JW PHOTO
Allowing Ads
None of the developers you've got, unfortunately. I'd suggest XTOL or DD-X.
In the Massive Development Chart there are a few notes on Delta 100 at 200 ISO with D76/ID11. Check the link.
Karl-Gustaf
http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.php?Film=Delta+100&Developer=&mdc=Search&TempUnits=C
My experience of Delta 100 is that it is an absolutely top class film if exposed and developed in the right way. Sometimes highlights in bright sunlit scenes have a tendency to be blown out if you are not careful with the development. The type of motifs you describe should not cause any problems if you use extended development time.Karl, I saw that in my search and it leads me to believe that Delta 100 have pretty good exposure latitude, but I've never tried it at other speeds about ISO 80 actually. I'm starting to think seriously about 20% more time in Pyrocat-MC. Also, most of the pictures are of a vintage (jet black) steam locomotive in cloudy conditions, if that helps anyone. John W
+1 strt with a 20 % increase in development time and take it from there.My experience of Delta 100 is that it is an absolutely top class film if exposed and developed in the right way. Sometimes highlights in bright sunlit scenes have a tendency to be blown out if you are not careful with the development. The type of motifs you describe should not cause any problems if you use extended development time.
Karl-Gustaf
+1 strt with a 20 % increase in development time and take it from there.
None of the developers you've got, unfortunately. I'd suggest XTOL or DD-X.
Assuming it does work just like XTOL, your best bet (with either the "real thing" or Mytol) would be 1+3.I could whip-up some Mytol in just minutes. Suppose to be just like Xtol, but I have never used it...
Try shooting another roll of D100 and use Pyrocat that you have at 1+1+100 with very little agitation. 68 degrees, agitation full first minute, set the tank down and let sit until 30 minutes, where you agitate 10 seconds, and then let it sit for another hour. See how that goes. If you find you need more contrast, develop the film that you exposed by mistake longer. If you need less, develop shorter time.
Good luck!
On my screen the shadow detail is poorly differentiated though discernable. Maybe that's a scanning or web issue, but muddied shadows with poor gradation is exactly what I'd expect with underexposed Delta. You'll get "something", but will also inevitably sacrifice something in exchange.
I think the fact that it was an overcast day saved your butt, if shadow detail is what you're after. Personally, I always thought shadow detail was overrated, but it's easier to tone down shadows while printing with a full range negative, and make it look good, rather than intentionally shooting negatives with thin shadows. You never know when you might change your aesthetic.
It seems to me that in those shots that lack some detail, the reason may be connected to the shots being "contre jour" and the large area of bright light from the sky is resulting in an under-exposure which would still have been the case even at box speed.
What I draw from these shots is that on overcast days and without the problem of "contre jour" D100 at 250 is OK and depending on the need for speed might even be a sensible strategy
pentaxuser
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?