• 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 delta 3200 development with pyrocatHD

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
201,881
Messages
2,831,698
Members
101,001
Latest member
Jim R
Recent bookmarks
0

Willie Jan

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jun 11, 2004
Messages
950
Location
Best/The Netherlands
Format
4x5 Format
I want to start theathre work again (did it long time ago..)
The guys ask me every year when I come back photographing, because the digital work produced is not what it was with analog...

I want to use the ilford delta 3200. In the past I developed it with microphen, but since a long time I only use my own made pyrocat hd for 6x6 and 4x5.

My question is, has anyone experience using this film with pyrocat-hd?

Thanks.
 

mexipike

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
377
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Format
Med. Format RF
I have done it before and I think the results were quite excellent but I think you will be disappointed at how slow it makes that film. I think I was getting around ISO 640. For low light work I would stick to a regular non staining developer. I personally love delta 3200 in ddx.
 

jim appleyard

Subscriber
Allowing Ads
Joined
Nov 21, 2004
Messages
2,421
Location
glens falls, ny USA
Format
Multi Format
I did D3200 in P'Cat, but only got an EI of 800 with it. The images were ok to print, but I liked it in Diafine better and got an EI of 1600 with better contrast. The negs were a bit flat in P'Cat

Good ol' D-76, 1+0 can get you and EI of 6400 in needed, but you may have to dev it as tho' it had an EI of 12,500.
 

DREW WILEY

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jul 14, 2011
Messages
14,875
Format
8x10 Format
I use a different category of pyro - "PMK" and love the look with D3200; but I do rate it at 800. That's still plenty fast for handheld shooting.
 
Joined
Jan 21, 2003
Messages
15,715
Location
Switzerland
Format
Multi Format
I use a different category of pyro - "PMK" and love the look with D3200; but I do rate it at 800. That's still plenty fast for handheld shooting.

I'd expect Pyrocat to yield a bit more speed than that, but I would imagine D3200 in medium format with PMK would be delicious.

The notion above of flat negs with Delta 3200 - can you extend the developing time and get better contrast? That's what I would do if I didn't have enough contrast. I've used Delta 3200 with many different developers and have found I have to sort of kick it down the road quite a bit and develop it for a very long time in order to get the contrast I want out of the negatives.

With Pyrocat I would also consider very frequent agitation, in order to overcome the shy contrast and the slightly compensating action that Pyrocat yields.
 

jim appleyard

Subscriber
Allowing Ads
Joined
Nov 21, 2004
Messages
2,421
Location
glens falls, ny USA
Format
Multi Format
The notion above of flat negs with Delta 3200 - can you extend the developing time and get better contrast? That's what I would do if I didn't have enough contrast. I've used Delta 3200 with many different developers and have found I have to sort of kick it down the road quite a bit and develop it for a very long time in order to get the contrast I want out of the negatives.

With Pyrocat I would also consider very frequent agitation, in order to overcome the shy contrast and the slightly compensating action that Pyrocat yields.

Not when I shot it. I only did a couple of rolls (120) with this combo and if I increase the contrast, my highlights would burn out. I was shooting in an old barn with window light. The highlights were borderline, but the shadow areas came out a bit on the muddy side.. P'Cat was an ok combo, but Diafine was better. IMO.
 

pgomena

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jun 25, 2003
Messages
1,391
Location
Portland, Or
P3200 is an 800 ISO film, so getting 800 out of it is about right. I tried several rolls at 800 with Pyrocat-HD and also found that the negatives were a little flat when exposed in flat lighting situations. Exposing it at IS0 640 and giving it about 1.5-2 minutes more development would have perked things up a little. In contrasty lighting, I found it held highlights very well, which isn't too surprising if my results in flat light were a bit flat.
 
Joined
Jan 21, 2003
Messages
15,715
Location
Switzerland
Format
Multi Format
Not when I shot it. I only did a couple of rolls (120) with this combo and if I increase the contrast, my highlights would burn out. I was shooting in an old barn with window light. The highlights were borderline, but the shadow areas came out a bit on the muddy side.. P'Cat was an ok combo, but Diafine was better. IMO.

I don't quite understand. If you develop your negatives to the point of blocking up the highlights, obviously it's gone too far. But if you dial back development time to the negative density of where it doesn't block up, how can there not be enough contrast?

I always think about the printing paper when I think about contrast. The paper can handle a certain amount of negative contrast, low or high, and when you exceed the limits of the paper, you are out of range. If you take Tri-X, Pan-F+, and Delta 3200 and shoot them side by side to have similar shadow detail, and then develop them to similar total contrast, besides color rendition and grain, how can Delta 3200 be too low contrast?

