Ilford DD-X

[rrusso]

I've only used Rodinal since getting back into film, and I've stuck mainly to HP5 and Kentmere. I like the results just fine.

I just bought some bulk Delta 100 to branch out and have some finer-grained fun. Ilford's recommended developer for Delta 100 is DD-X, so I bought a liter bottle, which is a concentrate.

It's designed to be a one-shot developer at 1+4, which will give about 16 rolls per liter. This works out to be roughly 5x the cost compared to Rodinal. Now, that's ok, it's not the cost I'm concerned about, but Ilford does say (but do not recommend) that you can reuse the working solution by increasing the times (as long as it's used within 24 hours).

My question is, have any of you done this and gotten acceptable results?

I typically develop 2-4 rolls per session, and I'd hate to be wasteful if it's unnecessary.

 

[markbarendt]

Yes, I've done it and it worked just fine.

 

[Michael W]

I've used it at 1+9 which takes longer but gives good results.

 

[pentaxuser]

I couldn't see any mention of using the solution within 24 hours. If I have understood the Ilford instructions you make up 1 litre of working solution i.e. 200 mls of stock DDX diluted with 800mls of water(1+4) to make one litre. Having done 1 film(say 250-300mls of working strength solution) for the standard time you then pour it back into the unused 750 mls mix it together and then use 250mls for the second film but add 10% to the time and so forth until the 10th film. Then discard the whole 1 litre. For the next 10 films you make up another 1 litre working strength and repeat the process. At 50 films DDX is till far from the cheapest developer but it brings the price per film down by quite a bit

I would have thought that if you can re-use 1 litre of working strength for 10 films then 2-4 especially if done in one session should be well within the limits of safety. What Ilford doesn't give any indication of is how long a working strength solution of 1 litre will last. If the working strength solution is in a full-to-the-brim bottle then it is only subject to air for the duration of the development time when 250ml has been removed and if a squirt of gas is added each time 250ml is drawn off then the 1L working strength solution is subject to almost zero air for the duration of its life.

If this is the case then how much quicker does 1L of working strength solution deteriorate than 1L of stock as delivered by Ilford?

I suppose the only real test is try a clip test each time, note when this fails and then note how long the working strength has lasted. Obviously if there is a long interval between uses, gauging the time the solution has lasted is a bit problematical but if you develop say weekly then it would seem you can work out fairly accurately what the life of working strength solution is.

While Mark Berendt has re-used DDX successfully I wonder if anyone has conducted such a test to "exhaustion" so to speak?

pentaxuser

 

[Peter Schrager]

don't reuse.. these are one shot developers; besides don't you want repeatable results?/
Tmax developer from Kodak is the same and cheaper...I just started using it for Foma200 and it works beautiful
you want economy? go with Xtol the best all around developer and gives you full speed and economy
best, peter

 

[pentaxuser]

I have just seen the reference to 24 hrs which is that working solution shouldn't be kept for longer than this. If DDX working solution really goes bad this quickly then unless you have more than 5 films to do at once it looks as if it would be almost as economical to use 50mls stock each time(200ml for 4 films) and then throw away as to use 1L of working solution for say 4 films and then throw away. It might be possible to make up 500ml of working solution (100ml of stock) for 5 or less films but Ilford gives no indication of added time for 500ml of working solution as opposed to 1L.

Anyone for instance making up 5 litres of working solution and developing 50 films in 24 hours must be relatively unusual.

pentaxuser

 

[markbarendt]

don't reuse.. these are one shot developers; besides don't you want repeatable results?/
Tmax developer from Kodak is the same and cheaper...I just started using it for Foma200 and it works beautiful
you want economy? go with Xtol the best all around developer and gives you full speed and economy
best, peter

See page 9 of Ilford's instructions.

The quality/consistency difference IME is insignificant.

 

[faberryman]

DDX one shot is $0.85/roll. If money is an issue, you can replenish and get the cost down somewhat, You do have to keep track of the number of rolls you have processed and adjust development times accordingly, the diluted solution has a limited shelf life, and as Ilford states, image quality will be reduced slightly. Of course, it's your call, but I use it one shot for consistency.

