Ilford chemicals: choosing developer for Delta 400

redbandit · Feb 5, 2023

How do you select the right developer for Delta 400 when just about everything you find online using search engines for "Delta 400 developed in" are all leading to the same heavily photo shopped and edited images?

Ian Grant · Feb 5, 2023

You could start with Ilford's Delta 400 data sheet, and recommended times. It's an excellent film and Ilford list "Choosing the best Ilford Developer for the job".

Ian

Sirius Glass · Feb 5, 2023

XTOL does a great job developing Delta 400 and gives it a bit of a speed boost.

Alan9940 · Feb 5, 2023

I use DD-X with Delta 100 and its a great combo! I don't shoot Delta 400, but I can't imagine DD-X wouldn't give acceptable results.

Craig · Feb 5, 2023

Much like choosing any other developer, what effect are you looking for? What do you already have and/or can easily obtain? There is no point in recommending something that you'd have to fly to Japan to buy for example.

albireo · Feb 5, 2023

redbandit said:
How do you select the right developer for Delta 400 when just about everything you find online using search engines for "Delta 400 developed in" are all leading to the same heavily photo shopped and edited images?

How did you choose the right developer for a film back in your days, when the most common output for a negative was a wet print? A lot of heavy editing happened back then, too.

It's a big world out there. Sounds like you might need to experiment.

Ian Grant · Feb 5, 2023

If I didn't use Pyrocat HD for all my films I would go back to Xtol replenished, or use Ilford's recommendation DD-X.

I would not do a Google search to misinform me

Ian

Sirius Glass · Feb 5, 2023

Ian Grant said:
If I didn't use Pyrocat HD for all my films I would go back to Xtol replenished, or use Ilford's recommendation DD-X.

I would not do a Google search to misinform me

Ian

I have found that I can get lost faster with a GPS than with a map alone.

retina_restoration · Feb 5, 2023

It depends what you want from a negative. Is de-emphasizing grain the most important consideration, or is sharpness the thing you're after? Are you wanting to get the best range of values from the film?
Your choice of developer will influence a variety of film characteristics, and you have to choose in order to optimize for the trait(s) you're seeking. There are no "bad" developers - only developers that help achieve your goal, or make it more difficult.

That said, the Pyro developers are wonderful paired with Delta 400. So is Xtol. My current favorite is Photographer Formulary FA-1027, which gives full film speed, excellent acutance and a rich tonal scale that doesn't sacrifice either shadows or highlights.

MattKing · Feb 5, 2023

The last place I would go to determine the appropriateness of a developer for a particular film would be some unknown person's uploaded internet image. There is almost nothing that you can tell about those sort of issues from those sort of images.
There are just too many unknowns between the negatives and your screen.
If you have seen someone's prints, and know how they appear, and have reason to be able to rely upon their judgment, and have seen their uploads as well, and can recognize that their uploads are fairly faithful to their prints, then it is a bit different.
The same sort of applies if you have seen their negatives, and see how they do uploads.

redbandit · Feb 5, 2023

right now I have the last 2 liters of mixed up eco pro, and 4 new bottles of R09 One shot rodinal waiting to be used.

I was seeing the use of ilford chemical stock as a mans to get improvements in performance for low light filming. and via use of my macro bellows

ghart · Feb 5, 2023

I suggest that the OP could let us know for what purposes he wishes to use this particular film, and what he means by "right" developer. FWIW I have, for many years, used this film for landscape in particular, with its extended red sensitivity giving to my eyes good "colouration" to the tones. Again FWIW I use half-strength ID-11 (D76 is the same), at ~85% of the Ilford recommended time for the appropriate temperature. This is after exposing the film at EI 200, and using a spotmeter, thus avoiding the underexposure that is common with in-camera meters. At 20 deg C I develop for 8 min, inverting the drum 4x once per minute. As the Ilford data sheet shows, temperature is critical; any variation more than 0.5 deg C needs a time adjustment. Just my two-pennorth…

albireo · Feb 5, 2023

Kerry Barringer · Feb 5, 2023

You are lucky. The Ilford Delta films develop well in most modern developers.
I find DD-X is excellent and easy to use. It may be the best to start with.
Arista film developer is very good, easy to use, conveniently available in a small size, and lower priced.
Xtol is very good and economical, but you need to mix a relatively large amount which has a limited shelf-life. An advantage, Xtol is probably has the lowest environmental impact of all modern developers.
D-23 replenished is excellent, but you have to mix it from the raw chemicals.
I have not had good luck with Rodinal, Ilfosol, or monobaths like Df96 when developing Delta films.

