Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/01/04
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]> Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 08:25:59 -0800 > From: Mark Rabiner <mark@markrabiner.com> > Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: If you had only one B&W film/developer combo, which would it be? > Message-ID: <3C35D798.929C312C@markrabiner.com> > References: <200201032133.NAA09967@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> <3C35C1BC.FF747FA6@ldp.com> > > Rolfe Tessem wrote: > >> > >> > Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 11:40:47 -0600 >> > From: "Jeffery L.Smith" <jsmith45@bellsouth.net> >> > Subject: [Leica] If you had only one B&W film/developer combo, which would it be? >> > Message-ID: <000901c1947d$c74fc080$a36dfea9@JSMITH> >> > References: > >> >> <snip> > >> > >> > I would like to find one good predictable film and developer. If I were >> > to ask you for a recommendation for a B&W film and developer combination >> > with an E.I. Of 400 to 800 (+/- 200), what would you blurt out? > >> >> Delta 400 in Xtol 1:1 in a Jobo. >> >> -- > > > I shot Delta 400 al last year. Now they've changed it and I've not tried > the new version. > This year I'm going between Neopan 1600 to 100. > If i had to standardize I'd go out and buy a brick of the 400 which I'm > planning on doing soon anyway and just shoot that. > I don't' even have a time on it yet. > And run it in Xtol 1:3. I'd expect it too look almost as good as a 100 > speed film; like Plus x or FP4 in D76 1:1. > > But i expect to be stocking all three speeds of Neopan film this year; > 100, 400, and 1600. > And using them at the speed indicated on the box by the way. 100, 400, > and 1600. The new Delta 400 is significantly better than the old Delta 400, IMHO, and Ilford probably should have come up with a different name. OTOH, Kodak has significantly changed Tri-X over the years without even telling us. :-). My take is that with Xtol, the new films look like the old films (and sometimes even new films) one step slower. That is, Neopan 1600 in Xtol looks to me like "old" Tri-X. Most of the 400 speed films, but especially the new Delta 400, look like 100 speed films. And the 100 speed films in Xtol look like the slow films of old. Since there has been some discussion of Xtol dilutions here, let me add my opinion. First, in a Jobo you're really limited to Xtol at 1:1 dilution because of the requirement of 100ml of stock per roll and the need to respect the tank capacity. Having said that, I've never seen any group as avid about using 1:3 dilution of Xtol as the LUG. The 1:1 dilution allows greater economy over using straight stock along with reasonable developing times. This dilution additionally arguably provides *some* additional accuance and edge effect. Nowhere have I seen any evidence that the additional dilution to 1:3 provides any incremental benefits over 1:1. Finally, I think that dividing the 5 liters of stock into 250ml bottles is probably overly conservative. I divide into five 1 liter glass bottles and have never had a failure even though a partially filled 1 liter bottle may sit for a couple of months. Kodak's claim is that a fully filled bottle of stock is good for year and I would guess that this claim is typically Kodak conservative. As Xtol users probably know, but others may not, Xtol does not turn brown when it starts to go bad as other well-known developers do so you are on your own to decide when to toss it. As to the recurring threads on rec.photo.darkroom about Xtol failures, I don't know what to make of them as I've had nothing but complete success with this developer. - -- Rolfe Tessem rolfe@ldp.com NYC - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html