 

[pentaxuser]

I wonder if Ilford's recommendation of no more than 24 hours working strength developer assumes that once diluted to working strength it is in preparation for immediate or almost immediate uses so that precautions are unlikely to be taken to exclude air i.e. as would be the case for tray developers for papers where 24 hours is often quoted as maximum safe time before discard.

Clearly water is present in DDX stock but this lasts a lot longer than 24 hours so is it more water in working strength that reduces its time to 24 hours and if so why or is it linked my assumption of Ilford's assumption of how working strength DDX will be kept?

In an air excluded environment 24 hours for DDX at 1+4 seems very conservative.

As a related "aside" where does 1+9 come from and how was it arrived at? I note it is seen in the MDC so Is this from enthusiasts' trial and error methods. 1+9 is mentioned in the spec sheets for LC 29 but not as far as I could see for DDX.

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[markbarendt]

The biggest air problem is introduced during the first use.

Air in the water used to dilute and the dilution process are also big.

 

[rrusso]

don't reuse.. these are one shot developers; besides don't you want repeatable results?/
Tmax developer from Kodak is the same and cheaper...I just started using it for Foma200 and it works beautiful
you want economy? go with Xtol the best all around developer and gives you full speed and economy
best, peter

No, economy isn't a major factor for me. It's just that Ilford gives a reuse guide using a 1 liter working solution, but the tech sheet has some caveats. I just wanted to know if anyone had done it, and what their experience was. No biggie to just use it one-shot, as I knew that when I bought it.

I have just seen the reference to 24 hrs which is that working solution shouldn't be kept for longer than this. If DDX working solution really goes bad this quickly then unless you have more than 5 films to do at once it looks as if it would be almost as economical to use 50mls stock each time(200ml for 4 films) and then throw away as to use 1L of working solution for say 4 films and then throw away. It might be possible to make up 500ml of working solution (100ml of stock) for 5 or less films but Ilford gives no indication of added time for 500ml of working solution as opposed to 1L.

Anyone for instance making up 5 litres of working solution and developing 50 films in 24 hours must be relatively unusual.

pentaxuser

Well, I was thinking that, using Ilford's 1 liter example, there's a lot more unused solution in the bottle than in the tank (300ml, in my case using a Paterson tank), then you pour it back in, mixing the two. But to make up 500ml of working solution, there'd be more in the tank than in the bottle. So, the exhausted portion of the used solution (whatever that happens to be - I guess that'd depend on the negatives) has much less unused "clean" solution to mix with. Using the 1 liter method, the mixing is much smoother/gradual, so I'd think that's the safest way to go.

DDX one shot is $0.85/roll. If money is an issue, you can replenish and get the cost down somewhat, You do have to keep track of the number of rolls you have processed and adjust development times accordingly, the diluted solution has a limited shelf life, and as Ilford states, image quality will be reduced slightly. Of course, it's your call, but I use it one shot for consistency.

As I stated in my original post, the cost isn't a deal-killer, but I just think it's foolish to waste the solution if there's no noticeable change by following Ilford's guidelines. I was hoping someone would say something like "Yeah, it works, but based on my experience, you should keep it within 4-6 rolls". Or something along those lines.

Oh, and regarding the Kodak alternative....

Besides just liking their products better, I'd rather give Ilford my business.

 

[pentaxuser]

. I was hoping someone would say something like "Yeah, it works, but based on my experience, you should keep it within 4-6 rolls". Or something along those lines.

.

Well markberendt confirmed he did it but didn't give details. You might want to explore exactly what he did. My point was that if you do a maximum of 4 films in one session then you use say 4 x50ml of DDX for a 250ml tank as one shot each time. If you do 4 films on the re-use basis you use 200ml of DDX for 1L of working solution and then have to dump the rest of the working solution so there is no saving and you run the risk, albeit a very, very small one that the problems Ilford cite could arise

The key to re-use is how long after 24 hours does the 1L working solution last? I have no idea and it seems that no-one else here has tried it.. If it were me and I were anxious to find things out I'd use 1L of working solution for 4 films then do a clip test every 24 hours to track the efficacy of the remaining working solution. You lose nothing that way except some clips of film and time to carry out the test. You may discover something that none of us here know for sure

If you do try this let us know the results of the clip tests, Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[M Carter]

My thoughts for DD-X - tested a fair amount but not extensively.

