x5 sheet film
    - 4x5 film for 7'30" - film speed 100

    To summarize, he was "very pleased with the results". Hope this gives you a good place to start.
     
  13. pentaxuser

    pentaxuser Subscriber

    Messages:
    9,293
    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Location:
    Daventry, No
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Thanks for this. There was a recent thread on using DDX at 1+9 instead of 1+4 but info on actual known dev times temp etc was harder to come by. As a DDX user this increases my knowledge on 1+9 uses.

    Apart from saving money did Fred Newman have anything to say about any other benefits. I am presuming that result would be as good at 68F with hand inversion agitation and suitable increase in dev time for non rotary processing and lower temp as per the Ilford recommednations.

    In the U.K. at this time of year the maintenance of 74F for as long as 7 plus mins is of course possible but is more problematical whereas 68F is about my darkroom temp so requires no special measures - except patience in accepting longer dev times.

    On the other hand I have a Jobo processor so could try Fred's process and save even more DDX as the 35mm tank only requires 140ml. A propos the rotary process, did Fred mention whether his times included a pre soak?

    Thanks

    pentaxuser
     
  14. emeraldcity_grain

    emeraldcity_grain Subscriber

    Messages:
    38
    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2008
    Location:
    Pacific NW
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    He preferred Acros when compared with 3 other medium speed films - Tmax 100, FP4+ and Delta 100. He prefers a film that is "friendly for printing highlights". He likes "a characteristic curve that's a straight line or has a slight shoulder (the curve slopes downwards a little)" and Acros has the curve shape he was looking for. He found the film to have a pleasing separation of highlights and very good shadow separation. Though subjective, he also felt that Acros had finer grain as well as better reciprocity characteristics than the other 3.

    He liked DDX because its liquid (which he prefers to powders) and has good keeping qualities (he decants to smaller bottles).

    Although he mentions the use of a Jobo, there is no reference to presoaking. I, too, use a Jobo and prefer to presoak (5 minutes). I find that I get more consistent results with a presoak.

    Fred Newman is the owner of The View Camera Store. You may want to contact him through the store's website.
     
  15. pentaxuser

    pentaxuser Subscriber

    Messages:
    9,293
    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Location:
    Daventry, No
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Thanks for the response. Can I take it that you also use and find the Fred Newman times satisfactory with a 5 mins pre-soak? In other words the times quoted by Fred in your post do not need any alteration with a pre-soak?

    I thought I'd better check this as the usual convention( well the Ilford recommendation anyway) is that without a pre-soak times need to be shortened by as much 15 or 20%. If you use Fred's times with a pre-soak then maybe Fred does also or it might be that with Acros it makes no difference to times.

    I take your point about the benefits of a pre-soak when rotary processing. A guy called John Tinsley wrote a whole book about rotary processing in the early 90s and alway used a pre-soak and found that with a pre-soak he didn't need to make any alteration to Ilford times

    Unfortunately there was no Acros, nor Ilford Delta when the book was written.

    I think Acros is a great film but my question about Fred's perceived benefits was a reference to the negs at 1+9 as opposed to those at 1+4 rather than the characteristics of Acros as a film.

    Maybe the negs at 1+9 print exactly the same as 1+4 in terms of grade, shadow and highlight detail but maybe there's a hint in what you say that at 1+9 the highlights are more easily manageable?

    Thanks also for Fred Newman link

    pentaxuser