Stand Developing with DDx

Zach-MLT-MD · Nov 3, 2016

Im looking to try some stand developing in DDX. I want to mess around with long pushes of TriX, Delta 400, and Delta 3200 - Im thinking of pushing them all like +2 respectively, But I want to see how they handle grain with long dev times. I want to try stand methods with DDX mostly because it is what I keep on stock and what I have easiest access to buying. Anybody have any ideas for dilutions to start with / times? Just kind of looking for a starting point for my experimentation.

John Wiegerink · Nov 3, 2016

I have tried and like DDX, but went to Xtol-R due to cost and shelf life. I have never tried it for stand development so can't say how it will work. My question is, why would you use stand development to try and get a two stop push? I can see using it for high contrast scenes, but a two stop push might be "pushing" it. Hey, what the hell do I know, it might be the cats meow.

Svenedin · Nov 3, 2016

Never tried stand development. Delta 3200 pushes well at 12,500 (+2) in DD-X. I've posted some pictures in the gallery. I used the Ilford published times. Grain is noticeable but not ridiculous, shadow detail is there and I was actually very pleased. EI 12,500 was fast enough for ambient light photos indoors at night without flash.

pentaxuser · Nov 3, 2016

OP, have a look at post 28 in the thread "HOW WOULD YOU EXPOSE DELTA 3200 IN THIS SITUATION" There is a link to an article on DDX stand development by a well know British Ilford Master Printer called Andrew Sanderson

pentaxuser

Zach-MLT-MD · Nov 3, 2016

John Wiegerink said:
I have tried and like DDX, but went to Xtol-R due to cost and shelf life. I have never tried it for stand development so can't say how it will work. My question is, why would you use stand development to try and get a two stop push? I can see using it for high contrast scenes, but a two stop push might be "pushing" it. Hey, what the hell do I know, it might be the cats meow.

My thinking is that when you push you add grain and contrast and im all for the grain - just more out of curiosity i want to see if i can push something like trix or delta 3200 hard and not introduce extra grain with the agitation. I know i can push all those films i listed +2 and that they all look good when pushed - I just want to see what happens if i push them with very gentle developing.

Zach-MLT-MD · Nov 3, 2016

Svenedin said:
Never tried stand development. Delta 3200 pushes well at 12,500 (+2) in DD-X. I've posted some pictures in the gallery. I used the Ilford published times. Grain is noticeable but not ridiculous, shadow detail is there and I was actually very pleased. EI 12,500 was fast enough for ambient light photos indoors at night without flash.

I have pushed delta 3200 also - i didnt push it all the way to 12K but somewhere between 1 and 2+ im guessing around 8 to 10k - and I like how the images turned out. I kind of just want to see what will happen if i push film hard with very gentle developing. I know all the films i listed push well and look good even at 2+ - just more out of curiosity I want to see what happens if you push them and dont add the grain and contrast that comes from agitation.

Zach-MLT-MD · Nov 3, 2016

Svenedin said:
Never tried stand development. Delta 3200 pushes well at 12,500 (+2) in DD-X. I've posted some pictures in the gallery. I used the Ilford published times. Grain is noticeable but not ridiculous, shadow detail is there and I was actually very pleased. EI 12,500 was fast enough for ambient light photos indoors at night without flash.

I actually shot it in a dark bar and pushed it so that I could get reasonable shutter speeds to hand hold - it is really grainy and dark - and kind of flat in some shots but I actually really like how they pictures came out - i mean you can tell it was shot in a dark scene the pictures have a really dark gritty feel that i think works well with the image content. https://www.flickr.com/photos/60507290@N05/albums/72157668854211774 if you would like to see some shots.

