Push processing Ilford Delta 400 to 3200 v Delta 3200 at 3200

Thanks Ralph. Yes I thought it an interesting video as well and it was a surprise to me. It seemed to be as much of a surprise to the video presenter and I could not detect any attempt on his part to try and deliberately "trick" us but it is proving very difficult to get to the bottom of what was done that produced the results as positives. I have to presume that whatever was done it was the same process in both cases of the identical pictures in what was nearly identical light conditions

pentaxuser

I agree with pentaxuser (got myself a LX as well) that the guy who made the video was not trying to trick us to get more interweb likes.

If he used Microphen as the developer then I suppose the negatives themselves are quite dense. I have pushed HP5+ to 3200 and the negatives are quite dense. Since the video guy stated he only scans his negatives then it makes sense how D400 pushed can look this way in Microphen. I’ve only shot and processed pushed HP5+ at night/low light situation and agree with less shadow details (as expected, and someone here already stated that).

I think we should all try this and see if this is reproducible instead of questioning whether some “magic” was involved.

@pentaxuser can you send a message to the guy to confirm whether or not he developed them in Microphen or something else? I have already have the developer on hand and can easily test this if I get some D400 and D3200 (will try at night shot too)

YoIaMoNwater said:

I agree with pentaxuser (got myself a LX as well) that the guy who made the video was not trying to trick us to get more interweb likes.

If he used Microphen as the developer then I suppose the negatives themselves are quite dense. I have pushed HP5+ to 3200 and the negatives are quite dense. Since the video guy stated he only scans his negatives then it makes sense how D400 pushed can look this way in Microphen.

I think we should all try this and see if this is reproducible instead of questioning whether some “magic” was involved.

@pentaxuser can you send a message to the guy to confirm whether or not he developed them in Microphen or something else? I have already have the developer on hand and can easily test this if I get some D400 and D3200 (will try at night shot too)

Click to expand...

Yes I have looked at several of his videos. he has only just started to make YouTube videos and currently in terms of presentation these are fairly amateurish as is to be expected but this in itself without any other clues of dishonesty leads me to believe that whatever he does it is the same both D400 at 3200 and D3200 at 3200 but somehow I can see what he sees which is that the same pic from each film having much the same in terms of shadow detail, has less grain and slightly better contrast in each pic for the D400

Yes he does mention scanning but it isn't clear if it is scanning in the usual sense of the word as he also says in other videos that he takes digital pics of his negs and then turns these into positives. We are always telling people who claim faults in their pics to take digital pics of the negatives and not scans of the negative as the best way for us to see what's in the negs and he says he does this exact thing.

As I said previously he says that he does not use PS but quite how he turns the digital pics of the negs into positives for viewing wasn't clear to me

The problem lies in contacting him. He has no website, I can find no e-mail address and when I tried to subscribe to his channel I appeared to be able to do this but not to add a comment to the comments area to ask the questions. In fact very few of his videos have any comments but some do so I presume I am failing to do something correct but I know not what. All it accepted was my "like " click

So can anyone help me here? I was nominated to be the guy to contact him but no one since has helped to give me instructions as to how I can add a comment to his video.

If you are more familiar with how the whole subscription thing works on YouTube then let me know. Clearly the most satisfactory way would be to offer him the chance to contact me but if the only way I can do this is by giving my e-mail on the comments section asking him to consider responding then, sorry, this is just too risky on a public site such as YouTube as far as I am concerned

Thanks

pentaxuser



Thanks

Old Gregg said:

@Lachlan Young but Xtol and ID-11 _are_ solvent developers. So is DD-X. I am following you up until you mention "problem with solvent developers" and then something doesn't compute.

Click to expand...

The 'problem' relates to the way that people can struggle to understand that Delta 3200 appears to have been engineered such that the slow emulsion component(s) has a larger quantity of surface/ near surface iodide, which is intended to be readily released by a more solvent developer (which opens up more development sites), dramatically restraining highlight density and improving sharpness at a micro level, along with producing overall finer granularity. A non solvent developer can't access the iodide as well, thus it doesn't seem to produce the same highlight restraining effect etc & giving a more conventional straighter-line characteristic curve. So the point is that if you want Delta 3200's 'Delta 3200-ish' properties in their clearest sense, use a more solvent developer - but on the basis that the intention of the characteristic curve is to produce a specific type of negative where the box speed/ EI matters more than the actual ISO speed. A less solvent developer will straighten out the upper end of the scale, but at the cost of some of the beneficial features of Delta 3200 in low light/ contrasty conditions - and potentially without as much usable speed.

Old West shootout at the OK Corral : "compensating solvent developer" dies groaning in the dust while "high-acutance staining pyro developer" casually polishes the highlights on his still smoking gun.

DREW WILEY said:

Old West shootout at the OK Corral : "compensating solvent developer" dies groaning in the dust while "high-acutance staining pyro developer" casually polishes the highlights on his still smoking gun.

