Delta 100 Question?

[dave_wilson1]

<p>I was cleaning out a dresser today and found nine rolls of Ilford film. 5 FP4+, 2 HP5+, and 2 Delta 100s. Anyway, I haven't used Delta since 2000 which is when it's from, and I only have HC110. What's a simple normal dev and time that some of you use with this. (Given the 9 year old age, and the Delta emulsion, should I bother or toss?) Thanks much as always!</p>

[dave_redmann]

<p><em>Given the 9 year old age, and the Delta emulsion, should I bother or toss?</em></p>

<p>That depends: is this exposed film, that might have images you'd be glad to have, or is it unexposed? If you think there might be images you want already on it, give it a shot: people have gotten usable images from film that has sat for much longer. If the film is unexposed, I can't see keeping it--why risk an image you hope to capture tomorrow, to say notjhing of your time, to save a few bucks worth of film?</p>

<p><em>I only have HC110. What's a simple normal dev and time that some of you use with this.</em></p>

<p>I can't predict how you'd need to change development to account for the stale film. From my notes, at least with more modern Delta 100 (I know Delta 400 changed, but did Delta 100?), for Delta 100 exposed at EI 100, with HC-110, dilution B (1+31 from the US syrup), at 68 deg. F / 20 deg. C, the starting time is 6:00.</p>

 

[dave_wilson1]

<p>Oops, no Dave, sealed unopened. Exactly what you mention about the "newer" emulsions is why I asked. The conventional films work fine for me stale, but this I think is more like the TMAX??? so that's why I was questioning other folks. Thanks for your thoughts, much appreciated.</p>

[larrydressler]

<p>Hey shoot a roll at box speed use HC-110 Dilution B and see what you get. I bet they are just fine. B will keep any fog down better than H but if you want use Dilution A but I find the times too short.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>Regarding the age of the film and whether to use it, I'd use it. Probably would rate it at half the box ISO speed and give appropriately less development. Not sure about times for the pre "+" era Ilford films but some info might be in Ilford's online archives. Or do a sort of clip test: expose half the film, cut the exposed half in the darkroom or a changing bag - you don't even need to remove the cassette from the camera for this - develop it to evaluate and go from there. Cut a new leader for the remaining half the roll. I've done this a few times with unknown films and older bulk rolls of Tri-X that I found in the closet after umpteen years.</p>

<p>As far as I can recall, Ilford refers to its Delta series films as "epitaxial grain", rather than to the T-grain technology of Kodak films. How different or similar these films actually are in reality and practical application, I don't know. I can say that in my casual experience as an ordinary user T-Max films appear to have a higher iodide content, perhaps related to the sensitizing dyes. T-Max films appear to exhaust rapid fixer more quickly than Delta films. Otherwise, both seem to have nearly equally fine grain.</p>

<p>I ended up not using Delta 100 and 400 films mostly because TMX had slightly finer grain and a distinctive tonality that I liked. And TMY pushes very well to 1600 or higher. I'll still use Delta 3200 occasionally.</p>

<p>Regarding the differences between HP5 and HP5+ or FP4 and FP4+, I don't know, never used the pre + era Ilford films. I recall reading some comments online during the 1990s but don't remember what folks were saying. Back then I used Tri-X almost exclusively and never even tried an Ilford film until around 2000 or so, by which time they'd switched completely over to the "+" lineup. I've used lots of HP5+, which is generally comparable to Tri-X, and FP4+ which isn't really directly comparable to any other film I've tried. It's not quite like Plus-X, not quite like APX 100, but a good basic film that works very well down to EI 50 with very fine grain.</p>

[dave_wilson1]

<p>Alright, I'm just gonna' roll with it and see what happens. I'll shoot one straight up, the other as Lex perplexses, 1/2 up and compensate. Good conversation, it was worth kickin' around. Good health to everyone.</p>

[larrydressler]

<p>Bet you find no loss of speed. LOL</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>Probably true, Larry. So far I've encountered only one old roll of film that was badly fogged due to age and heat, a bulk roll of Tri-X that was only a few years old but was stored in a non-air conditioned space. The rest, mostly ISO 50-100 stuff, turned out about as well as fresh rolls. Even some 10 year old 120 color film that had been in the fridge turned out well enough.</p>