ID-11 vs. DDX for delta films

[scott_e2]

I would like to get opinions on ID-11 vs. DDX for Delta films (100,

400, 3200). Which one gives finer detail, sharper grain, maintains

film speed, etc...

Thanks.

[lowell_huff1]

DDX is a much more sophisticated formula than ID-11 (D 76). It will afford much more latitude and control as a result, especially with the faster more modern emulsions.

[mikeseb]

Not what you asked--but Xtol is Kodak's recommended developer for its TMax films. The

results are splendid at a range of dilutions (I've used it up to 1+3). It also works beautifully

for Deltas, as well as with conventional grain films of all stripes.

[david_beal___richmond_hts.]

DDX is very good for Delta 400 and Delta 3200. With DDX, the "box" speed of Delta 400 is ISO 500, and I've gotten some good shots that way.

 

When shooting Delta 3200, I develop in DDX at twice the ISO shot (i.e., develop at 6400 if shot at 3200) because it is a very low contrast film.

 

I don't use DDX for Delta 100. I prefer to rate it at ISO 50 and develop in Rodinal 1:50.

 

Good shooting.

 

/s/ David Beal ** Memories Preserved Photography, LLC

[ronald_moravec1]

ID11 diluted does poorly on the NEW Delta 400 , but was just fine on the original Delta 400. At stock strength it works pretty good on the new 400. I think this new DELTA 400 film was developed for DDX or Xtol.

 

Delta 100 likes anything.

[blue_sun408]

Can't comment on DDX, but I've used ID-11 (1:1) for both Delta 100 and 400 films (120 format) and have been very pleased with the results, but I agree with Michael's recommendation for XTOL, even better results with the Delta films, although I use it 1:1.It's what I use mostly now for all my b&w films, and especially the Deltas.