xalo Posted December 15, 2012 Share #1 Posted December 15, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hello everyone, Am about to try my first home development since 20 years. Finally settled on xtol and the first roll is going to be Ilford Delta 400, exposed as 800. Now I see that Ilford's and Kodak's spec sheets don't agree on development times: Ilford Delta 400 @ 800iso, 20°C Kodak xtol processing information: stock: 8 min 1:1: 12 1⁄4 min Ilford processing chart: stock: 10min 1:1: 15 1/2 min The proposed agitation cycles are not the same, but close (a bit more agitation with Kodak, based on TMax). I recall that overdeveloping gives more dense negatives and for scanning I certainly do not want that. Pics are wintery daylight mostly, some dim city scenes, I'd like some contrast, but which can be handled by the scanner (Minolta 5400). I'd tend to stick closer to the Kodak times, but the difference of 20% appears rather large... May I ask for your advice? Any experience with xtol welcome as well... Thanks and regards, Alexander Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 15, 2012 Posted December 15, 2012 Hi xalo, Take a look here First development xtol & Delta 400 - times. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
stunsworth Posted December 16, 2012 Share #2 Posted December 16, 2012 I didn't shoot much Delta 400 as I preferred Tri-X and HP5, but when I did I followed the Digital Truth times here... B&W Film Developing Times | The Massive Dev Chart I wouldn't recommend using Xtol at dilutions greater than 1:1, the T grain films - including Tmax - don't like it. Here's a Delta 400 pic developed in Xtol 1:1. Sorry for any technical deficiencies, it was done 10 years ago... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
xalo Posted December 16, 2012 Author Share #3 Posted December 16, 2012 Thanks a lot, Steve. The massive development chart then goes with the Ilford indications, good to know. I like your sample pic! Will post a scan, if I achieve a usable result... Cheers, Alexander Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_d Posted December 16, 2012 Share #4 Posted December 16, 2012 Manufacturer development times are a recommended start point. Once you process a roll using your technique you should make adjustments from your results. If I were to error on development I would prefer to error on the side of under development than over development. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Albertson Posted December 16, 2012 Share #5 Posted December 16, 2012 I'd go with Ilford's recommended times, to start with. To their credit, when Kodak introduced Xtol back in the '90's, they did extensive development testing of non-Kodak films and published their recommendations in the J-107/J-109 data sheets. I don't know if they updated the times for non-Kodak films after that, and many films have since been reformulated, and that usually has an effect on development times. Ilford re-did Delta 400 around 2000 and re-named it Delta 400 Professional. Their first data sheet for that film didn't have a recommended time for Xtol. One was added around 2002, so I would guess it's more recent than Kodak's recommended time (which may have been good for the old version of Delta 400). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
xalo Posted December 16, 2012 Author Share #6 Posted December 16, 2012 Thanks for your helpful comments! Dave, that confirms my thoughts re/avoiding over development... Chuck, this seems to be indeed a logical explanation for the different indications in the spec sheets. Now, this makes me wonder about the TMax 400 I ordered alongside the xtol. The film is even more recent than the new Delta 400... Will do my homework and compare various sources before souping the TMax. Alexander Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Albertson Posted December 16, 2012 Share #7 Posted December 16, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Now, this makes me wonder about the TMax 400 I ordered alongside the xtol. The film is even more recent than the new Delta 400... Will do my homework and compare various sources before souping the TMax. Just download datasheet F-4043 from the Kodak Website. It has their recommended times for "new" TMax 400 (TMY-2 on the edge markings). I prefer TMax developer for TMax films, but Xtol also works well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
xalo Posted January 16, 2013 Author Share #8 Posted January 16, 2013 After several postponements, last weekend I finally got to it and souped the first three rolls since ages. Great fun, except the first one, the Delta 400... I couldn't get the lead out and had to open the can. I poorly cut the film edge, fumbled in the changing bag. The lack of practice in spooling and the very stubbornly spiraling film made me savour some bitter moments before I finally got the film in the tank. The development as such went well, time seemed about right (slightly shortened to 14 1/2 min due to 21° C of the xtol 1:1), but I really savaged the roll. Unscratched frames are by far the minority, I managed to curl the edges at places... dreadful. Hadn't the time and the heart yet to scan what's salvagable. The two next rolls went through easily (Neopan 400 @ 800; my last roll of Neopan 1600), I got the leads, trimmed carefully, the reels behaved. So good to see the images coming out of the tank! Next weekend, scanning... Alexander Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeswe Posted January 18, 2013 Share #9 Posted January 18, 2013 Hello Alexander, congratulations for taking the first step and as you haven't been developing for a long time, here are some tips that I found useful when I returned to home developing after long absence a couple of years ago: Feeding the reels can indeed be troublesome if they are not 100% clean and dry. If you find residues on the reels you can remove them with an old toothbrush and a detergent (which in my case is a couple of denture cleansing tablets in 500cc of warm water ). To avoid scratches and facilitate loading of the reels I personally use and recommend the following technique: 1) When rewinding, do not spool the film all the way into the cassette. Stop at the moment when you feel it slipping from the take-up spool. Take it out, trim the leader (the leading edge should be straight with the corners rounded off just a tiny bit) and load as explained below. (This spares you the hassles of breaking open the cassette and will allow the film to stay the longest possible time in its cassette, where it is protected from dust and scratching etc). In case of the Ms observe the rewind knob and make exactly one more turn after the film slips from the take-up spool. This way the cartridge can be removed from the film chamber very easily (it drops out more or less by itself), but there is still a tiny bit of film visible that you can grab to pull out the film leader from the cassette. 