Ilford Delta 3200

[PhotoJim]

Maybe not right out of the factory. But off the shelf. Doesn't this film need to be refrigerated, and well?? Who knows what the shippers and resellers do with it?

It doesn't require refrigeration.

Delta 3200, and other fast films, will develop base fog by exposure to cosmic rays. This is unavoidable and inevitable unless you can bury the film many hundreds of metres underground (cosmic rays can pass through buildings, people and routine amounts of protection without inhibition). The closer to the expiry date (i.e. the longer after manufacture), the more fog you will get. Refrigeration and freezing will do nothing to help this, other than to protect against any possible damage due to excessive heat.

Inappropriate storage by a dealer will accelerate the fogging, but normal storage at room temperature does not make a significant difference versus refrigeration. The cosmic rays will do their damage before temperature makes a huge difference.

 

[strangepics]

"but normal storage at room temperature does not make a significant difference versus refrigeration"

I know about the cosmic rays. I also know that the faster the film the more susceptible it is. Refrigeration takes care of the heat fog. People who refrigerate their film and paper know that it does not get fogged as unrefrigerated film and paper, so the above is false.

 

[spijker]

Try using Perceptol developer. I haven't tried DDX yet so can't compare but at 5x7, prints from Perceptol developed negs were a lot less grainy than those I had previously printed from the same film developed in ID11.

pentaxuser

What EI did you expose at? Then, what dev. time and dilution did you use with Perceptol? Ilford says 15min/20C/stock @ IE1600 and 18min/20C/stock @ EI3200. I shot a roll at EI1600 and need to decide now whether to develop it for 15 or 18 min. So any advice from experience with D3200 in perceptol would help. Thanks.

Menno

 

[PhotoJim]

"but normal storage at room temperature does not make a significant difference versus refrigeration"

I know about the cosmic rays. I also know that the faster the film the more susceptible it is. Refrigeration takes care of the heat fog. People who refrigerate their film and paper know that it does not get fogged as unrefrigerated film and paper, so the above is false.

Film won't get heat fog at room temperature. If the environment is subject to temperature shifts, then sure, refrigerating will help, but then you aren't storing it at room temperature, either.

Room temperature is 20 degrees, not 25 or 30.

 

[pentaxuser]

What EI did you expose at? Then, what dev. time and dilution did you use with Perceptol? Ilford says 15min/20C/stock @ IE1600 and 18min/20C/stock @ EI3200. I shot a roll at EI1600 and need to decide now whether to develop it for 15 or 18 min. So any advice from experience with D3200 in perceptol would help. Thanks.

Menno

Menno. Both the ID11 developed D3200 and the Perceptol developed D3200 were exposed at 3200 and developed at Ilford recommended times for this speed, both at 20 degrees C and Ilford recommended agitation. The ID11 was 1+1 and the Perceptol was stock.

I suspect that at box speed Perceptol has to be used as stock to have an appreciable effect on grain. It starts to get a little expensive then as a litre only does 4 films with a Jobo tank and inversion agitation. Then again D3200 probably isn't going to be most people's regular film. I used it on a dull day at the Isle of Man TT races - great for high speed stuff but then would have needed a ND filter on the next sunny day when I wanted to blur the Laxey wheel and couldn't get the exposure slow enough even with a filter

I have only done this once so can't say whether expose at EI1600 and develop for D3200 is the better combo but all the prevailing wisdom seems to point to this being the case.

As I can say that shadow detail at EI 3200 and the Ilford dev time for this was at least acceptable( well to me anyway), there's a no lose argument that says try half the film at the Ilford time for EI 1600 and the other half at the dev time for 3200. Both lots of negs should print OK but it will be interesting to see if negs developed at the EI 3200 time are actually better.

If you try this let us all know your findings.

Best of luck

pentaxuser

 

[Paul Verizzo]

Recent foggy film observations

Nothing to do with Delta 3200, but....

Eleven year old TMX is slightly foggy but very printable. Storage was variable in those eleven years, from freezing to sweltering.

A new roll of Fortepan 400 was very foggy. Too bad I have two more rolls. Developed in dilute D-76.

Both 35mm.

 

[rkoliver]

Concerning Ilford Delta 3200 and FB+Fog...

I recently "standardized" my equipment (camera, film, meter, developer, enlarger, etc) for Ilford Delta 400 Pro and rated it at ISO 250. The rating is based on the minimum time needed to achieve a maximum black print through an unexposed portion of the negative and the practical ISO needed to still get a Zone I exposure. After the success I had with Delta 400 and "standardizing" for the Zone System, I thought I would do the same for Delta 3200 so I could have a low-light film in my arsenal. Unfortunately, even a Zone V exposure shot at box speed doesn't yield a Zone I print at dmax print times! I'm attributing this to the high "density" of FB+Fog since the exposure to achieve a max black print is more than 2.5 times that needed for Delta 400.

I still like Delta 3200 for low-light photography but I'm disappointed I couldn't "standardize" for the Zone System with it. I really like the pre-visualization I can achieve with the "standardized" Delta 400...it makes printing so much easier and predictable.

 

[hoffy]

Sorry to dredge this one up again.

I was given 2 rolls of Delta 3200, 120 format, today that had expired in December 09. I have no idea how they were stored (they were given to me through a few sets of hands).

I didn't really want to use it yet (I am still coming to grips with 120, a new camera, so I had decided to stick with HP5 as I have been using it in 35mm for the last 18 months), but after reading this thread, I don't want the film to become totally unusable.

If I were to refridge it (which I know doesn't take into account cosmic radiation), how long would I be able to successfully store it for? Or should I just shoot it for giggles and not care about the results?

Cheers

 

[Shangheye]

Sorry to dredge this one up again.

I was given 2 rolls of Delta 3200, 120 format, today that had expired in December 09. I have no idea how they were stored (they were given to me through a few sets of hands).

I didn't really want to use it yet (I am still coming to grips with 120, a new camera, so I had decided to stick with HP5 as I have been using it in 35mm for the last 18 months), but after reading this thread, I don't want the film to become totally unusable.

If I were to refridge it (which I know doesn't take into account cosmic radiation), how long would I be able to successfully store it for? Or should I just shoot it for giggles and not care about the results?

Cheers

I would use it asap...I once had a roll, well stored and expired for 4 months when I used it and it was starting to fog...not a film for storage I would say...at least not for important photos...buy to use, not store. K