Click to expand...

@3200 iso on 35mm? like to see that. Have any examples?

When did I ever recommend shooting it at 3200? I shoot it at 800 and then get told "you can't do that". "It ain't fair", quoting the dying Sheriff in another Western shootout movie, Unforgiven, to which the Clint Eastwood character coldly responded, "Fair's got nuthin' to do with it". Taint fair to use pyro either; whar is thet on Ilford's tech sheet? (You'll have to translate all this into Aussie yourself. I don't even know what they call cowboys down under; do they ride roos instead or hosses?)

DREW WILEY said:

When did I ever recommend shooting it at 3200? I shoot it at 800 and then get told "you can't do that". "It ain't fair", quoting the dying Sheriff in another Western shootout movie, Unforgiven, to which the Clint Eastwood character coldly responded, "Fair's got nuthin' to do with it". Taint fair to use pyro either; whar is thet on Ilford's tech sheet? (You'll have to translate all this into Aussie yourself. I don't even know what they call cowboys down under; do they ride roos instead or hosses?)

Click to expand...

I always thought of you as the Eli Wallach character, guess you ought to start diggin cause we're talking bout shootn' @3200.
We have stockmen here, a cowboy is someone who does poor workmanship.

I thought stock men dressed in suits and stole money from investors on Wall Street. They use fast computers, not fast guns or fast film - rated too fast to reliably hit the target.

pentaxuser said:

The problem lies in contacting him. He has no website, I can find no e-mail address and when I tried to subscribe to his channel I appeared to be able to do this but not to add a comment to the comments area to ask the questions. In fact very few of his videos have any comments but some do so I presume I am failing to do something correct but I know not what. All it accepted was my "like " click

So can anyone help me here? I was nominated to be the guy to contact him but no one since has helped to give me instructions as to how I can add a comment to his video.

Click to expand...

Have you tried clicking "RELPY" under his comment? Since you are subscribed to his channel I'm assuming you have an Youtube account and thus should be able to leave comments. Can anyone else link this Photorio thread to him there?

YoIaMoNwater said:

Have you tried clicking "RELPY" under his comment? Since you are subscribed to his channel I'm assuming you have an Youtube account and thus should be able to leave comments. Can anyone else link this Photorio thread to him there?

Click to expand...

Thanks. If it says I have subscribed to his channel and I thought that was what I had done then I expected to be able to add a comment but I could not

I note that in the last 27 minutes someone called jonnoMoto has made a rely to the presenter mentioning the thread here thus I assume he is a member here So I tried adding a reply to that but once again it simply takes me to an unrelated list of videos?

So what is it I haven't done that jonnoMoto has done to be able to leave a reply? Just as an aside what amazes me is the here we have a person who made quite a good video with evidence in the form of pics which seems to have an interesting conclusion and yet until jonnoMoto no-one had even left a reply. Yet there are others who make videos which are almost bereft of anything substantial who have 1000s of followers who engage in replies

Strange world we live in

Thanks

pentaxuser

pentaxuser

pentaxuser said:

I note that in the last 27 minutes someone called jonnoMoto has made a rely to the presenter mentioning the thread here thus I assume he is a member here So I tried adding a reply to that but once again it simply takes me to an unrelated list of videos?

Click to expand...

That'd be me. I clicked on reply to his pinned comment via my browser on my laptop.
I initially put 1 in earlier but it disappeared. I put that down to the fact I had put this thread's URL in the comment and triggered youtube's spam filter.

Jonno85uk said:

That'd be me. I clicked on reply to his pinned comment via my browser on my laptop.
.

Click to expand...

Thanks I thought I had done the same but I'll try again. I note you got a response but it was only what I always thought, namely that he did not fake anything. What may gives us more of an insight is how he turned both the D400 and D3200 into positives and whether than somehow could have resulted in the D440 pics looking as good from the shadow details and tones aspect and with slightly finer grain It is the latter aspect that intrigues me.

What also interests me is whether comparable shots in very sunny condition would reveal D400 weaknesses or in night conditions

If his video only applies to D400 being better in dull overcast daylight then D400 is not the winner all the way but may be a better bet for anything in daylight at 3200 in overcast conditions I can think of many occasions in the year on this island of ours where such conditions exist

Thanks

pentaxuser

This whole test would have been more valid if he hadn't gone out one day in the snow and one day after the snow had melted.

Bill Burk said:

This whole test would have been more valid if he hadn't gone out one day in the snow and one day after the snow had melted.

Click to expand...

Quite possibly but the snow did not seem to be enough to affect things by more than a marginal amount and some of the comparisons were of shots that would have been unaffected except by overall light which was overcast in both sets of shots or so it seemed to me

pentaxuser

Or maybe it wasn't snow, but the contrast is significantly different between series.