2) If you use the Jobo or similar plastic reels, I recommend to not use the intended Jobo load mechanism (turning the two halves of the reel against each other), but rather follow the technique that I demonstrate in the video below. It is very quick, reliable and has the great benefit that you will never touch the surface of the film with your fingers (except for the first couple of centimeters when feeding the leader onto the reels) or force it. It works also very well in a changing bag. Video: "Quick" loading with Jobo reels Have fun! John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
xalo Posted January 18, 2013 Author Share #10 Posted January 18, 2013 John, thanks a lot. Especially for the hint on the "one turn" after releasing the film from the M's tulip and the instructive video. I might also try the dental tabs , but the reels seemed clean. Albeit not Jobo quality they are of similar style but different plastic (transparent). The tank's brand is 'plastimat'. Well trimming the film leader is crucial with my gear. I will try your method - in fact, I tried what I thought was "gently pushing" with the very first roll while attempting to keep the film rolled in the opened canister. In vain and to no success, probably because the poorly cut leader got stuck repeatedly... The two other rolls went very smoothly, with the classic spooling method and only touching the film edges. More exercise this weekend. Snow in Paris right now! Cheers, Alexander Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted January 19, 2013 Share #11 Posted January 19, 2013 Ilfords time with Ilford developers are spot on in my home. They are too long for Ilford film and other developers. There needs to be 10% compensation between Kodak 30 sec cycles and Ilford 60. Take a new roll and run a test of 6 frames. That is 12" of film. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted January 19, 2013 Share #12 Posted January 19, 2013 When trimming the leader, cut it to a slight convex curve and always between the sprocket holes and never through them. This will help to prevent snags as the film goes into the spool Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
StS Posted January 19, 2013 Share #13 Posted January 19, 2013 Good point. There is one additional point - since a Leica M is winding the film in the "other" direction after exposure, the first part of the film is curved in the wrong direction for the spool of the developer tank. It can be helpful to cut more of the part of the film, which got fully expose during the loading process. Stefan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
xalo Posted January 20, 2013 Author Share #14 Posted January 20, 2013 Tobey, Andy and Stefan, thanks for the support. I'll see if I get to use some Pan F today when I go out (Paris wears white today). Might then experiment with reduced development times. Indeed, sprocket holes and 'reverse' curling were part of the problem with the savaged roll. Yesterday I exercised with a roll of 120 on these somewhat wobbly reels. This will be a challenge... Alexander Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted January 20, 2013 Share #15 Posted January 20, 2013 If you use a changing bag, as I do, 120 film is a right PITA to load onto reels in my experience. I need to build myself a much larger changing "facility" to make it easier to do so. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted January 20, 2013 Share #16 Posted January 20, 2013 Andy, what you need is one of these... Calumet Changing Room Or better still, one of these... DR-90-II - Dark Room Grow Tent 90x90x180cm Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted January 20, 2013 Share #17 Posted January 20, 2013 What I need is a darkroom Will have a look at these options. Thanks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
StS Posted January 20, 2013 Share #18 Posted January 20, 2013 They could make these tents in walk-in-size. I remember from my childhood, that it takes quite some effort to get a cellar room completely lightproof. If I remember correctly, I ended up loading my films, when it was dark. But then, I guess I would throw in simply more and more professional ressources these days. Naturally, the relationship between time and cost has changed quite a lot since then... 120 film is indeed very unpleasant to load. The second paper layer does not help exaclty, either... Stefan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
xalo Posted January 20, 2013 Author Share #19 Posted January 20, 2013 Ouf, the film roll's leader is out... Am just back from a splendid, grey-white city winter walk with two exposed rolls of TMax 400. Spent the first 10 minutes inside fiddling with the Hama blade, 'coz I have to get used to the indeed highly efficient rewind crank and somehow softer releasing take-up tulip of the M5. Was more careful with the second roll, without gloves this time... For the 120 films I might wait a little, my changing bag ain't that big -- but I found that at dark (and when alone) I could possible use the windowless toilet room as a 'spooling chamber'. Cheers, Alexander Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
xalo Posted November 15, 2013 Author Share #20 Posted November 15, 2013 Attempting to call this thread to life again! Thanks again for the encouraging advice. Although I didn't develop as regularly this year as I had wished, all the fun is intact. I'm very pleased by the perceived depth of the scans from the Delta. There is much in there that the combination of Vuescan and Minolta 5400 can get to. Here a sample of the second role of Delta 400, scanned earlier this year. I meanwhile have a bulk roll in the fridge. Best, Alexander Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/194146-first-development-xtol-delta-400-times/?do=findComment&comment=2466628'>More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.