• 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

Need Ilford Developer Recommendation

Acros is only available in 100 speed, regardless of size.

Some of the advantages of that film would likely be lost if they tried to increase the speed.

- Leigh
 

Ilford And Kodak make good film too. Have you heard of Delta 400 and TMax 400?
 
markbarendt said:
Ilford And Kodak make good film too. Have you heard of Delta 400 and TMax 400?
Click to expand...


Of course. I am going to experiment with Ilford's 400 speed films to see what suits me there as well as try the ISO3200 to see if that is a viable option for low light shooting.

I dont want to get too attached to Kodak because I don't believe they will be around much longer. In my own case, it is time to rally around those who have a better than prayer chance to survive.
 
Leigh B said:
Acros is only available in 100 speed, regardless of size.

Some of the advantages of that film would likely be lost if they tried to increase the speed.

- Leigh
Click to expand...


My mistake. I am guessing that there is a Neopan 400 for 135 then which was discontinued for 120. I did not realize that this 400 speed film did not carry the Acros name.
 
Right. Acros is a unique film.

It shares the Neopan name with other films, but they're not the same.

- Leigh
 
I find that Delta 400 developed in stock ID11 for 9.5 minutes gives me excellent results except when I make a mess of the exposure.
 
ID11 is the normal beginners' recommendation. This is a metol-hydroquinone developer. Unfortunately, there seems no such developper exist in liquid form. Perhaps because of the short shell life.

You can go with one of the liquid phenidone developers, which are the "murderer" ones. Phenidone was detected as developing agent in the 40ies. Here we hve DDX from Ilford, or Ultrafin Plus from Tetenal or TMax developer from Kodak or LP Supergrain form Laborpartner or perhaps some more. Not each of these contains the pure phenidone some use a derivate of it, mostly pyrazolidone.
One of the powder equivalents of these developers is Microphen.
 
Thank you Michael for your support in my opinion. I was too annoyed to reply myself. I've been involved in photography for 35 years and what counts with me is the final image and how satisified I am with it. If Ilford recommend ID11 to develope Delta 400 that's good enough for me. I have not seen any other photos developed differently to make me question my choice of developer.
 
Folks,

We're veering off on a totally stupid exercise in semantics, which has no relationship whatsoever to the original intent of Piu58's post.

Identifying something as a "beginner's developer" means only that it will produce good results on a wide variety of films using
standard techniques, not requiring extraordinary measures such as tight temperature control or precise timing.

It means nothing beyond that. The same could be said for D-76.

- Leigh
 
Michael R 1974 said:
Calling ID-11 a "beginner's" developer implies some sort of tradeoff of image quality for ease of use...
Click to expand...

- For every film you fnd a producer's information for the devloping time. That is not the case for many devs.
- I recommend a rather compensating developer fort the first steps. It forgives some of the processing errors we all made in our erlier days.
 
RattyMouse said:
as well as try the ISO3200 to see if that is a viable option for low light shooting.
Click to expand...

Delta 3200 is actually an ISO 1000 film which can be pushed to EI 3200 (and further).


Steve.
 
Tom Stanworth said:
DDX. When used at 1+7 or 1+9 it is much more economical and the negs look the same.
Click to expand...

When using DD-X at higher dilutions than 1+4 , do you go by the developing times listed in the Massive Development Chart or do you have any other source of information ?

Karl-Gustaf
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register