It's a very good developer for retaining film speed (shadow and low-mids detail). It's not a compensating dev, so there's (to my knowledge) no "creative" uses for dilution.

It's a very "clean" dev, easy on the grain, especially if you're used to Rodinal or HC-110. But, it doesn't bring any mojo to the party - if you use Rodinal for that hard-to-describe "something" it seems to bring, you may not like it as much. Testing would be in order though, you may find that shooting at a different ISO than for Rodinal works best, and you'd want your dev times to work for that ISO. I'd bracket, snip, and develop a few times, and judge by final output (IE printing or scanning, whatever you do) vs. eyeballing a neg. Just keep in mind that when processing short strips, agitation is much more efficient.

That said - when you need speed, it's impressive. I strongly dislike Delta 3200's grain structure for most work - to me it's like wet popcorn mush and is detail destroying. DD-X does make the most of Delta though. But, pushing HP5+ to the 1200-1600 range, DD-X can be a pleasant and impressive surprise. It's damn good and would be my go-to if I needed to shoot in a dark environment. Much sharper image rendering and detail in my tests than Delta.

I've tested it at 1+7 and found you just need more time than 1+4. I've tested fairly empirically, with blown up print sections, locked-off enlarger, etc., and found no tonality differences to my eye (I don't own a densitometer though). So yes, you can make it last longer with no negative results, you just need to chop up a roll and find the optimal time for a given film.

I've read the advice for re-use, something like "2 rolls at 1+4 OK, then add 10% time for the 3rd roll" and so on. Never tried this - I only pull the trigger if I'm pretty sure I'm going to want to print the image, so I don't blow through tons of film, and the film I do shoot is a bit more "precious" to me with that mindset. Personally, I'd treat it as a one-shot for those reasons, just my .02, YMMV, we all have different needs and processes.

 

[Fraunhofer]

I have used DD-X to develop several films in one session (few hours) and just followed the specs by Ilford to increase development time and I did not notice any major drawbacks.

 

[markbarendt]

Well markberendt confirmed he did it but didn't give details. You might want to explore exactly what he did. My point was that if you do a maximum of 4 films in one session then you use say 4 x50ml of DDX for a 250ml tank as one shot each time. If you do 4 films on the re-use basis you use 200ml of DDX for 1L of working solution and then have to dump the rest of the working solution so there is no saving and you run the risk, albeit a very, very small one that the problems Ilford cite could arise

The key to re-use is how long after 24 hours does the 1L working solution last? I have no idea and it seems that no-one else here has tried it.. If it were me and I were anxious to find things out I'd use 1L of working solution for 4 films then do a clip test every 24 hours to track the efficacy of the remaining working solution. You lose nothing that way except some clips of film and time to carry out the test. You may discover something that none of us here know for sure

If you do try this let us know the results of the clip tests, Thanks

pentaxuser

Well I just followed the instructions.

IMO since I followed the directions I saw absolutely no evidence of loss of quality.

 

[rrusso]

Well ok then. I developed my first roll yesterday and scanned today.

This is really nice stuff, both the Delta 100 and DD-X. I used the one-shot method and was very strict about it (see my other thread).

Just a bunch of stupid snaps around the house (the dog, the cat, the garden, etc.) to get my feet wet and see how it's "supposed" to look at box speed. I like it a lot, and can see having to buy another bulk roll in the not-so-distant future.

Thanks again for the replies all.

 

[Svenedin]

I like DD-X and Delta 100 but now use Xtol 1+1, one shot for Delta 100. For Delta 3200 the results with DD-X are very good and I have pushed Delta 3200 to 12,500 and still been able to print to 8"x10" without grain being terrible. I've never tried to re-use DD-X.

 

[thuggins]

I don't recall seeing anything about 24 hrs when I mixed up DD-X. As I recall, I developed about 25 rolls over the course of a couple of months on a single mix. The last roll looked as good as the first.

My kit is currently set up for E-6, so it will be a while before I do some more B&W. But based on my experience the shelf life is measured in weeks, at least, if not months. I think the comments above for it being in an open tray for 24 hrs are closer to the point.

 

[90mm_tony]

any new updated on this thread. looking for persons who have develop film with pre-wash and processed it normally. any results on negative quality from one sheet of film to the other.