Ilford 3200 contrast

[hipvicar]

I've been shooting Iflord Delta 3200 (at 3200, and processing for

3200) with acceptably dense negatives, but the contrast (especially

when shot under indoor lighting) is too low, even when printed with

filters on a color head enlarger and on high-contrast paper.

 

I've heard varying, often conflicting, advice about developing film

for increased contrast. Are there any developers, temperatures,

developing times, etc., that you've found have worked to increase

contrast in high-speed film?

[rich_ullsmith1]

Love that wide angle stuff.

 

Do you have access to any PMK Pyro? Delta 3200 rated at 3200, 22 minutes at 75 f. I got the time off the massive chart. This soup really gives a gritty, contrasty negative. I've tried Xtol, Perceptol, Microphen, DDX, but Pyro really does something different with this film. At EI 1600, a little less contrast and a little less grain.

 

The stuff is relatively cheap, the shelf life is long, and a working solution is 1:2:100, so a kit goes a long way.

[chris_waller]

Any developer can be used to increase contrast. Just increase development time. As a rule-of-thumb 15-20 percent increase in development time is equivalent to one grade.

[lex_jenkins]

Delta 3200 is a fairly low contrast film. It was designed for shooting in conditions where high contrast lighting is anticipated, such as concerts, stage productions, nighttime street photography, etc.

 

Many of us who use Delta 3200 routinely develop it longer than suggested to offset the low contrast characteristics. For example, if I expose it at 1600 I'll develop it for 3200.

[kaiyen]

Ditto on Lex's advice. For instance, the Massive Development Chart (digitaltruth.com) lists times of 9:00 and 12:00 for Microphen 1+0 for 3200 and 6400, respectively. However, I use 13:00 and 20:00. That's actually even higher than just 1 step up, as you can see.

 

allan

[daniel_ob]

I think also that there is some issue with contrast. I think that it might be exposed as around iso1000 to get it right, but every emulsion (batch) is different. You have to test the batch you got. My should be exposed as iso1000 and developed 13 min in rodinal to get density arond 1.2 at +3 tone (three tones above zero tone, or three zones above zone V). If you do not know what I talk about, I sugest to expose it as iso1000 and develop 13 min in rodinal at 20deg.C with dilution 1:50. DDX developer (ilford) is second one as good as rodinal, but I have no test with that developer.

[profhlynnjones]

Hi Charlotte,

 

Those of us who often use this film always process in D76 for one more stop development than we shoot. shoot 1600, develop 3200. Shoot 3200, develop 64 hundred.

 

Working like this you will be printing on somewhere between #2 and #3 contrast.

 

Lynn

[kaiyen]

While Daniel's comments re: speed and density is useful in a certain context, the uses for which Delta 3200 was designed are quite different and at odds with those types of tests, IMHO. If you do densitometry tests, the speed of Delta 3200 will come out at about 1000-1250. However, the film is designed for pushing in the sense that it doesn't build up contrast as much via underexposure as other films. Which means you can underexpose it and overdevelop it and still get usable negatives.

 

Exposing at speeds lower than 3200 will help the look. But if you're going ot expose at 3200, develop as if you did for 6400.

 

allan

[poutnik]

Daniel Ob, what kind of agitation did you use, and what if I used R09 instead of Rodinal? I think there should be no significant change in (starting) times. Am I correct?<br>

Thanks

<br><br><i>Jiri</i>