Zach-MLT-MD · Nov 3, 2016

pentaxuser said:
OP, have a look at post 28 in the thread "HOW WOULD YOU EXPOSE DELTA 3200 IN THIS SITUATION" There is a link to an article on DDX stand development by a well know British Ilford Master Printer called Andrew Sanderson

pentaxuser

thanks for the info

howardpan · Nov 3, 2016

Zach,

If you can, please post your results on filmdev.org do that others may benefit and learn from your results.

pentaxuser · Nov 3, 2016

Zach-MLT-MD said:
thanks for the info

You haven't said if your camera is 35mm or a medium format. If the latter then I'd endorse Svenedin's recommendation to look at his shots of Alex at 12,500. Quite amazing. Of course if yours is a 35mm camera then his shots are still relevant but expect bigger grain for the same size enlargement.

I'd be surprised if stand development in DDX reduces grain to any real extent but there seems little user experience that you can draw on here or if there is, they the stand developers in DDX, haven't yet replied.

You may just have to "wing it" in terms of time but as it is stand development then the times in the article may be close as film speed in a stand situation appears to have less of an influence if I have understood the theory behind it correctly

pentaxuser

Zach-MLT-MD · Nov 3, 2016

youre right my bad - i shoot 35. Ive got some experience pushing delta 3200 and the others - I am really just curious to see what happens with gentle long develop times. Ive actually got some triX in right now so we will see what happens. I looked at rodinal dev times and dilutions - it seems like a common dilution for rodinal is 1+25 and 1+100 for stand methods so I went with a 1+16 since my usual DDx dilution is 1+4. shot a roll of triX at 1600 and then took the time on Devchart for DDX 1+4 at 1600 - and multiplied it by 4 since i am doing a 4 times dilution. And we will see what happens - total experiment mode over here.

Zach-MLT-MD · Nov 3, 2016

First test strip looks super contrasty but really clean. I shot test scenes that had really bright brights and really dark darks to see how it would handle the contrast. Negatives look super clean and sharp but really contrasty. Second test strip will be the same but half the time in the chemistry.

pentaxuser · Nov 4, 2016

From your post #11 I think you have now tried DDX at 1:16 and extended the development time to 4 times what is recommended for 1+4 and have found the strip to be super contrasty? Am I right?

Have you used the 1+16 DDX dilution at normal Ilford agitation or has it been a form of stand development?

I'd be interested in a scan of the negs, if possible. I confess never to having heard of anyone using DDX at as low a dilution as 1+16 but if I have understood you correctly this has worked well. Indeed too well as the negs are too contrasty. I am intrigued

Thanks

pentaxuser

Zach-MLT-MD · Nov 4, 2016

pentaxuser said:
Have you used the 1+16 DDX dilution at normal Ilford agitation or has it been a form of stand development?

I'd be interested in a scan of the negs, if possible. I confess never to having heard of anyone using DDX at as low a dilution as 1+16 but if I have understood you correctly this has worked well. Indeed too well as the negs are too contrasty. I am intrigued

You are correct 1+16 DDX for 72min in a semi stand method - the film was rated and shot at 1600 so I did a 2+ push with a super dilute developer- i did a semi stand i agitated for 15 sec and then for 15 sec every 18 minutes until getting to the 72 minute mark. I then used a water stop and fixed as normal. The negs look very clean and crisp and sharp but they are going to be really contrasty - Since the test scene I shot was a very contrasty scene the development I tried might have worked well in preserving both detail in the very bright areas as well as in the very dark areas - I dont have any scans yet but I will update this post when I do scan a few to look at them.

pentaxuser · Nov 4, 2016

Thanks for the info so far. DDX is an expensive developer compared to a lot of others but is very good for D3200. Based on your observations it seems that with your semi-stand method you get a good neg and extend the DDX's use by a factor of 4 thus bringing down its expense considerably

It might just be that if the scenes were contrasty then the negs will reflect this whatever your developer or development method was.

I look forward to the scans

pentaxuser

Zach-MLT-MD · Nov 4, 2016

Yes it is pretty spendy compared to others like D76. I just love the ease of use one gets with liquid developers and im sure that by using it i am paying some for this connivence.

Stand Developing with DDx

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency