Developer for Ilford Delta?

Forgive me if this has been done many times before; I couldn't quite

find the right answer here.

 

I'm beginning to develop my own film. My current preference is for

Ilford Delta 100 (because of its sharpness and tonality). I shoot

6x7cm landscapes/nature, all tripod mounted. I am looking for a

developer that will give me finest grain and best acutance. I was

thinking of trying Ilford DD-X or Perceptol, but some posts I've seen

through searches here might suggest otherwise. I don't push much, so

let's not consider that part of the equation. What would you

recommend?

 

Thanks for your replies.....

I have used XTOL 1:2 and Rodinal 1:75 with good success. XTOL yields excellent speed with Delta 100.

PMk works very well with the Ilford films. I have used it with the deltas, but generally, I use it with HP5+ with excellent results.

I have developed Delta 100 with Perceptol with very pleasing results. Under very high contrast conditions this film/developer combination has given me the acutance I prefer (high), and the expected fine grain from the Delta. A call to Photographers Formulary may prove helpful.

Have you checked the Ilford site? I know that David Carper from Ilford checks on this site from time to time, perhaps he will be able to give you some valuable help.

Just to clarify the above post, you cannot have the absolute best acutance and the absolute finest grain. Not in this universe anyway. This is the same reason that the best tasting food is not the one with the least calories (unless you are a rabbit), or the best quality car is not the cheapest.

 

But you can get a good compromise of grain and sharpness (acutance). Probably XTOL 1:2 or 1:3 will give you that. If you use 120 film or larger, and want to err on the side better acutance with a little more grain, Rodinal 1:75 is a good choice.

 

If you can figure out how to get into one of those �alternate� universes that have different laws of physics, then you might have better luck finding the perfect developer.

DD-X would be a good choice for Delta 100, but if it were me, I'd go with Mark F and use XTOL, given your requirements. You can get some tunability in the acutance vs grain balance, and even in high dilution XTOL will still deliver fairly fine grain (though not as fine as XTOL straight up, and certainly not as fine as Perceptol). You might also consider Paterson's FX50, which sounds a lot like liquid XTOL (I haven't actually tried it, though).

Michael,

 

Another alternative would be ID-11 diluted 1:2 or 1:3. The extra dilution will give you increased sharpness. You get some of the fine grain effect of ID-11, with increased acutance. Some of my favorite 35mm negatives were made with this combination.

<I>I was thinking of trying Ilford DD-X or Perceptol, </i><P>I really can't find much difference between Delta 100/400 to be worth yelling about. 100 is a bit sharper, but in 6x7 format the two stops loss of speed isn't worth the trouble, unlike TMX vs TMY. Delta 100 does respond to more acutance developing with better results than 400, but if I want a sharp film with an emphasis on acutance I'll use either Acros 100, TMX 100 or Plus-X pro.<P>I still prefer and recommend Delta 400 in either Perceptol/Microdol, but Perceptol/Microdol tends to disolve the grain in Delta 100 so that you can barely tell it from Delta 400. ID-11 or DDX (DDX is chemically similiar to HC-110 I believe) would be better options for Delta 100. ID-11 is basically D-76, and DDX produces similiar results to D-76, so it's an exellent place to start. If you use Xtol, don't use it diluted more than 1:1, but I think DDX or ID-11 might be a better starting point.

I suggest D-76/ID-11 1:1 to 1:3. I've also liked D100 in Xtol 1:1 but one abrupt Xtol failure put me off that; going on image qualities alone Xtol is good.

I dev 100 Delta rated at 50 ASA in Rodinal 1:50, 20 C, 7 mins. Four agitations in the first 30 seconds then one inversion every 30 seconds after that.

Mike �

 

If you are the reading type, you might want to pick up a copy of the 'Film Developing Cookbook' by Anchell and Troop. This book is a reasonably comprehensive but very readable treatment of a complex subject.

 

Amazon carries it, although I bought my copy at a local Barnes & Noble. I got a lot out of the book, and would recommend it.

 

Hope this helps.

 

� Bill

As someone else has already pointed out, you cannot get both the finest grain and the highest accutance. You have to accept a trade-off, and of course, since which end of the equation you prefer is a personal choice, I cannot say which developer will best suit your needs.

 

PERCEPTOL will give you extremely fine grain, but at a cost of sharpness. PERCEPTOL also gives a loss in film speed if developed to a normal contrast (this is typical of extreme-fine grained developers).

 

For the highest accutance, I would recommend ILFOSOL S, which is a liquid developer, used 1+9. It is very economical for a liquid, and provides the highest accutance of any ILFORD developer with this film. ILFOSOL S provides full film speed, but you do have the tradeoff that the grain is not as fine as with some other developers.

 

My personal preference is ILFOTEC DD-X (I'll admit, in part because I'm too lazy to mix powders). It gives a good balance of sharpness vs. grain, and has the added benefit of giving a slight speed boost, which results in more shadow detail. It also has a tonality which I find pleasing.

 

Also giving a good balance is ID-11 (or Kodak's D-76). Using the stock solution will give finer grain; the 1+1 dilution will give higher accutance. ID-11 gives normal film speed.

 

BTW, ILFOTEC DD-X is very different from HC-110 in composition as well as results.

 

David Carper

 

ILFORD Technical Service

You might be from Ilford, but I'd you to show me and about dozen other Ilford shooters how to get full speed from Ilfosol-S.

 

This developer tends to crush Delta 400 to about 250 and Delta 100 about 1/3 of a stop as well as well. Loss of speed, increase of grain, flattening of midtones, and increase in shoulder contrast. If I want Tmax developer, I'll buy it. Ilfosol is cheap for a reason.

 

Try DDX first.

> This developer tends to crush Delta 400 to about 250

 

Well, otoh I've gotten full rated speed for Delta 400 in Ilfosol-S 1:14 10'30"/68F rotary agitation. Or to put it differently, I get the same speed as with ID-11 1:1 with a comparable DR of about 1.25.

 

I think maybe the key to that is to use a higher dilution (1:14 rather than 1:9) and give constant agitation; several of the films I use give a little higher speed when developed that way whether I use D-76/ID-11, Rodinal, DD-X, Ilfosol-S etc. The difference is slight, never more than 2/3 stop, and it certainly isn't enough to warrant a wholesale change in processing procedures.

 

I did find a marked difference with Ilfosol-S; the curve shape of D400 in Ilfosol-S 1:14 shows a much more pronounced shoulder than with D-76/ID-11. This could be seen as "mucky grey highlights" or "easily-printable withough burning-in" depending on preferences, subject etc.

I've tried many different developers for the Delta films, but I keep going back to DD-X(I'm lazy too when it comes to powders). I process Ilford, Fuji, and Agfa films in DD-X with great results.

> I think maybe the key to that is to use a higher dilution (1:14 rather than 1:9) and give constant agitation;

 

My experience agrees on this one, the agitation part.

I don't use rotary processor or continual agitation but I do give a couple of extra seconds agitation per minute, and I leave enough empty space in tank for vigorous agitation.

 

I use developer comparable to Ilfosol-S 1+9 but I get full 400 speed. I also get the same speed in D-76 type developer 1+2.

 

Delta 400 also takes about double the time to clear in rapid fixer compared to old flavored T-MAX 100, both with continual hand inversion agitation.

 

I thought TMX liked vigorous agitation, but I think D400 likes even more agitation, both in developer and in fixer.

Thanks to all who responded. Because it was on hand, I went with D76 per Mr. Carper's suggestion and got good results. I'll have to try DDX next and see how it compares.