I was going to use Rodinal on these rolls of 120 film but, after my experience with the Delta 400 & HP5, I've determined that to be a bad idea. I'm thinking of HC-110. Is that a good chemestry for Delta 3200? Anyone else had any experience with this film?
Ilford Delta 3200 processing...
-
A
- Thread starter Jehu
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale BOOK SALE! Weston, Karsh, Kenna, Worth, Sexton
- Started by AnselMortensen
-
For Sale Complete Mamiya RB67 Pro SD collections with camera bags
- Started by orbitaldebris
-
Want to Buy JOBO ATL 1500/1000 or JOBO CPP2
- Started by balazsfff
-
For Sale Foto-100 bulk roll, 100'
- Started by MCB18
-
Sold Hasselblad ELM battery adapters x2
- Started by blee1996
Forum statistics
Pyrocat HD at 800: wow!
Rodinal with 3200 can produce smooth, nearly grainless negatives under the proper conditions. Check out the recent thread on high speed films.
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)
Last edited by a moderator:
XTOL 1+2 at 24 deg. C always worked well for me. I would think that even in 120, Rodinal would give you grain the size of golf balls !!
Bob H
Bob H
Depends on the situation. It's possible to get nearly grain-free negatives with the two.
I throw my D3200 in the same developer I use for everything else: Ilfosol-3. It makes lost of grain, as it should. If you are wanting chocolaty smooth negs from 3200, I would not use Ilfosol-3.
Ilford DD-X is what Ilford recommend, I think, for maximum speed out of Delta3200. It's certainly been the developer that's given me by far and away the best results with it.
Rodinal works perfectly with 3200. No worries.
Current Ilford literature indicates Microphen one of the recommended choices, and it has worked well for me.
Yes, if you search the site you will find that they have.
Microphen for me. Rodinal is my standard developer for almost all films, but for delta3200 (above EI1600) I use microphen...
Yes. Sorry. My response looked rude. Actually, I was typing it and as I submitted my reply your response came up. So sorry if I appeared rude - didn't mean to. Honest !!
Bob H
Yes. Sorry. My response looked rude. Actually, I was typing it and as I submitted my reply your response came up. So sorry if I appeared rude - didn't mean to. Honest !!
No worries. Most people do associate Rodinal with large grain, so it was certainly a valid point to bring up.
Of course HC-110 will work. Any black and white developer will work with any black and white film. As for what is "good", that is largely up to you to decide, and we can't answer that question until you define what "good" means to you.
You might like to try Ilford Perceptol. The grain is even smaller than in DDX. I'd use it as stock solution. Developing times get to be quite long but if its 35mm D3200 and you intend to make prints at 8x10 inches or maybe a little larger then Perceptol produces acceptable grain.
My experience has been confined to using it at EI1600 and I use 20 mins. If you shoot at 3200 then I see no reason why you couldn't use Perceptol. Ilford gives a time of 18 mins at 3200 but this is seriously inadequate in my opinion. It's only a guess but if 20 mins is right for EI1600 and it is in my case then I'd try 10% more at 22 mins
pentaxuser
My experience has been confined to using it at EI1600 and I use 20 mins. If you shoot at 3200 then I see no reason why you couldn't use Perceptol. Ilford gives a time of 18 mins at 3200 but this is seriously inadequate in my opinion. It's only a guess but if 20 mins is right for EI1600 and it is in my case then I'd try 10% more at 22 mins
pentaxuser
Pentaxuser,
The Perceptol developer doesn't run out of power processing Delta 3200? Are you using it neat?
Tom
The Perceptol developer doesn't run out of power processing Delta 3200? Are you using it neat?
Tom
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2003
- Messages
- 2,021
- Format
- Multi Format
Xtol 1+2. Tight, crisp grain and beautiful tonality from 120 negs. I have had no reason to use anything else. Although I tested for dev times with DDX I cannot really comment on the difference as I have not made prints.
Try it at E.I 1250 (incident lightmeter) and develop in undiluted D-76/ID-11 for 9.5 minutes at 20*C (68*F). It is surprisingly good in medium-format for indoor photography.
Apologies for the thread-jack, but I have a very similar question. I'm shooting an event (don't worry, the results aren't critical at all) tomorrow night, it's a parade lit only by streetlights. I need ISO3200 to get 1/60 at f/2.8 (my fastest RZ lens), and I have 3 rolls of Delta 3200. I shot a test roll tonight under the same lights that I can try one developer combo out on.
I have on hand some Rodinal and some D-76. I want to use the latter 1+1 but most of the times listed on MDC are for stock, presumably for the purpose of dissolving the grain a little. Can I deduce from the ISO6400 entry that one can just use double the time for half the dilution and therefore go for about 21 minutes for ISO3200 in D76 1+1? That relationship doesn't really hold for other films, it's more like 1.75*time for 0.5*dilution.
I saw this which seems to say about 19 minutes once you apply time/temp conversion, so I guess that's not much of a difference, given variations in agitation technique.
Any suggestions? Big grain is fine but it must be sharp, and I need 3200. DD-X, Microphen and other fancy stuff is not available locally.
I have on hand some Rodinal and some D-76. I want to use the latter 1+1 but most of the times listed on MDC are for stock, presumably for the purpose of dissolving the grain a little. Can I deduce from the ISO6400 entry that one can just use double the time for half the dilution and therefore go for about 21 minutes for ISO3200 in D76 1+1? That relationship doesn't really hold for other films, it's more like 1.75*time for 0.5*dilution.
I saw this which seems to say about 19 minutes once you apply time/temp conversion, so I guess that's not much of a difference, given variations in agitation technique.
Any suggestions? Big grain is fine but it must be sharp, and I need 3200. DD-X, Microphen and other fancy stuff is not available locally.
Sorry for the delay I have only just spotted your question. Yes I have always used it neat with D3200. If 20-22 mins is right for EI 1600 then goodness knows how long it would need if used at 1+1 or worse 1+3!
Ilford gives a time for stock solution at 3200 of 18 mins and I have a confession to make now. I now realise that I did once develop a film for a friend who had shot at 3200 and for 18 mins. I hadn't at that stage explored other than Ilford times. An indoor shot he had taken looked quite good at a print size of 5x7. I was primarliy interested in its grain-free properties rather than shodow detail then so now many months later I can't say if a lot or only a little shadow detail was lost. The point being that Perceptol does a reasonable job at 3200 and doesn't seem to run out of steam but if I do it again, I'd extend development to at least the equivalent of EI 1600 which with Perceptol I judge to be at least 22 mins.
Maybe longer is better but you need patience when times start to run towards 30 mins or longer including fix and washing.
pentaxuser
I second DD-X very good. I hear semi-stand Pyrocat is good too.
Hi Jehu, I like the combination of Delta 3200 & DD-X.
For best results I have found using the development time for the next EI up is optimum i.e. expose @ EI 3200 and develop for EI 6400.
That is the technique I used for (there was a url link here which no longer exists) (shot @ EI 6400, dev time for EI 12500).
For best results I have found using the development time for the next EI up is optimum i.e. expose @ EI 3200 and develop for EI 6400.
That is the technique I used for (there was a url link here which no longer exists) (shot @ EI 6400, dev time for EI 12500).
| 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:  |