Earl wrote:
>What is DD-X? How do you expose the Delta 400 and what is
>your starting point for time and temp with DD-X?
>Schnozz, what is your recipe for Pan F?
DD-X is Ilford DD-X B&W Film Developer. A modern chemistry that
comes in liquid concentrate and is designed for "one-shot"
usage. The Ilford site (www.ilford.com) has all the details you
need on processing times for every B&W film out there shot at
any usable speed.
DD-X is a fine-grain developer that balances acutance (apparant
sharpness) while keeping the grain from clumping. (most grain
problems are associated with the ways that it clumps in
different developers and dilutions).
As you can see from the charts, you can actually shoot the films
at the rated speeds! A 400 speed film is shot AND processed at
400. Most developers don't do that. Another aspect of this is
that DD-X appears (in my testing and usage--YMMV) to be a true
push/pull developer (hence the accurage speed rating) than a
variable contrast developer. With most films and developers, you
can vary the contrast of the negative by extending or decreasing
development time. Yes, some contrast control happens as a
matter of course, but DD-X allows you to truely shoot the film
at most any speed and develop to that speed. Delta 400 is shot
and processed at 400, 520 (true speed of the film), 800 and
1600. Some people will pull process to 200 or 320, but I
haven't found any real reason to.
In regards to the recommended processing times, I do go slightly
on the long side. I usually don't start the timer until I've
loaded the developer in the tank and initially agitated. Then I
dump after the timer expires. This adds about 20 seconds to the
processing time which seems to just complete the needed density.
Said another way: Don't shorttime the development.
Delta 400 is absolutely the cat's meow in DD-X with georgous
skintones, tight and smooth grain, and completely pushable to
1600. I shoot a ton of it at 800. Process according to the
instructions. BTW, Delta 400 has a slightly extended red
sensitivity which works extremely well for portraiture. (used
with an orange filter, skin blemishes like zits, moles and scars
simply disappear).
PanF+ retains skintone luminiscy and is rated directly at 50
with DD-X. No need to overexpose (except for OTF, where it
tends to underexpose 1/3 stop--but that's another story.)
Process according to the instructions, or experiment with 1:9
dilution if you want to increase acutance.
HP5+ is best processed in DD-X at 1:9 dilution. The acutance
goes up, but the tonalities are nearly perfect. Yes, you can
push/pull HP5+ in DD-X and often shoot it at 800.
I'm sold on DD-X. Sure, it's a bit more expensive, but the
consistancy, predictability, reliability and flexibility of it
is perfect for my operation. I've threatened to play around
with some form of "grainless" developer, but why? I haven't
seen any compelling reason to change. I think Bob G. has gone
to PanF+ in Acufine, but haven't seen the evidence for me to
bother.
One caution: You will be tempted to reuse DD-X. Resist the
temptation. Some people claim to be successful at it, but in my
testing, I've found that the exhaustion rate is so sensitive to
the image density of the previous rolls/sheets that the
developer may be nearly exhausted or barely at all. Just adding
15% development time for batch #2 will not cut it. DD-X removes
a lot of dye and silver during the process--much of which is
traditionally done during fixing. This loading of dye and
silver occurs during the first couple of minutes and the
developer doesn't seem to have the ability to clear it the
second time around. Use it and toss it.
AG
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus
The olympus mailinglist olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: mailto:olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
To contact the list admins: mailto:olympusadmins@xxxxxxxxxx?subject="Olympus
List Problem"
|