I found the same thing with Delta 100 in Adox FX 39 II at 1:19 Dilution. Adox tech sheet does say that 1:19 development time should be increased between 75% and 100% of the 1:9 dilution (7:00 minutes). I reduced the dev time by n-1 (14:00 min/1.3 - which is approximately 75%) - and the negatives came out perfect.
It's been my experience that many recommended times for Delta are on the long side, like ilfosol 3 1+14 being 7:30 minutes (six and a half is better). I don't know what's up with this film in particular with that but kind of weird
An other useful film test, Greg. You make an interestíng point about Ilford's time in D76 being too much. Ilford states 9 mins at stock solution for D76 whereas for its own ID11 which many say is the exact equivalent in terms of a developer, the time is 30 secs less at 8.5 mins I can't explain why there is this 30 secs difference or know what difference a reduction of 30 sec in D76 might make but for sure it is likely to tame the highlights to an extent at least
DD-X is recommended with Delta 100 (I understand D-76 to keep comparison fair). Be good to re-run with a shorter dev time in D-76. Excellent grain and tonality.
Great video and film! Do you have any plans to do these kinds of comparisons with color film? I'd be curious to see how the grain and color prints compare to each other.
I personally use dd-x for this film, I love the results of delta 100 with that developer. I've done it with HC 110 and it was good but a bit with more contrast.
Off the topic, yesterday I used DDX 1+4 with Delta 400 under a very overcast sky using recommended times, and the result was very grainy, much more so than I have had with HC110. Both the film and the developer are fresh stock. The desnsities were spit on so film developed properly. It suprised me.
Does it have anything to do with Ilford vs Kodak Development instructions? I know Ilford says 10 inversions every minutes, while Kodak says 5 inversions every 30 seconds. So maybe Ilford recommends some time for D-76, but using a different interval for inersions? The only doubt to what I've said above is if inversion intervals make a difference, then we might have seen something really wild with Delta 400
@@mynewcolour Rollei Infrared 400, Retro 400S, and Superpan 200 are all the exact same film: Agfa Aviphot Pan 200 (Rollei IR and Retro 400S are labelled as “ISO 400” because they silently switched from Aviphot 400 to Aviphot 200 when the former was discontinued c. 2010)
I found the same thing with Delta 100 in Adox FX 39 II at 1:19 Dilution. Adox tech sheet does say that 1:19 development time should be increased between 75% and 100% of the 1:9 dilution (7:00 minutes). I reduced the dev time by n-1 (14:00 min/1.3 - which is approximately 75%) - and the negatives came out perfect.
Maybe a development issue or maybe not.
Thank you for showing your results.
Thanks
It's been my experience that many recommended times for Delta are on the long side, like ilfosol 3 1+14 being 7:30 minutes (six and a half is better). I don't know what's up with this film in particular with that but kind of weird
An other useful film test, Greg. You make an interestíng point about Ilford's time in D76 being too much. Ilford states 9 mins at stock solution for D76 whereas for its own ID11 which many say is the exact equivalent in terms of a developer, the time is 30 secs less at 8.5 mins
I can't explain why there is this 30 secs difference or know what difference a reduction of 30 sec in D76 might make but for sure it is likely to tame the highlights to an extent at least
I’ve been using XT-3 with Delta film and am very happy with the results.
DD-X is recommended with Delta 100 (I understand D-76 to keep comparison fair). Be good to re-run with a shorter dev time in D-76. Excellent grain and tonality.
just goes to show how important it is to calibrate your tools and process
edit: are you going to redo the test with less development time?
Great video and film! Do you have any plans to do these kinds of comparisons with color film? I'd be curious to see how the grain and color prints compare to each other.
lol...What is he going to compare color to?...It's all kodak film at this point.
@@Adrian-wd4rn Kodak makes more than one film stock don't they?
@@Adrian-wd4rn Orwo and Fuji are still making color negative film stocks.
@@lespycrab8265 lol my sweet summer child...Fuji film is just kodak film.
@@mchubble2226 barely, and theres no point in comparing them. they make 2 pro line color neg, and e100.
Test parameters aside, I don’t understand why you didn’t adjust contrast in printing to make a readable print.
I personally use dd-x for this film, I love the results of delta 100 with that developer. I've done it with HC 110 and it was good but a bit with more contrast.
Off the topic, yesterday I used DDX 1+4 with Delta 400 under a very overcast sky using recommended times, and the result was very grainy, much more so than I have had with HC110. Both the film and the developer are fresh stock. The desnsities were spit on so film developed properly. It suprised me.
Does it have anything to do with Ilford vs Kodak Development instructions? I know Ilford says 10 inversions every minutes, while Kodak says 5 inversions every 30 seconds. So maybe Ilford recommends some time for D-76, but using a different interval for inersions?
The only doubt to what I've said above is if inversion intervals make a difference, then we might have seen something really wild with Delta 400
At which point are you starting to get limited by the quality or resolution of the paper?
If you achieved full speed with this time, doesn’t it just mean that Delta 100 has more contrast?
Think it’s more to do with where the toe of the curve sits against log exposure , this doesn’t affect the slope of the curve (contrast)
Love this film. -- Have you tried Rollei IR 400? I'd love to hear your thoughts on that film
There is one for 400S, a very similar film.
@@mynewcolour Rollei Infrared 400, Retro 400S, and Superpan 200 are all the exact same film: Agfa Aviphot Pan 200 (Rollei IR and Retro 400S are labelled as “ISO 400” because they silently switched from Aviphot 400 to Aviphot 200 when the former was discontinued c. 2010)
@@nytpu Maybe. th-cam.com/video/FlmNTZvcBn0/w-d-xo.htmlsi=Lx4gp7mcxxf3J83q
Muller Curve