Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] BW films again

Subject: Re: [OM] BW films again
From: AG Schnozz <agschnozz@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 09:46:07 -0700 (PDT)
>Have you tried Ilford Delta 3200 Push-1 at EI 1600?  Would be
>curious about any comparison there.

Yes.  I think the Delta 3200 would be a better film if pushed to
6400 or 12800 than at either 1600 or 3200.  Delta 3200, like the
Tmax equivelent has too much "smear" to it.  Nearly impossible
to get a razor sharp picture.  The sharpness difference is
visible with the naked eye looking at the negs.

Delta 400, pushed to 1600 (D400+2) proved to be slightly higher
contrast (Delta 3200 at 1600 was flatter, but did have really
nice gradients). Zones 2-3 on the D400+2 neg are a touch muddy,
but nothing that can't be worked around--still gobs better than
T400CN.

Back to sharpness and grain structure, the images are crisp
enough to make you do a double take.  I did a test print where I
had enlarged the neg to about 16x24" and the grain was not
objectionable.  Can you say "Hmmm"?  Even the scanner didn't
have any problems with the film!!!!!!!!!  Delta 100 and 400
scans exceptionally well in my Nikon Coolscan II scanner.  Far
better than I've ever had with older style films.  The Scanned
D400+2 remained crisp and did not alias like I'm used to.

Delta 100, shot and processed at 100 is good stuff.  I did a
trial chemical print of a bunch of wet leaves taken with the
50/3.5. At 8x10, grain is entirely invisible. The film is just
contrasty enough that I dropped down to a grade 1.75.  The
picture is so sharp and the tonalities so absolute that you
could swear that it was a medium or large format negative. (this
particular picture will be a money maker).

I'm still struggling some with the Zone 3-4 tones with Delta 100
and DDX chemistry, but am learning what makes this film tick.
When it comes to graininess, it is a tabular style grain, so it
doesn't have the sandy look that traditional films have, so it
is even smoother than Ilford Pan-F.  The edgyness is similar to
Pan-F, but the film is much contrastier.  I can print D100
almost a full grade softer than Pan-F. (However, Pan-F has a
tonal scale that just won't quit).  Zones 1-2 and 7+ have nice
sparkle to them--but it is easy to blow out the highlights
(similar to TMY in that characteristic).

In comparing TMax 100 with Delta 100, I'd give the grain nod to
D100.  At 8x10, grain remains nearly invisible whereas TMX has a
slight sandy look to it.  Sharpness of the films is similar, but
I'd say that D100 raises the "film format" a notch.  It must be
stunning in medium format.

D400 at 400 did an excellent job with the wedding shoot. The
skin tones are lovely. This is a people film, for sure.  Skin
tones are similar to TMAX 100, but much better than TMAX 400.
Compared to traditional films, I'd say that grain is softer but
similar sized to FP4+ or Plus-X.  The grain of D400 is rather
controlled and not objectionable. (I despise TMAX 400).

Best of all, the Ilford Delta films scan well.  I've had
exceptional results scanning this film.  The film base is
slightly frosted and the grain isn't "clumped" up like
traditional emulsions (Tri-X and HP5).  My jaw is still bouncing
on the floor after doing a scan of the D400+2 film.

I'm still not so sure about D400 at 400 for nature work. Until I
spend some time in the darkroom with the negs I'll refrain from
commenting. For the wedding, the D400 at 400 was a supurb
choice.  I'm completely sold in it for this application.

I scanned a wedding shot (D400) and printed it on 4x6 glossy
from the computer. I also did a chemical print of the same shot
at about the same size.  The blacks go much deeper in the
chemical print and the highlights sparkle more, but otherwise
the prints are pretty comparable.  Took me a whole lot less time
to get a nice shot from the chemical print, though. The computer
print is a bit cooltoned.  In either print, the grain is
essentially invisible.

So, in conclusion... ...uh huh...

Given the exceptionally good scanning quality of Delta 100 and
400, I'm going to be hard-pressed to not use this film.  No
other B&W film scans as well, in my experience, as these films
do.  Also, it is a pleasure to have to soften the paper grade in
the darkroom instead of hardening like I normally do.

I'll experiment with D100 pushed to 400 to see what that is like
and also try D400 pushed to 800.  As a pushable film, Delta 400
with the DDX chemistry has no equal--grain wise.

I'm still not completely satisfied with the gradients.  My
exposures and processing are not perfectly matching the film
yet.  But I'm so pleased with all other aspects of this film
that I'm going to try.  I'll blow a roll on an
exposure/processing test.  Out will come the color chart/gray
scale and photograph it over, under and dead on and process it
over, under and dead on.  Has to be some setting like
over-expose 1/2 stop and under process 1 minute or something
like that.

I don't think I'll ever buy a high speed roll of film again.  At
1600, D400+2 has no equal.

AG-(I am NOT on Ilford's payroll)-Schnozz

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo!
http://sbc.yahoo.com

< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz