Delta 3200 developer suggestions.

[johndc]

I'm currently developing this film in XTOL, and I'm pretty happy with the

results, particularly in the shadow detail. I'm wondering if there is a

different developer I might try that yields the same shadow detail and ability

to push, but with higher acutance. Yes, I know increased acutance will result in

more pronounced grain, but I don't mind that. Or, at least, I don't know if I

would mind it yet and don't mind going through a few bucks and a few rolls to

find out.

 

Any suggestions?

[frank.schifano]

I'm not a Microphen user, thoguh I do hear and see some results with that developer and film combination that look good. Like you, I usually pair Delta 3200 or TMZ with XTOL. I'm satisfied with the results.

[User_502260]

Microphen will give slightly different look but I don't know whether it would be better or worse. I like the Kodak 3200 film (TMZ) in Microphen but I prefer the Kodak 3200 film anyway. The exception is the 120 size where Ilford is the only choice.

[brian steinberger]

May I suggest Ilford's DD-X developer. It's formulated for the faster ilford films. Recommended dilution is 1:4, but you could easily use it at 1:7 or 1:9 for greater accutance. I highly suggest it.

 

Brian

[spanky]

I guess a lot rides on which iso you plan to use. I have to shoot at 3200 so I loose a little shadow detail. I've been using Clayton F76+, seems to work well. Most of my images in my gallery section The 3200 Club are Delta 3200 and Clayton F76+

[yann1]

DDX works very well, I personally use HC110, with very good results so far, but I use 120 films so grain isn't too much of a problem. Even if you don't mind grain, and you shoot 35mm, Microphen should be your best choice, and DDX if you can afford it...

[pc_b]

Hi John,

have you tried Xtol diluted 1+2 or 1+3? Sure will get you rougher grain but also more

accutance. Already the step from stock to 1+1 is noticeable. (I invert only every minute).

Cheers, Peter

[johndc]

I'm shooting 120, so grain is not a huge issue.

 

I shoot at everything from 1600 to 12500, depending on the conditions. I'll have to get a bottle of DD-X and try that, as I've heard good things about it.

[gnashings]

I have tried Delta 3200 in everything from Microphen to Rodinal with D76 in between. I have found that Microphen was the best of the three for "proper" results - Rodinal was just whacky, as you may have guessed - but not having used XTOL I really can't make any judgement on the relation between the two.

I have to say that the whole pursuit of shadow detail is quite often taken to ridiculous lengths. I think as photographers, we are used to be able to perform magic with images, and some times get a severe case of wanting our cake and eating it too (guilty as charged - I am not pointing fingers), but when you think about it, there actually is very little detail in shadows when your eyes are adjusted to an over all scene. Part of the miracle of the human eye is that it adjust so quickly, so imperceptibly, that we don't notice it (think about it, most people would not tell you that they can see almost 180 degrees because our brains concentrate on a much smaller portion of what we see). The camera can't do that... Simularily with shadows - we see details in shadows because when we direct our direction there, the eyes adjust (if we were "looking" at them, we would find the highlights "blown out"). Are we sometimes not asking for too much?

Sorry - I got a little "philosophical" there - just thinking out loud:)

[ed_hurst]

Another vote for DD-X. Seems to me to be just the most suitable developer all round for this film. As was said earlier, you can increase the dilution to increase acutance (at the cost of increasing grain).

[mikeseb]

Xtol, undiluted. Only way to get shadow detail is adeuquate exposure, so pushing is not

compatible with that goal.

[roger krueger]

I tested several developers for shadow speed a few years ago--X-TOL, dilute X-TOL

sanand didn't find much difference. T-Max-RS was just a hair faster than anything else,

but it's a rotten push developer--zero compensating action=massive highlights blowouts

when pushed.

 

I like stand development in dilute X-TOL, good grain, sharpness and compensating action,

Microphen is the tiniest bit less sharp, but it has the same shadow speed, and

considerably more compensating action.

 

One interesting thing I found was that D3200 is very sensitive to temperature--even 72F

lost a little bit of shadow detail into fog vs. 68F, and it got ugly over 72F. TMZ in dilute X-

TOL worked fine all the way up to 90F, a temp at which the D3200 was almost solid.

[johndc]

"Only way to get shadow detail is adeuquate exposure, so pushing is not compatible with that goal."

 

Some developers are better at developing low-exposure areas than others, regardless of whether you push or pull. Naturally what qualifies as "shadow detail" when you push to 12500, is going to be different than when you pull to 400 -- when I say "shadow detail" with regards to pushed film, I'm not talking about Zone I. I wouldn't say they were incompatible, just different.

[roger krueger]

Hmm, lost part of that post, the list of devs I tried should be X-tol, dilute X-tol stand,

Acufine, T-Max-RS, Microphen, Speedibrews.

[chris_waller]

As you're shooting on 120 and grain is not an issue then Rodinal is the one for acutance.