The obvious use case for Delta 3200 is late evening / night time photography, but personally I gave up shooting film under those conditions. Digital is just so stupidly superior, it feels silly to deny it.
Instead, I started to use Delta 3200 to flatten high contrast scenes. Think harsh midday light. If you open its datasheet and look at the characteristic curves, you will see a significant degree of highlight compression. Work with your meter, remember its nominal ISO speed of 1000, optimize exposure for the required shadow detail and let the highlights lay where they will.
Now, the bad news: I seriously doubt you'll have a good time sending this film to a lab. It is finicky and demanding when it comes to developer choice. Or perhaps I should say it looks very different when souped in different developers. I haven't used SF labs for B&W in a long a while, but IIRC most of them use Xtol and it's not a great choice for Delta 3200. Moreover, most labs don't seem to bother to use optimal development times, say from MDC, for all B&W films. I suspect they're trying to save time and batch-develop different emulsions that are close enough. I think it will be hard to predict what kind of results you will get. And if you let a lab scan it, the level of unpredictability will be even higher. Not the best film for outsourced development/scanning.
Best of luck!
The obvious use case for Delta 3200 is late evening / night time photography, but personally I gave up shooting film under those conditions. Digital is just so stupidly superior, it feels silly to deny it.
Instead, I started to use Delta 3200 to flatten high contrast scenes. Think harsh midday light. If you open its datasheet and look at the characteristic curves, you will see a significant degree of highlight compression. Work with your meter, remember its nominal ISO speed of 1000, optimize exposure for the required shadow detail and let the highlights lay where they will.
Now, the bad news: I seriously doubt you'll have a good time sending this film to a lab. It is finicky and demanding when it comes to developer choice. Or perhaps I should say it looks very different when souped in different developers. I haven't used SF labs for B&W in a long a while, but IIRC most of them use Xtol and it's not a great choice for Delta 3200. Moreover, most labs don't seem to bother to use optimal development times, say from MDC, for all B&W films. I suspect they're trying to save time and batch-develop different emulsions that are close enough. I think it will be hard to predict what kind of results you will get. And if you let a lab scan it, the level of unpredictability will be even higher. Not the best film for outsourced development/scanning.
Best of luck!
Steven has posted some good info. I feel like we need some more info from you to provide better answers.
Delta is the most expensive b&w Ilford film. Giving yourself 1 roll to "learn with" seems like a potentially futile exercise.
Is there a certain look you are after?
I'm not trying got be discouraging, just a nudge towards managing expectations. If you decide you want to head out tomorrow and do wet-pate Collodion for the first time, that's awesome, just don't expect to have a ringing success on the first outing.
I'll throw one link at this because the info in the link seems solid. It doesn't answer your questions regarding metering. An ND filter functions in the same way regardless of film stock. Your on-site/scene metering will guide you to which ND to use.
The Definitive Guide to Ilford Delta 3200 | Learn Film Photography
Ilford Delta 3200 is perfect for low-light photography. It has the widest exposure latitude of any film, and a beautiful grain structure.www.learnfilm.photography
Processing at home is going to be your friend here. I resisted it for a few years because I thought it would take up too much space, etc etc.
I now take up about 1/3rd of my kitchen sink counter when I process. That's it. The equipment to get you rolling is relatively cheap. The chemistry ends up being cheap when you factor the number off rolls you can process against the cost of chemistry vs. cost per roll at the lab. You also will have full control over your results.
Do you have the 250mm lens? That would make the ISO 3200 film more useful. That film would lower the contrast, so keep that in mine. I would recommend using ISO 400 film and as it gets darker switch to the ISO 3200 film as the light diminishes.
Excellent film for daytime, indoors, natural light photography. It's all I use in such cases. I expose it at 1600, developed in Ilford DD-X with the 3200 time.
@Alex Benjamin, beautiful portrait! My big concern has been that my camera's max shutter speed is 1/500. So I'm unsure how to work with that.
Not sure I'm following you. How is that a problem?
@Alex Benjamin, beautiful portrait! My big concern has been that my camera's max shutter speed is 1/500. So I'm unsure how to work with that.
My concern is shooting at 500 will result in overexposed images. Would this be case when shooting at wide aperture?
OK, I think I know what it is. I understand that you want to shoot wide open—or with a depth of field as shallow as possible, which, in the case of the Mamiya, isn't quite the same thing.
I believe you're forgetting to factor a couple of things. First, bellows extension. You have to remember that the closer you are to your subject, the more your bellows will extend. With the 80mm, that means you can lose up to two stops.
Next, you have to check your depth of field chart. Again, the closer you are, the shallower your depth of field. As you can see here, f/5.6, at 3 feet, the depth of field is barely 3 inches. Which is less depth of field than if you're using f/2.8 at 7 feet, which is 10 inches.
So, again, what you seem to want is not shooting at the widest aperture, but (if I'm to judge from the photo example you linked) to shoot at a narrow depth of field.
This means you have a little preparation to do, and a bit of calculus. How you want to frame your picture will give you your distance. After that, you chose your aperture according to the depth of field effect you want. Once you've metered you scene, you figure out what shutter speed will work with the aperture you've chosen—you might want to have a tripod with you just in case—, all the while not forgetting to adjust your exposure according to bellows extension (chart for that is on the left side of the camera).
Not sure this is clear, but the photo you liked to looks simple but requires a really good understanding of how these cameras work.
View attachment 343926
What kind of light, ND filter, and aperture scenarios would work well with Delta 3200 on a camera with max shutter speed of 1/500? What EI should I specify to my film lab? I have 1 roll to learn from.
Here's an example of what i use Delta 3200 for. Indoors, nighttime w a Mamiya 6 (50mm f4). I have no use for it outdoors. As well, I often like using lenses wide open or close to, especially for portraits or close ups., (the exceptionView attachment 343973 being landscape photos.)
,
(*please excuse the reflections, this framed print is the only 3200 Delta example i have printed)
Not true. Film retains dynamic range much better even if (developed) sensitivity is lower.
Digital often looks harsh and blown out in the high contrast low light conditions common at night, because the sensors DR is severely cut down when amplified that much.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?