Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/11/13
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Hello- I have had excellent luck with Delta 3200 and Rodinol. I expose at 1600 and develop for a bit longer than the suggested time. Rodinol isn't mentioned on the official Delta 3200 datasheet (link below), but it's on the digitaltruth massive dev. chart (link also below). The chart says 9:00 at 20C and 1:25, but I give it 9:30 and the results are usually great. I can't find scans of any of anything I have shot like this, but next time I'm in the darkroom I'll dig through my negs and throw a frame or two up on the net. - --Dan Ilford Delta 3200: http://www.binbooks.com/books/photo/ic?l=5E116AF7D6 Massive Dev. Charts: http://www.digitaltruth.com PS- Thanks for the tip about Neopan. I shoot for the MIT Tech and we stock Delta 3200 for available dark work. I'll relay the message to the darkroom manager and maybe we can save a bit of money. - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Rabiner" <mark@markrabiner.com> To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2002 5:53 PM Subject: Re: [Leica] OT Neopan 1600 developers > Nathan Wajsman wrote: > > > > Thanks to Don and Mark and the others who contributed to the thread. > > Spurred by it, I bought a couple of rolls of Neopan 1600 and shot them > > (using EI 1600) at a Warhammer tournament my son was in on Sunday. I > > developed the negatives in XTOL 1+3, 13 minutes at 20C/68F in my Jobo, > > i.e. continuous agitation. I am now scanning them, and my experience is > > exactly as Don describes: they look thin on the light table, but when I > > see the scan (LS-2000), there seems to be much more detail in those > > shadows than is the case with Delta 3200. I will experiment some more, > > but it looks like I may be switching to this film for my high-speed needs. > > > > Nathan > > > >From my experience, Nathan it seems to me that you have properly exposed > but slightly under developed negs. > Just run it at 15 next time and your highlights should separate a bit > better from your shadows then they are now. > > Its my opinion that when any exalted one or thing gives you a > development time it is only a starting time for YOU. > > If your negs are printable from that first run then that's pretty good > and actually I kind of expect at least that. > But from that first batch you then adjust for your own darkroom set of > variables: water temperature (thermometer) and impurities, agitation, > global positioning and so on. Your darkroom and technique needs a > different time usually by a minute or two or more. And after a week or > so I'll end up tweaking the time again after I've had even more > experience with the stuff. > Again it's my experience that the Neopan is a half stop faster than the > Delta. And for a bit less money. > For once you don't get what you pay for. I love that. > > I've had this Neopan 1600 stuff in my street camera for most of a year > or so and i no longer think of 1600 as high speed. I think of it as > normal. I think of 400 as medium and 100 or 50 as slow. > > The results most would consider normal: Tri X in D76 1:1 is matched or > surpassed my the Delta in Xtol 1:3. That's been my delightful > experience. Hey we needed a break sometime! > > Oh Lord! Wont' you buy me > Another couple of F stops. > My freinds all use view cameras. > I can not get enough! > > > Mark Rabiner > Portland, Oregon USA > http://www.markrabiner.com > -- > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html > - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html