Ilford Delta 100 at ISO 250 Question????

[JW PHOTO]

I was at my local Camera store the other day and picked up some Ilford 120 film. I ask for some 3 rolls Ilford Delta 100, 2 rolls PanF+ and 4 rolls of HP5+. When I got home I discovered I had been slipped 4 rolls of Delta 400 instead of HP5+. To make a long story short I took what I thought was two of the rolls of Delta 400 to the Clare, MI. St. Patrick's Day parade. I ran the first roll and loaded the second into my Rollei 3.5E, but didn't notice that I had mistakenly loaded a roll of Delta 100 instead. Of course I did notice it when I removed that second roll, which was to late to set the correct ISO. That roll of Delta 100 was shot at ISO 250, which is what I was rating the Delta 400 at. The day was pretty heavy overcast with just a few breaks in the clouds. My question is what should I do for development? For developers I have Perceptol, Pyrocat-MC, both Wimberley's WD2D+ and WD2H+ and Rodinal ready to go. I also can whip up some D76/ID11 or some Ethols UFG. I've never tried pushing or pulling Delta 100 or Delta 400 for that matter and would like a little advice as to how to get the best out of this up-rated Delta 100 at ISO 250 with the developers on hand. Starting times would kinda help too, but I could work on those myself with the spare roll I have. Yes, I did some searching, but didn't come up with much. Thanks in advance, John W

 

[Sal Santamaura]

None of the developers you've got, unfortunately. I'd suggest XTOL or DD-X.

 

[K-G]

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

 

[Anadred]

I know that GSD-10 developer is not in your list but I would highly recommend using it if you have a chance to get it. I have good experience with Delta 100@200 in GSD-10 1+9; 22-23 minutes semistand. It gives true one stop speed increase.

 

[Anadred]

1+9 using original, less concentrated, formula.

 

[zanxion72]

Try FX-1. It increases the film speed by almost one stop. This way you will be spot on.

 

[JW PHOTO]

None of the developers you've got, unfortunately. I'd suggest XTOL or DD-X.

I could whip-up some Mytol in just minutes. Suppose to be just like Xtol, but I have never used it. John W

 

[JW PHOTO]

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

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

 

[K-G]

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

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

 

[RalphLambrecht]

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.

 

[JW PHOTO]

+1 strt with a 20 % increase in development time and take it from there.

Thanks Ralph and Karl,
I like Delta 100 with my normal development times so I'll give it a whirl at 20% more. Delta 400 is going to be a new experience for me since I usually use HP5+. Maybe I'll like it? Sometimes mistakes turn out to be in our favor! John W

 

[Sal Santamaura]

None of the developers you've got, unfortunately. I'd suggest XTOL or DD-X.

I could whip-up some Mytol in just minutes. Suppose to be just like Xtol, but I have never used it...

Assuming it does work just like XTOL, your best bet (with either the "real thing" or Mytol) would be 1+3.

In my experience, DD-X is optimum for this situation. I actually ended up with EI 250 when trying Delta 100 and DD-X. Many will tell you that personal EI results vary and can't be directly compared, but mine are based on a Pentax digital spotmeter that's spot on with lab-developed transparency film exposures, calibrated shutter speeds and the classic 0.1 over fb+f as measured by a calibrated densitometer.

Delta 100 negatives I've gotten from these two developers are very close to each other. In XTOL 1+3, my EI was 160 and the grain/acutance was ever so slightly better under 15X magnification. In your situation, the one-time expense for DD-X will be worth it to avoid underexposure. I suggest trying Mytol/XTOL in the future if you decide to standardize on Delta 100.

 

[JW PHOTO]

Well, they (the Delta 100 negatives) are hanging to dry and they look pretty good. I'll scan some tomorrow and post them. I didn't use any of the developers that I had on hand or were mentioned here. Instead, I mixed and used Crawley's FX-37 1+5 for 7.5 minutes @ 68F. I've used it before with Delta 100 and figured I could at least get around ISO 200, which looks pretty close to what I've got. I did the roll of Delta 400 in FX-37 1+3 and they don't look half as good. We'll see how things straight scan tomorrow and then I'll wet print some tomorrow night. John W

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

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!

 

[JW PHOTO]

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!

Tom,
I'm definitely going to do my next roll of D400 in Pyrocat-MC and might as well do the D100 roll I have left the same way. It's just that I know FX-37 and Delta 100 pretty good and thought I could push it just a little better in FX-37. See what you think tomorrow when I post some of the steam locomotive shots. John W

 

[JW PHOTO]

Well, they are not perfect, but they are pretty much "straight" scans with no tweaking. Some are from Delta 400 in FX-37 at 1+3 and the rest are from Delta 100 rated at ISO250 in FX-37 1+5. The shots were from Clare, MI. St. Patty's Day parade and train ride. I'll wet print a couple either tonight or in the morning. The D100 negatives shot at ISO250 seem to have pretty darn good detail in the shadows of the train and when I played with curve in scanning, but these have had no curves or shadow/highlight work.

 

[JW PHOTO]

Here's two more and the last one is a "must stop at if in Clare" type of spot. Cop's and Doughnuts is famous and ships around the world. Well, at least I know they ship to our servicemen and women overseas.

 

[DREW WILEY]

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.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

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.

 

[JW PHOTO]

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.

Drew,
These are straight scans from my Nikon 8000 and have no sprucing up. I could have popped these up in the scan software or post-scan, but wanted to see how they came out without being doctored. Printing with my Ilford Multi-grade head at 2 or 2 1/2 will be the real test and I'll do that tomorrow. Yes, the shadows are a little under, but I do see pretty good detail in the negative. None of these were important shots and it was really a test run on a Rolleiflex 3.5C I rebuilt. John W

 

[JW PHOTO]

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.

Thomas,
Yes, if it were the day before I would have ended up in much worse shape. It was a pretty dreary day that's for sure, but we had a good time anyway. John W

 

[pentaxuser]

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

 

[JW PHOTO]

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

pentaxuser,
I took an incident reading at ISO 250 for the train shots and a couple shots are bracketed also. That explains why a few look better than others, but other than that it was still under-exposed. I'll post how they wet print tomorrow. John W

 

[DREW WILEY]

The good news with a characteristic curve like Delta has is that if you're a bit underexposed, you'll still get something recorded down there, because the toe is quite gradual and doesn't drop off a cliff. The bad news is that you will land the shadows where the curve rises very slowly,
so the gradation between the shadow values is not particularly obvious. Depending on the specific subject and conditions, this is one of
those scenarios where the glass can either be classified as half-empty or half-full. It's just good to know, so you can plan and develop your
shots accordingly if shadow detail is important to you.

 

[flavio81]

JW PHOTO, they look just fine, thanks for the scans, this test is valuable to us who might want to push Delta 100 in the future.

From your tests, i would have no fears to use it at 400 if needed (for example, when I only have D100 in the bag.)