recommendations for ilford processing times

[amy_c1]

hello all,

 

i have recently been processing my own 35mm b&w film at home and am

trying to experiment to learn about different film-developer

combinations and processing times. as many have written about, i

often find that the recommended processing times don't quite give me

the results i am looking for in the negative, and that certain film-

developer combinations don't work so well. although i am going to

continue my "research", i was hoping to get some advice from those

of you who have already been through this and can give me some

guidance...

 

i usually use ilford delta 100, HP5+, or delta 3200 (rated at 1600).

i currently have Ilfosol-S, ID-11, and am interested in trying

Microphen and/or DD-X. i am trying to stick with ilford for now and

then when i have a good handle on their products will try some

others.

 

can you provide suggestions as to which developers to use with which

films, and recommended processing times? i prefer fine grain and a

good amount of contrast. here is an image that shows the kind of

print i tend to like...

 

thanks in advance!

amy<div></div>

[eric friedemann]

http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.html

[mikeseb]

You have hit upon the reality that published times are only starting points from which to

experiment. You are really determining exposure and development for your entire imaging

"system", from film to negative to final output, encompassing all of the quirks and

variables therein to come up with times that are yours.

 

Your film choices are pretty solid and should enable you to handle nearly any lighting or

subject and produce good images. You might also look at FP4+ for a conventional-grain

medium speed film; and at Delta 400, which is absolutely a stunning film. (If we were

usign the K-word i'd plug Tri-X, which is the best B&W film of all time IMHO, but we aren't

so I won't.)

 

Deltas and TMax-es in general are less forgiving of overdevelopment, so they reward

consistent careful processing. The conventional films are much more forgiving, which is

not to be taken as an excuse for slovenliness! :)

 

Re developers: you'd be better served, at first, to pick one or two developers and learn

them thoroughly before confusing yourself with a whole shelf of chemicals. ID-11 (or its

Kodak equivalent, D-76) is an excellent all-around developer used straight or 1:1. It can

hardly be beat for all-around versatility.

 

Another developer you didn't list, which i'd recommend highly, is Xtol. Yeah, I know it's a

Kodak product, but the idea here is to produce the best possible images, rather than

brand chauvinism. I think its sharpness and grain results are better than ID-11/D76, and

it's equally versatile, and won't cost you any film speed. I've used it with spectacular

results with each of the films you list. If memory serves, Ilford DDX is also an ascorbic

acid/phenidone developer like Xtol (check me on this) so it may give equally good results;

I've never tried it . If I could have only one developer, it would be Xtol hands down.

 

Only downsides to Xtol: it comes in 5L packages only, so you have to subdivide it into

smaller containers to keep them full so the stuff stays fresh until you use it. (I put mine

into 250 ml bottles because that's how much I use per typical session). Another downside

is putting up with the noisy crowd of irrational Xtol haters who will tell you it is awful, it

dies prematurely (problem linked to old 1L packages only), it builds weapons of mass

destruction, etc, etc....Not sure why it provokes such vitriol; I have never had anything but

success with it.Look at my portfolio; nearly every image there was made with Xtol.

 

Hope this helps. Let us know how it goes.

[mikeseb]

An excellent resource is "The Film Development Cookbook" by Anchell and Troop. It belongs

on the shelf of every person developing B&W film.

[amy_c1]

thanks for the helpful responses so far. i have heard of the film development cookbook and will pick up a copy. the webite was also helpful, thanks!

 

question: do you find that the times ilford posts for ID-11 and Kodak posts for Xtol are accurate or do you adjust?

[mikeseb]

They are decent starting points, and not far off. Using them, you'll likely get printable

negatives first time out. From there on it's fine-tuning.

 

I have to adjust always with a new film, because I use a Jobo. My development times are

generally at least 10-15% less than posted times because of the continuous agitation of my

system.

[stephen gale uk]

Amy, I think there is some pretty good advice here.

 

I would second the suggestion of sticking with ID-11. I think the results when used 1:1 can be outstanding. In terms of development time, I find the Ilford times are a little short when developing for a diffuser enlarger and usually overdevelop by around 15% - both FP4 and HP5 respond well to this. I also tend to over expose by 1/3 stop to open up the shadows a bit. But remember, your mileage may vary depending on how you meter, your kit, your development and printing procedure, etc, etc.

 

Hope this helps.

[david_beal___richmond_hts.]

Amy, use either Xtol or DD-X for Delta 3200, and (my opinion; YMMV) as a starting point, develop to twice the speed you shot.

 

ID-11 is a great developer and excellent for HP5+. Look at digitaltruth.com, as has been suggested. If you plug in HP5+ and ID-11 you'll get a lot of information. Also, look at Roger Hicks' website (www.rogerandfrances.com) for some stunning photographs with HP5+, and a discussion about how he processes it. (Roger won't admit it, but he knows more about HP5+ than anyone now alive.)

 

My personal favorite developer for Delta 100 is Rodinal 1:50; I shoot at ISO 50. However, for finer grain, either Microdol-X or Perceptol. Be aware that these will result in a reduction in speed. Search this forum for more information.

 

Finally: you posted a nice shot of a baby. Have you tried Pan-F (with Microdol-X or Perceptol) for babies and children?

 

Good shooting.

 

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

[amy_c1]

michael and stephen,

 

thanks for the advice about processing times. i will try the posted times with ID-11 and about 15% over with a slight overexposure and see how they come out. that gives me some good starting points, thank you!

 

amy

[amy_c1]

david,

 

thanks for the advice for trying delta 3200 with Xtol or DD-X. "develop twice the speed you shot" = develop film rated at 1600 for the time recommended for 3200? just want to be clear :) i am going to take a look at roger hicks website tonight, his photos look wonderful. what about delta 100 and rodinal do you like? grain, contrast, etc.?

 

the photo i posted is one i took a few months back with HP5+. i have not tried pan-f but i will certainly look into it. what about it do you like for babies and kids? thanks for your help!

 

amy