Please help me understand. I'm not contesting what you say, I'm saying I might be missing something. I know you have a lot more experience than I, Jim, which is why I'm trying to understand.
 

zehner21

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
May 28, 2014
Messages
143
Location
Sardinia, IT
Format
Multi Format
P3200 is an 800 ISO film, so getting 800 out of it is about right. I tried several rolls at 800 with Pyrocat-HD and also found that the negatives were a little flat when exposed in flat lighting situations. Exposing it at IS0 640 and giving it about 1.5-2 minutes more development would have perked things up a little. In contrasty lighting, I found it held highlights very well, which isn't too surprising if my results in flat light were a bit flat.

?
I thought that in flat situations, the best thing to do was underexpose a little bit...
 

jim appleyard

Subscriber
Allowing Ads
Joined
Nov 21, 2004
Messages
2,421
Location
glens falls, ny USA
Format
Multi Format
I don't quite understand. If you develop your negatives to the point of blocking up the highlights, obviously it's gone too far. But if you dial back development time to the negative density of where it doesn't block up, how can there not be enough contrast?

I always think about the printing paper when I think about contrast. The paper can handle a certain amount of negative contrast, low or high, and when you exceed the limits of the paper, you are out of range. If you take Tri-X, Pan-F+, and Delta 3200 and shoot them side by side to have similar shadow detail, and then develop them to similar total contrast, besides color rendition and grain, how can Delta 3200 be too low contrast?

Please help me understand. I'm not contesting what you say, I'm saying I might be missing something. I know you have a lot more experience than I, Jim, which is why I'm trying to understand.


Thomas, I'm not sure I can explain. The highlights weren't blown out with D3200 & P'Cat, but they almost were. Anymore time in the soup and they would have been. The shadow areas came out muddy. They probably needed more time, but then the highlights would blow out. P'cat was ok, but Diafine simply did a better job for me. Hard to describe.

As for me having more experience than you, not so fast. You know your stuff here!
 
OP
OP
Willie Jan

Willie Jan

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jun 11, 2004
Messages
950
Location
Best/The Netherlands
Format
4x5 Format
I Always start with a graycard test. shoot a gray card, develop film, develop paper so that the Original gray card and the dried paper gray card have the value. Take the next negative and print it at the time of the gray card paper development time found (a blank part of a negative should be just at maximum black at that time). It will show if it is right. This method illuminates all variables between picture taken and print.

If the delta in combination with pyro is about iso800, i will test a overdevelopment 50% to see what happens. Normally I develop at 12 minutes 1:1:100 (Fuji acros).
 

john_s

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Nov 19, 2002
Messages
2,205
Location
Melbourne, A
Format
Medium Format
Thomas, I'm not sure I can explain. The highlights weren't blown out with D3200 & P'Cat, but they almost were. Anymore time in the soup and they would have been. The shadow areas came out muddy. They probably needed more time, but then the highlights would blow out. P'cat was ok, but Diafine simply did a better job for me. Hard to describe.

As for me having more experience than you, not so fast. You know your stuff here!

Maybe part of the phenomenon of low highlight contrast was the masking effect of the stained negative on VC paper. (If you used graded paper, ignore everything I say!). Part of Delta3200's appeal lies in its lowish contrast, making it useful for pushing which as we know usually results in excessive contrast. I like pyrocat with more conventional films. It is a very special developer. I develop to a not very high contrast and use VC grade 3 as my standard. Delta3200 is a special film in its way. I would use it for speed and would not use pyrocat, but rather something more conventional, and a non-staining developer to avoid the roll-off of contrast with a stained neg when using VC paper.
 
Joined
Jan 21, 2003
Messages
15,715
Location
Switzerland
Format
Multi Format
John, this is quite possible as I was using VC paper.

I'll put my vote in that bucket too. It didn't occur to me. I used Pyrocat-HD and MC for many years as my only developer, and printed many of my negatives on Kentmere Bromide paper, which was graded. Gorgeous paper, available in G2/3/4. It wasn't until many years later that I tried to print the same negatives on Fotokemika Varycon, which was a VC paper (as the name implies), and I couldn't make those negatives work without significant darkroom gymnastics. I stopped using staining developers at that point unless I knew I was printing using graded papers, or I wanted a lower contrast print with really rich mid-tones.

I guess if one prints using VC paper, using a staining developer with Delta 3200 might prove difficult, since you get a double whammy of effects of lowering contrast. The OP has enough experience and skill to overcome it, I am fully convinced of it, but if for some reason it doesn't work, these will be the likely culprits.
 

