Getting density with Delta 3200 in Pyrocat-HD?

[ProfessorC1983]

Is anyone successfully using this combination? And if so, what are your development times/agitation technique?

I'm on my 3rd roll of this stuff and just can't figure out how to get useful density out of it in the Pyrocat. Maybe I'm doing something wrong, and I do realize it's not a true 3200 speed film, but I was hoping to find a good option for handheld indoor shooting... yes, my girlfriend has requested even more pictures of her cats.

There was not any guidance in MDC so I made some comparisons with other developers and took a wild guess.

First roll I shot at 1600 and developed for 20min, with initial 1min constant agitation and then 4 inversions every 3 min (same as I do for normal dev with FP4). Completely unusable, barely any trace of an image.

Next 2 rolls I shot at 1200 and developed 24min, with initial 1min constant and then 4 inversions every 2 min (same as I do for a +1 push of HP5). These did create a discernable image, but with a DMax in the 0.5-0.6 range, which combined with the very high Fb+F (at least compared to the Ilford films I'm used to) gave me a maximum DR of ~0.3-0.4, barely suitable for a grade 5 print and only on a few shots, at that.

In all cases, temp was a constant 20C and dilution was 1:1:100, with a 5min pre-soak, water stop, and TF-4 fix.

Am I doing something very wrong, or is this maybe just not a good combination? I could try exposing at 800, but that means I'm getting no benefit over HP5 which I already know I can push with great results. And looking at MDC I just don't see any non-stand-dev times longer than ~20 minutes for any film with Pyrocat-HD, though I guess it's worth leaving it in for a REALLY long time and seeing what happens?

Or would something like Rodinal or D-23 (my other two dev options currently) be a better fit for D3200?

 

[john_s]

I use Pyrocat-HD for all my normal film development. This developer is considered not to be a speed reducing developer but I find that a stop over box speed works well for me.
But TMZ3200 is not "normal" in the sense that you're trying to get maximum speed out of a marginal situation, and a developer that maximizes speed seems like the best option. I tried TMZ and Pyrocat once and decided to not bother again. I don't have my notes here in Covid lockdown but I doubt that they would be helpful anyway.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I have used it for 120 Delta 3200 (EI 1000) developed in Pyrocat-HD. 1+1+50 (10+10+500) 9:30 21C. I have also used same dilution and time/temp for film I ran through my Holga.

 

[revdoc]

Are the edge markings on the film as faint as the image? If they look normal, it's an exposure problem, not a development problem.

It might also be a case of "Pyrocat sudden death". Have you developed any other film in your batch of Pyrocat since you started using Delta 3200?

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Are the edge markings on the film as faint as the image? If they look normal, it's an exposure problem, not a development problem.

It might also be a case of "Pyrocat sudden death". Have you developed any other film in your batch of Pyrocat since you started using Delta 3200?

The sudden death thing has only happened with store bought, as far as I know.

 

[Anon Ymous]

The sudden death thing has only happened with store bought, as far as I know.

IIRC, there was at least one case where it was an alleged "sudden death" and the same chemicals performed fine the next time. In any case, Pyrocat HD isn't exactly a speed increasing, or even maintaining developer as far as I can tell. Seemed to give HP5+ an effective ISO200 in my tests, while Xtol gave a bit over 400. There are IMHO better choices for push processing developers.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

IIRC, there was at least one case where it was an alleged "sudden death" and the same chemicals performed fine the next time. In any case, Pyrocat HD isn't exactly a speed increasing, or even maintaining developer as far as I can tell. Seemed to give HP5+ an effective ISO200 in my tests, while Xtol gave a bit over 400. There are IMHO better choices for push processing developers.

Thanks Anon Ymous. HP5 EI 250 for me. I have to admit I've never done this push processing before. Extending development time for me is to increase contrast. HP5 isn't the greatest for that...but apparently it's quite good for push processing. Cheers!

 

[pentaxuser]

If you go to the Unblinkingeye website and look at film dev times there is a section on D3200. Ed Buffalo himself writes about using Pyrocat -HD with success at 1600.

I won't go onto details as they are all there but suffice it to say that Ed is pleased with the results. Worth a try to use Ed's method. I suspect that if this doesn't improve matters substantially you may need to examine if the problem lies elsewhere with your Pyrocat -HD

pentaxuser

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

Pyrocat HD isn't exactly a speed increasing, or even maintaining developer as far as I can tell. Seemed to give HP5+ an effective ISO200 in my tests,

Recently Moersch expressed the same opinion in a FB group: "neither PMK nor Pyrocat HD or my similar Tanol yields box speed. Depending on chosen films my calibrations show a loss of speed between 1-3 DIN". His "Finol contains four developing agents in order to get more film speed".

 

[koraks]

Next 2 rolls I shot at 1200 and developed 24min, with initial 1min constant and then 4 inversions every 2 min (same as I do for a +1 push of HP5). These did create a discernable image, but with a DMax in the 0.5-0.6 range, which combined with the very high Fb+F (at least compared to the Ilford films I'm used to) gave me a maximum DR of ~0.3-0.4, barely suitable for a grade 5 print and only on a few shots, at that.

That's not right. Either you underexposed, or something went wrong with the developer (mixing error or sudden death). Pyrocat & Delta3200 should give more contrast with the parameters you listed. It's maybe not the best combination, but it does work, and better than you observed.

 

[Rudeofus]

I have made the observation, that Delta 3200 needs a lot more developer than other films. If you look at instructions for liquid film developer concentrates, quite often higher concentrations are listed for Delta 3200 than for other film. I have the impression, that Delta 3200 releases massive amounts of iodide during development. This released iodide strongly restrains high density areas, while allowing weakly exposed areas to fully develop. The result is a high speed rating and great pushability without runaway highlights. At the same time it makes this particular film very unsuitable for dilute developers.

 

[ProfessorC1983]

Thanks for the help, all. I don't think it's a "sudden death" issue (unless it's the magical disappearing/reappearing one?) because I've since developed 2 rolls of FP4 which came out exactly as expected.

Looking at the edge markings, which are present and somewhat denser than the images (though still fainter than what I get on HP5 and FP4), I'm guessing the root of the problem is indeed exposure related which is being exacerbated by the poor developer match. I'm pretty sure I metered correctly, but since all 3 rolls were taken at the same indoor location, maybe the spectrum of the (LED) lighting there is causing a mismatch between my meter and this particular film. If I have a chance, I'll do some comparison shots with HP5 to confirm. Appreciate the thoughtful advice as always!

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I have made the observation, that Delta 3200 needs a lot more developer than other films. If you look at instructions for liquid film developer concentrates, quite often higher concentrations are listed for Delta 3200 than for other film.

And that is probably why I mix a stronger batch of pyrocat-hd.

 

[DonW]

I've been using PC-HD ever since Sandy released the formula. Thousands of rolls later I have never experienced this "sudden death" thing.

At first I mixed my own from powdered chemicals but once the Formulary started supplying in liquid form that's all I have used.

 

[Lachlan Young]

I have made the observation, that Delta 3200 needs a lot more developer than other films. If you look at instructions for liquid film developer concentrates, quite often higher concentrations are listed for Delta 3200 than for other film. I have the impression, that Delta 3200 releases massive amounts of iodide during development. This released iodide strongly restrains high density areas, while allowing weakly exposed areas to fully develop. The result is a high speed rating and great pushability without runaway highlights. At the same time it makes this particular film very unsuitable for dilute developers.

And it would seem reasonable to surmise that because of the need to gain access to that iodide, less solvent developers are going to be not as effective at delivering those properties.

 

[Rudeofus]

Here is a comparison of some developers for Delta 3200.

 

[Anon Ymous]

Here is a comparison of some developers for Delta 3200.

And of all developers tested, Atomal is the one giving the best speed.
Marginally 800ISO

 

[Rudeofus]

The speed tests shown on this page may be a bit unfair to Delta 3200. The tester tried to create normal contrast in the lower part of the H&D curve, which is not the correct mode of operation for this film. AAMOF the Atomal 49 test gave higher contrast than the TMAX developer test, which may well explain the higher measured speed. I do like the Atomal 49 grain and sharpness, though, in this test image.

 

[Lachlan Young]

The tester tried to create normal contrast in the lower part of the H&D curve, which is not the correct mode of operation for this film.

Strongly agree here - if you develop Delta 3200 to a 0.6 average gradient, the gamma in the shadows may be closer to 0.7 and to 0.5 in the highlights because of the curve behaviour.