Scratching my head with Delta 3200 and ID11

[fotoobscura]

For the first time in many years I mixed up some ID11 that had been sitting around dry for (also many years). I mixed it perfectly into a clean 5L jug (old e6 ra4 bleach jug) and it dissolved nicely. I followed directions as required. I even used distilled water to mix the chemistry.

I shot a roll of 120 delta 3200 the other day and developed it today and the negatives came out incredibly thin. As I was not going for anything but reminding myself if I liked this combination, I developed at mfr. times and no hokey-pokey or additives.

This could very well be a confused flash (or flash owner) but I seem to doubt it. On the other hand, shooting 3200 with a flash...

Has anyone experienced thin negatives with this film/developer combination?

Thanks!

 

[Rich Ullsmith]

Not with that developer, but a few years ago it was a topic of discussion that the box developing times for this film was about 1 stop off, i.e. ISO3200 would actually be developed at the time listed for ISO 6400 to get the density.

That was my experience, until I went to cross check with other sources. Look at digitaltruth or unblinkingeye and see what ballpark times are listed there.

 

[johnnywalker]

Not with that developer, but a few years ago it was a topic of discussion that the box developing times for this film was about 1 stop off, i.e. ISO3200 would actually be developed at the time listed for ISO 6400 to get the density.

That seems to be most peoples' experience, certainly mine:

 

[Allen Friday]

Yep. I normally shoot it at 1000 to 1600 and develop for the time specified for 3200.

 

[GrantR]

I typically just double all of my times with it--I actually have not been disappointed yet!

 

[2F/2F]

First off, it is an ISO 1000 film. Therefore, if you rate it at 3200, you send what would be your zones II and III into almost total blackness, no matter how you develop it.

Then, Delta and T-max negatives look about a stop thinner than "good" exposures on conventional films.

Finally, you likely need to alter the developing time because your parameters are not the same as Ilford's.

 

[fotoobscura]

Very interesting. That saved me a lot of head scratching on the box development times. Digitaltruth reports 10.5m at 20c id11 1:1 which absolutely did not work out for me.

Thanks