Trask

Subscriber
Allowing Ads
Joined
Oct 23, 2005
Messages
1,946
Location
Virginia (northern)
Format
35mm RF
I Always start with a graycard test. shoot a gray card, develop film, develop paper so that the Original gray card and the dried paper gray card have the value. Take the next negative and print it at the time of the gray card paper development time found (a blank part of a negative should be just at maximum black at that time). It will show if it is right. This method illuminates all variables between picture taken and print.

I do nearly the same, but a bit differently. I'll meter a grey card with the meter set at ISO 100 (for a nominal ISO 100 film), then shoot a sequence of -2 down, -1 stop down, as metered, +1 up, +2 stops up, to span the entire ISO range from ISO 25 to ISO 400. Then shoot a couple of frames at f/22 at 1/1000 with the lens cap on, to get some totally unexposed frames. Develop. Put a blank frame in the enlarger at the height you would normally us, and do a step test to get a series of exposures across the paper. Develop the print and find the time that gives you maximum black. Then put the negative shot at ISO 100 into the negative carrier so that the image on the paper shows part of the frame shot at ISO 100 and part of the frame shot at ISO 50, with the blank area between the two frames in the middle. Expose the paper for the time you found from the step test, and develop and dry. Ensure the middle strip on the print is as black as it should be, and see which of the two frames for ISO 100 or ISO 50 matches the grey card. If both are too dark, make the same print with the negatives for ISO 200 and ISO 400, to see if either produces a grey that matches the grey card. You could even do a test for the ISO 50 and ISO 25 exposures if need be. Once you have a ballpark idea, you can shoot a few more frames at 1/3 stops on either side of the ISO you've identified, to fine tune.

The only thing to remember is that you're using the fact that the max black on the print matches the max black from your step test to decide that you've got the correct paper exposure timing. Of course, once a paper hits max black extra light doesn't make it any blacker, so it's possible to unknowingly err on the side of overexposing your test print. To double check, once you've got it all dialed in, shoot a frame at your arrived-at ISO, develop, and print with the inter-negative space on the print but use a few seconds less exposure time on the print. If the space that should be max black comes up a bit less than max black, you know you've got it right.

All that remains is to see how the highlights come out in a full-range subject, and adjust developing time of the film as necessary. Yes, that may change the grey tones somewhat too, so a little tweaking will be required. But the advantage is that in the end, you've included every element of the image: film developer, development, exposure (including any effect of the film base itself), illumination of the enlarger, enlarging lens and paper developer.
 

jim appleyard

Subscriber
Allowing Ads
Joined
Nov 21, 2004
Messages
2,421
Location
glens falls, ny USA
Format
Multi Format
...
I guess if one prints using VC paper, using a staining developer with Delta 3200 might prove difficult, since you get a double whammy of effects of lowering contrast...

I would aree with this MOST os the time, but doesn't SOMEONE always have an exception? I did wedding with APX 400 (normally not my favorite film) and souped it in WD2D+ from the Formulary. Those negs were just gorgeous and very easy to print on VC. The white wedding dress and black tux both had detail in them.

Now it's hard to find APX 400 in MF and I haven't found another combo that looks quite like it with VC paper.
 

DREW WILEY

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jul 14, 2011
Messages
14,875
Format
8x10 Format
Printing Delta 3200 souped in pyro onto VC papers is super easy.... I don't get the contradiction at all. The exact opposite would appear to be
true, and certainly has been in my experience. The stain HELPS.
 
Joined
Jan 21, 2003
Messages
15,715
Location
Switzerland
Format
Multi Format
Printing Delta 3200 souped in pyro onto VC papers is super easy.... I don't get the contradiction at all. The exact opposite would appear to be
true, and certainly has been in my experience. The stain HELPS.

Drew, don't you think that depends on what you want to achieve?

To me the way the pyro developers lower the contrast with VC paper can be both a benefit and a curse. I have loved using Pyrocat for portraits in the past, for example; it worked really well with Tri-X / TMY-2 / FP4+ films. The mid-tones were nice and the tonality had a slight bias towards favoring lower tones, like a bass guitar sets the foundation for music.
These days I try to print the same negatives using the paper and developer I favor now with developers like Xtol and D76, and I end up not getting as much contrast as I want in the print, simply because even at Grade 5 filtration in a condenser enlarger I simply can't get the combination of highlights and shadows I seek. It's an interesting dilemma, I think.
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom