ILFORD DD-X, Kodak T-Max, and Tetenal Ultrafin Plus

[Tom Kershaw]

I'm familiar with the characteristics of most developer types but with these 'dilute 1+4' concentrates for Delta or T-Max type films, I'm somewhat unclear as to whether the three products mentioned in the title are broadly comparable. I understand the Kodak product was developed to give the films a "push" in shadow detail; however ILFORD does or has promoted DD-X as being the most suitable ILFORD developer for the Delta films whereas as Kodak gives a range of options, suggesting XTOL as a best compromise. The Tetenal website doesn't give much away on the characteristics of Ultrafin Plus aside from 'designed for modern films'.

Tom

 

[Tom Kershaw]

DDX is similar to Tmax in my experience. Ilford does not recommend only DDX. DDX is the liquid recommendation for best overall image quality with Delta, defined by them as the optimal mix/tradeoffs of grain, accutance and film speed. With powders, Ilford provides additional recommendations like ID11 in various dilutions as a general purpose developer for optimal image quality balancing grain, accutance and film speed. They also recommend Perceptol and Microhpen powders, depending on what image characterstics and speed you're looking for.

I have never used Tetenal products so can't comment.

I did use DD-X but then moved onto other developers. These concentrates don't seem to get that much attention I guess because many people (myself included) are prepared to use more specialised liquid concentrates or mix powders.

Tom

 

[mcgrattan]

I've always had very consistent (and good quality) results from DD-X, especially with faster films and with 't-grain' or Delta emulsions. As it happens I've been trying T-Max dev recently but so far, I haven't really gotten on very well with it. I find it grainier than DD-X, and with higher contrast and a less pleasing tonality. However, I've only developed half a dozen rolls with the T-Max, so I'm hardly an expert!

I've also found Ilford's Ilfosol-3 to be a pretty good general all round liquid developer, and inexpensive too.

Matt

 

[Tom Kershaw]

I've always had very consistent (and good quality) results from DD-X, especially with faster films and with 't-grain' or Delta emulsions. As it happens I've been trying T-Max dev recently but so far, I haven't really gotten on very well with it. I find it grainier than DD-X, and with higher contrast and a less pleasing tonality. However, I've only developed half a dozen rolls with the T-Max, so I'm hardly an expert!

I've also found Ilford's Ilfosol-3 to be a pretty good general all round liquid developer, and inexpensive too.

Matt

Did you use T-max on the same films to achieve a similar contrast range?

Tom

 

[mcgrattan]

I used it with some of the same film. I mostly use Neopan 400, Acros, Ilford Pan-F and occasionally Delta 400 and HP5. I've also used TMX and TMY, although I can't be sure I've used both of those with DD-X or just with the TMax dev. So I've tried most of those in both developers -- certainly the Neopan 400, Acros and Pan-F several times in both developers. However, I'm not doing any kind of measurement or formal testing, so my assessment is purely impressionistic. My feeling is that the TMax developer produces higher contrast, which is not to my own personal taste.

It's also been a while since I did any enlarging, so I'm developing for use in a hybrid process [outside the scope of APUG, I know], so what counts as a 'good' result for me may not be appropriate for someone else.

 

[frednewman]

Hi Tom - I've been using Ilford DDX for many years. You will probable have to increase the dilution to 1+7. I process most films at 1+9 but my developing temperature is 75 degrees. In Arizona we have 85 to 90 degree cold water in the summer. Phil Davis did an article for our D-Max newsletter comparing 9 films with 5 different developers. DDX and D-76/ID-11 were the winners. DDX seems to give slightly higher film speeds than most developers and I prefer liquids to powders. I would recommend testing it because 1+4 as the recommend on the bottle is too strong.

Fred Newman

 

[Tom Kershaw]

Fred,

Thanks for reminding me that Phil Davis preferred DD-X. Is the D-Max newsletter article available to download?

Tom

PS) I do my film processing in a Jobo.

 

[frednewman]

Hi Tom

The D-Max Newsletters is available on the viewcamerastore web site. I will do free shipping when you mention you saw it on APUG.

Fred Newman

 

[frednewman]

Hi Michael R 1974

I did an article for Photo Techniques on the new 400 T-Max film processed in Ilford DDX developer and I do process at 75 degrees and found with a 5 minute presoak for 4x5 film in a Jobo processor I used a dilution of 1+12. When I did 4x5 T-Max film in the BTZS film processing tubes I used a dilution of 1+9. For 35mm 400 T-Max film I used 1+9 dilution with a 5 minute presoak before developing. I was quite amazed at the difference between presoak and no presoak, when I did the tests. The article was in the September/October 2009 issue in Photo Techniques - titled - Who Says Film is Dead? Kodak's New 400 T-Max-2 Film Shows an Old Dog Can Learn New Tricks.

The film testing procedure I use is the one described in Phil Davis's book Beyond the Zone System, 4th edition. I've been doing film testing this way since the early 1990's for customers with our film testing service. For an explanation of the BTZS film test go to the BTZS.org site and you can read articles by Phil Davis on film testing. I originally got involved in film testing out of frustration from bad negatives.

For the article I mentioned earlier Phil Davis had tested 9 4x5 films with 5 different developers and the dilutions he used were 1+6, 1+7, and 1+8 depending on the film.

Fred Newman