aparat · Feb 5, 2023

You already got a lot of great advice in this thread. I will just add that Ilford's data sheets are exemplary, as @Ian Grant suggested, so read those. Also, XTOL is a very easy developer to start with and, as @Sirius Glass points out, it does give you a slight speed boost with Delta 400 and very nice tonality (to my eye). I am a late XTOL adopter, having spent most of my life developing in D-76 (or its clones), and I am impressed with how easy it is to obtain good, clean, even, repeatable results with XTOL.

Sirius Glass · Feb 5, 2023

aparat said:
You already got a lot of great advice in this thread. I will just add that Ilford's data sheets are exemplary, as @Ian Grant suggested, so read those. Also, XTOL is a very easy developer to start with and, as @Sirius Glass points out, it does give you a slight speed boost with Delta 400 and very nice tonality (to my eye). I am a late XTOL adopter, having spent most of my life developing in D-76 (or its clones), and I am impressed with how easy it is to obtain good, clean, even, repeatable results with XTOL.

What attracted me to try XTOL is that I had heard that it is very forgiving. And it is.

kozesluk · Feb 6, 2023

DD-X works very well with Delta 400.
If you like to experiment with particular characteristics, FX-37 is interesting ("sharper" than DD-X), Pyrocat-HD gives great results too. I would (personally) just stay away from Rodinal - I've never made that combination work well in terms of tonality or sharpness (or anything really).

Steven Lee · Feb 6, 2023

I used to have a love affair with Delta 400. Had been bulk loading and shooting it non-stop for 3 years.
My favorite general purpose developers for Delta 400, sorted by awesomeness:

Xtol
ID-11

And the following two will give you a crisp & sharp image with well-defined but also tightly packed grain. Again: the grain is actually fine, but it's well-defined and therefore more visible. Sometimes I crave this look vs Xtol smoothness, it's a personal preference thing

Ilfosol 3
Rodinal

Developers to avoid:

Ilfotec HC
DD-X

Delta 400's grain loses its charm with both. It starts to look rough and irregular. The weirdest thing about Delta 400 is how its grain looks completely different in different developers. In fact, the grain character changes quickly with exposure too. But if you don't scan at high resolution or don't wet print large this shouldn't be a concern.

Remanton · Feb 6, 2023

Perceptol 1+3 13 min 24°C EI200 Ilford agitation

brian steinberger · Feb 6, 2023

I’d recommend starting with ID-11 diluted 1:1.

titrisol · Feb 6, 2023

Delta400 in DD-X/Microphen is beautiful
ID-11 / D76 works fine a well.

I haven't tried it in Xtol but it should also work fine.

Agulliver · Feb 6, 2023

I've had good results in ID-11 stock, shooting at box speed and 1600. Most recently (December 2022) I shot a roll at 1600 and developed in Microphen which was perfectly good...but I think I prefer Delta 400 in ID-11.

faberryman · Feb 6, 2023

It depends. Why don't you describe the deficiencies you perceive with your current developer.

Keith Tapscott. · Feb 6, 2023

I would use ID-11 stock solution partly because Ilford says it provides the optimum balance of speed, grain, sharpness and gradation and partly because I would welcome the shorter development time with that particular combination.

Melvin J Bramley · Feb 6, 2023

DDX or Xtol, both give similar results.

At the end of the day my film / developer choices are decided on availability.
Xtol is not readily available in this area, BC, Canada.
Ilford products have a reliable supplier network.

TB

Ilford chemicals: choosing developer for Delta 400

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency