Mamiya 645 pro TL and Delta 3200

[rubyfalls]

Hey y'all - I am wondering what ISO setting I should use when shooting with Delta 3200. I just developed my first roll, set at 3200 and developed as such and the negatives seem rather thin. Would it be better to set the ISO at 1600? Or change develop time? For the record, I mostly use slower film and have only shot and developed maybe 6 rolls of 3200 speed. Thanks for any insight.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[markbarendt]

So, how do the prints look?
Yeah, that's really what you need to look at before you make a judgement.

 

[rubyfalls]

So, how do the prints look?
Yeah, that's really what you need to look at before you make a judgement.

True. My first attempts at making prints off of 3200 speed negatives were...well, they were prints. Embarrassingly bad, not even something grandparents would love. But that was several rolls ago. When these dry, I'll scan and see what I see. This is also the first time I've shot faster film on a camera with a working light meter. And ISO settings that go that high.

A dumb question, perhaps, but do faster speed negatives generally look thinner than slower speed? Should I not freak out so quickly? Are Red Vines really superior to Twizzlers? So. Many. Questions...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Chris Lange]

Set it to 1600 and develop for 1600, or set it for 1600 and -1 exp. compensation if the camera doesn't go up to 3200. Develop for the times given for 6400...or more.

I shoot at 6400 and develop Delta 3200 for 24-27 minutes in full strength D76.

I get good contrast range and nice tones with this method.

 

[rubyfalls]

Set it to 1600 and develop for 1600, or set it for 1600 and -1 exp. compensation if the camera doesn't go up to 3200. Develop for the times given for 6400...or more.

I shoot at 6400 and develop Delta 3200 for 24-27 minutes in full strength D76.

I get good contrast range and nice tones with this method.

Thank you! And lovely picture. I've never used D76, only DD-X and ID-11; maybe that is my problem?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Terry Christian]

ID-11 is D76.

 

[Chris Lange]

Must correct a tiny error, meant to say "set it to 1600 and develop for 3200".

nb. That only applies if you're one of those ninnies that prints everything at like a grade 2 (and even then that's too contrasty) and never does anything interesting.

I always preferred shooting the stuff at 3200 or 6400 and developing for 23-27 minutes depending. I generally use a 4.5 or 5 to exaggerate micro contrast when printing these negatives, and dodge/burn/use cutouts to hold back shadows as necessary so as not to lose them entirely.

People say a Pentax 6x7 has mirror bounce and not to use it handheld. I use mine handheld at night with Delta 3200. Same for my Hasselblad.

 

[markbarendt]

True. My first attempts at making prints off of 3200 speed negatives were...well, they were prints. Embarrassingly bad, not even something grandparents would love. But that was several rolls ago. When these dry, I'll scan and see what I see. This is also the first time I've shot faster film on a camera with a working light meter. And ISO settings that go that high.

A dumb question, perhaps, but do faster speed negatives generally look thinner than slower speed? Should I not freak out so quickly? Are Red Vines really superior to Twizzlers? So. Many. Questions...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Chris's advice is great as a starting place with Delta 3200. Basically develop +1 from wherever you shot. Shoot 1600 develop 3200, shoot 3200 develop 6400. Season to taste from there.

Delta 3200 is really a 1000 iso film that pushes really, really well. That doesn't mean it defies the laws of physics. Detail is lost as exposure is reduced so thin is relative.

With that in mind I typically find that most people try to print high EI shots to light, placing faces like they would be in daylight. Brightness isn't the same as lightness; printing darker many times makes a face look brighter for me. In fact brightness is defined more by contrast/appearance than the actual density on paper.

And I do prefer Red Vines.

 

[chriscrawfordphoto]

I get great results from Delta 3200, exposed at 3200 and developed for 3200. No need to develop for the next higher speed as so many suggest. You should be aware though that this film does not work well in most developers, and that may be the origin of the idea of overdeveloping it. Develop it in Tmax Developer or DDX.

 

[Xmas]

review ilfords time and ISO figures and your technique or use 800 ISO you need silver in shadows that you want to have details in. If film is clear it is underexposed...

 

[StoneNYC]

Thank you! And lovely picture. I've never used D76, only DD-X and ID-11; maybe that is my problem?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No DD-X is generally better for D3200 than D-76 (which is similar to ID-11 by the way) because it's designed for T-grain emulsions.

Did you use DD-X for this thin batch?

 

[StoneNYC]

Also some examples shot at 3200 in DD-X

35mm

And 120

The 35mm was shot in a very dark house, the 120 was shot using a red filter, the first two daytime, the third, dusk for 2 minutes exposure and yellow filter.

Just remember to use gentile agitation/inversion for best grain.

 

[rubyfalls]

No DD-X is generally better for D3200 than D-76 (which is similar to ID-11 by the way) because it's designed for T-grain emulsions.

Did you use DD-X for this thin batch?

No - I used ID-11. It was really more of a test roll for me, as I am still getting acquainted with my m645. I just scanned the negatives and they actually aren't awful -- my main takeaway is that I need to spot meter and shoot in manual rather than AP. A big duh, I know. The next roll I will develop in DD-X.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[rubyfalls]

Thank you all so much for the tips -- and your photos! What great inspiration! Another issue is that the things that I shoot with faster film aren't the sort of things i usually shoot, so part of my problem is capturing the subject appropriately. eg, I primarily shoot single objects, single person portraits, lines and architecture, whereas with the 3200 it is "busy" scenes such as musicians or roller skating kids.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MattKing]

No - I used ID-11. It was really more of a test roll for me, as I am still getting acquainted with my m645. I just scanned the negatives and they actually aren't awful -- my main takeaway is that I need to spot meter and shoot in manual rather than AP. A big duh, I know. The next roll I will develop in DD-X.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Just for clarity ....

If you refer to your camera as an "M645" you might confuse some people, because the very first Mamiya 6x4.5 SLR had the model name of "M645".

 

[rubyfalls]

Just for clarity ....

If you refer to your camera as an "M645" you might confuse some people, because the very first Mamiya 6x4.5 SLR had the model name of "M645".

Thanks - I forgot about that. And I am bad for making my own words and short hand. Too many kids; too little sleep.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Chris Lange]

I actually love using medium format Delta 3200 as a general purpose film. Great grain, really smooth tonality, and a great tonal scale. It's one of my favorite films period the end...love using it in my Rolleiflex Automat or Hasselblad...even in broad daylight:

 

[StoneNYC]

I actually love using medium format Delta 3200 as a general purpose film. Great grain, really smooth tonality, and a great tonal scale. It's one of my favorite films period the end...love using it in my Rolleiflex Automat or Hasselblad...even in broad daylight:

That's a really interesting shot, I wouldn't have thought to blow it out so much but it really is neat. Not a great example of tones with all that contrast, but it's really neat.

 

[Chris Lange]

Y'all want some tones?

 

[StoneNYC]

Y'all want some tones?

Beautiful!

Almost hard to believe they are the same film, goes to show both it's versatility and also shows that technique, and skill/knowledge go a long way to a beautiful photograph

 

[rubyfalls]

Alright - thoroughly inspired. I'm going to shoot my kids -- wait, let me rephrase that. I'm going to do the holiday card photo shoot thing next weekend and will use both my trusty tri-x and a roll of delta 3200. It'll be a test run all around -- I just finished making a "pop-up" studio (fake walls) and am dying to try my lights. I do a music-themed thing with the kids every year; this year is punk rock. Wish me luck - if I get anything that isn't too horrifying, I will share.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[pentaxuser]

No DD-X is generally better for D3200 than D-76 (which is similar to ID-11 by the way) because it's designed for T-grain emulsions.

Interesting. Can you say what the evidence is that DDX is designed for T-grain emulsions?

pentaxuser

 

[Chris Lange]

No DD-X is generally better for D3200 than D-76 (which is similar to ID-11 by the way) because it's designed for T-grain emulsions.

Did you use DD-X for this thin batch?

There is no truth to this, Stone. You're guilty of the same accusations you levy at others. As someone who has processed at least 100+ rolls of D3200 in d76 1+0 (120, with likely 50-75 more in 35mm, and that's still not that many) and made prints and scans of all sizes from the negatives, I would love to see your evidence.

 

[StoneNYC]

Interesting. Can you say what the evidence is that DDX is designed for T-grain emulsions?

pentaxuser

http://www.ilfordphoto.com/products/product.asp?n=31

It is designed to complement the features of all ILFORD films, ***especially the range of ILFORD DELTA PROFESSIONAL films*** which means T-Grain films...

 

[StoneNYC]

There is no truth to this, Stone. You're guilty of the same accusations you levy at others. As someone who has processed at least 100+ rolls of D3200 in d76 1+0 (120, with likely 50-75 more in 35mm, and that's still not that many) and made prints and scans of all sizes from the negatives, I would love to see your evidence.

See above.... Post... D-76 was designed before t-grain products so it was not designed specifically for them...