Delta 3200 - again

[magumi]

I know there are several threads on photo.net about the development

of Ilford Delta 3200; I read them all and I researched the Internet

as well. Yet, I would like to ask one more time.

 

I have shot a series of photographs at a dress rehearsal of a local

theatre company with Delta 3200 rated at 1600. I had 28/2.8, 50/1.4,

135/2.8 and tripod with one leg extended that I used as a monopod.

The light was very low and rather contrasty - the technician did a

poor job - but I tried my best. Luckily enough, I could stand on a

stage with the actors, and get really close even with the wideangle

lens, which is why I hope that the pictures might come out

interesting. My question is: what would be the best development to

avoid excessive contrast and preserve at least some detail in the

shadows? Unfortunately, I cannot do the developing myself, but there

is a professional lab here, that will follow my instructions

concerning the choice of developer.

 

Thank you,

 

Martin

[al_kaplan1]

The only way to have detail in the shadows is to put it there with light. The development can control the contrast to some extent, but enough exposure for the shadows may be way too much for the highlights, no matter how you develop. Those are situations where a very low power flash on camera might make a big difference, without looking like a "flash photo". If you have an assistant a big sheet of white foam core can be used as a reflector to fill the shadows.

[magumi]

I know that I should have used flash, but unfortunately, hard to believe as it is, I don't have any. I started photography 2 years ago with nothing more than a manual camera and normal lens and only two weeks ago I added the wideange and tele lens. Flash has never been in the list of my priorities, as I prefer to shoot with available light, but I acknowledge that it would be nice to have one to fill in shadows from time to time.

[john_hicks___]

Best to have the lab use Ilford DD-X or Microphen; these give a nominal "real" speed of EI 1200 with D-3200 developed to "normal" contrast. Avoid standard developers such as D-76 etc; you'll get as much as a stop or more _less_ speed even developed to higher than normal contrast.

 

You also really should shoot a test roll in similar conditions and have the lab develop it just to make sure your instructions etc are good enough.

[magumi]

Should I tell the lab to develop the film at 1600 or at 3200, as some people recommend?

[lex_jenkins]

My answer to the same question, from the general/unarchived forum:

 

"I'd ask the lab to use something like Ilford Microphen. If they don't stock it you can buy the developer yourself for around $3.00 for a box of a two-part powder to make a quart. If the negatives are important it's worth spending a few extra bucks for a well-matched developer.

 

In my trials with Microphen and T-Max 400 pushed to 1250-1600, contrasty lighting - whether outdoor or indoor, day or night - is well controlled. Grain is very reasonable; so is shadow detail considering the push. These negs scan and print very nicely.

 

I plan to try Microphen next on Delta 3200 at 3200 and higher. Last year I developed several rolls of Delta 3200 (at EI 1600-3200) in other developers, including ID-11 and Rodinal. There was a surprising amount of shadow detail but the negs were very flat and difficult to print or scan."