• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Ilford DD-X question.

rubyfalls

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Aug 5, 2013
Messages
169
Location
USA
Format
Medium Format
So I'm on a DDX kick. Yep - I'm a creature of habit. But I'm also a creature of limited funds. Does anyone have any opinions on using a different dilution or re-use? I see an option for a 1+9 dilution on my massive dev chart; didn't know if that was for a different version of DDX or if I could use mine as such.

Otherwise, what do you think gets the closest to DDX for less $$$?

Thanks in advance for you sage insight -- I've got 14 rolls waiting to be developed, but am in no hurry.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I have only ever tried DDX at 1+4 but have never tried 1+9 but it appears from enough posts to be possible with longer development times. I changed to Xtol on cost grounds and think this to be as close to DDX as to be the equivalent.

It is unfortunately expensive stuff and in my experience the extra cost isn't justified by extra benefits

pentaxuser
 
I haven't tried DD-X at 1+9 but I have used it over and over per Ilford's instructions, it woks very nicely.
 
I think DDX is similar in formulation to Kodak Tmax Developer. Like DDX, Tmax has a standard dilution of 1+4, but it works great diluted 1+7 and 1+9. Kodak publishes times for Tmax 100 and Tmax 400 for the 1+7 and 1+9 times, and I have extrapolated from them to find 1+7 times for Tri-X and Delta 3200. Generally I have found that the time for 1+7 is about 1.5x the time used for the standard 1+4 dilution. I usually use it 1+7; I haven't used 1+9 in many years, though I remember it working well. I'd try your DDX at 1+7 at 1.5x the time you use for 1+4 as a starting point.
 
I like f76+ aka arista premium. Despite the name it's more chemically similar to xtol/ddx than d76. Inexpensive as well. I like it for the tmax films
 

No experience with DD-X but with T-Max and T-Max RS I didn't like what looked like compressed midtones at 1+9. I tend to use the times for 1+4 and dilute 1+5. I think I'd be fine with 1+7 but 1+9 was just too far for my tastes. YMMV of course.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Two things I think is important to remember here:

1) Is that any time you start with a fresh recipe, you normally need to fine tune exposure, development, agitation... (Extra time or agitation may have solved Roger's mid-tone complaint.)

2) Is to understand how important the roll in question is, can you risk that roll in an untried recipe.
 
I tweaked the time for preferred overall contrast. I think any change would have affected that too much. Results weren't bad I just preferred the results with T-Max developer slightly stronger. As seldom as I get time to do darkroom work I'm not worried about the cost of developer for the small amounts I use.
 
I've never used T-Max developer, but I second pentaxuser's recommendation for XTOL. It's the closest to DD-X I've seen and extremely cost-efficient, even if you don't replenish like so many do here.
 
jeff786 said:
I like f76+ aka arista premium. Despite the name it's more chemically similar to xtol/ddx than d76. Inexpensive as well. I like it for the tmax films
Click to expand...

My F76+ just arrived and I'm chomping at the bit to try it, but have to wait until Sunday. JohnW
 

Yeah - these are rolls I can't experiment with, so I'll probably stick with DDX 1+4 - at least for the D3200 rolls. And probably the tri-x, although I really like tri-x in perceptol, as well.

I'm interested in the arista - I've never used it before. So far I've used perceptol, Microphen, DDX, and ID11. I wasn't thrilled with the ID11, but admittedly didn't prep it the best - pretty sure I was under temp with it.

Thanks all!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

I like to use both Perceptol and ID11 diluted 1:3 myself. Some folks complain about the looooooong developing times at those dilutions, but I always liked longer times myself. With longer times a missed agitation cycle or dump time isn't very critical and won't ruin a roll/sheet of film. When I first used HC-110 I didn't like it's short developing times and eventually went to a more diluted mix. To be honest I could live with ID-11 or Perceptol as my only developer if I had to, but I sure would miss Rodinal. Life is still pretty good in the film world. Not as many choices as we used to have, but we still have enough. Sunday I'm cracking the cap on Clayton's F76+ for the first time and will post what I discover. JohnW
 
Perceptol and ID11 work very well in most circumstances, although I use Kodak XTOL. I've not got better results with liquid concentrates although started off with DD-X about 10 years ago and achieved fairly good results for a beginner so the developer must have its qualities. In the UK we have a product Fotospeed FD-10 which dilutes 1+9; I wonder if this is similar to the F76+ developer?

Tom
 

Looking back at the developers I've played with, D-76, Xtol, RolloPyro, WD2D+, and DD-X I can honestly say I had enough success with each to say they are all very workable.

What makes DD-X my favorite is first- it reliably does a really good job of getting good speed and good quality out of every film I've used with it and second- the simplicity, the math and measuring are easy to do in one beaker.
 

It might be! Since Clayton makes Freestyle's Arista Premium Liquid for them it just might be they make Fotospeed FD-10 for a new label. The starting dilution is 1:9 also. Do you have any starting times for some films so we can compare? If times are the same then it's cinch to be Clayton F76+. I like Xtol and DD-X too, with a slight edge going to DD-X, but you're splitting hairs on that match. JohnW
 

There is a pdf chart here: http://www.focalpointphotographic.co.uk/pdf/FD10.pdf - even if not made by the same company there are certain classes of developers and results can surely only differ so much.

Tom
 
RalphLambrecht said:
I switvhed to self mixing not based on cost butbased on increasing knowledge and darkroom fun.
Click to expand...

It is real practical with a cheap mini scale resolution of 0.01 gm, one even do any phenidone dev, the acid fix and hypo clear as well, restrainer for warm or cold prints. The only problem is should I use distilled water or not, (havn't yet)?
 
Ilford instructions are perfect if your thermometer is right, developer fresh, and you use a diffusion enlarger. Take 10% off for condenser.
 
markbarendt said:
Looking to be a chemist when you grow up?
Click to expand...

Yes, and I regret not having paid better attention in chemical class, but at that time, my brain was side-tracked by body chemistry and Helmut Newton,which bothturned out to be a major photographic influence for me.
 
Xmas said:
It is real practical with a cheap mini scale resolution of 0.01 gm, one even do any phenidone dev, the acid fix and hypo clear as well, restrainer for warm or cold prints. The only problem is should I use distilled water or not, (havn't yet)?
Click to expand...

I use distilled water(can't hurt, right?)but my main problem wasless than pure sodium sulphite.In my case, it must have contained metal ions, which the development activityand I got nothing but clear film.::confused:
 
RalphLambrecht said:
Yes, and I regret not having paid better attention in chemical class, but at that time, my brain was side-tracked by body chemistry and Helmut Newton,which bothturned out to be a major photographic influence for me.
Click to expand...

I was more interested in biology back then too.
 
I too recently switched to DD-X after years of using XTol. I still like XTol a lot but Ilford Delta 3200 does look the best I've seen it in Ddx. I'm going to use it for a while and eat one less hamburger a week to be able to afford it.


I wish someone would figure out a home made DD-X, maybe even a syrupy very concentrated version!?
 
RalphLambrecht said:
I use distilled water(can't hurt, right?)but my main problem wasless than pure sodium sulphite.In my case, it must have contained metal ions, which the development activityand I got nothing but clear film.::confused:
Click to expand...

Confirmed but the faucet water is cheaper but very hard, not had any problems with any of my made up solutions. The big advantage is you can make up the stock volume you need for the tank you use.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register