First time dev - Delta 400 or Tri-x?

thecornflake

thecornflake

Suspended / Banned
Messages
186
Name
Simon
Edit My Images
No
Going to be trying my first time developing in a couple of days. I have 2 cameras with half-finished black and white films I could use. I have D76 developer and was going to use it 1:1. The films are Delta 400 and Tri-X 400, when I searched online for Delta 400 plus D76 I got a few results of people saying they got odd results. I was just going to finish up the Delta and dev that first, but am I better of using the Tri-X for my first time doing this as it's a well known good combination with D76?
 
Either one will be fine - all films are formulated to work well with D76, since it's such a stock classic film developer. Don't worry, you'll be shooting both eventually anyway so it doesn't matter.
 
Cool. Out of interest why is the dev time for Delta so much more than Tri-X?
 
thecornflake said:
Cool. Out of interest why is the dev time for Delta so much more than Tri-X?
Click to expand...

Its because Delta is a tabular grain type film (like Kodak T-Max, Fuji Acros) compared to the traditional cuboidal type used in Tri-X (and other "traditional" type films like FP4+, HP5+ etc); they naturally usually have longer development times. Tabular grain films enable much more fine grained, higher resolution negatives, but they do have very slightly less exposure latitude and require much longer fixing as well as well as not giving that "traditional grain" type look as much.
 
Ah, ok. Funnily enough the dev times in the developing cookbook are very similar (around 10mins each) but published times from Kodak and Ilford vary more (10 and 14).
 
There have been different versions of Tri-X over the years. Use the latest data sheet from the film manufacturer and you can't go wrong.
 
freecom2 said:
There have been different versions of Tri-X over the years. Use the latest data sheet from the film manufacturer and you can't go wrong.
Click to expand...
It's the Delta times that vary. Ilford time is 14min vs the books time of just over 10. 14 sounds long compared to other films and its a well respected book but could be a mistake.
 
thecornflake said:
It's the Delta times that vary. Ilford time is 14min vs the books time of just over 10. 14 sounds long compared to other films and its a well respected book but could be a mistake.
Click to expand...

Follow the Ilford time, they'll have comprehensively tested it in ID-11 (which is the exact same developer as D-76; if you look on the datasheet they'll be exactly the same). Are you sure you're looking at the same dilution as for stock D-76/ID-11 the recommended time is 9.5 minutes, but 14 for 1:1?

Sam.
 
I think the book is wrong, everywhere else says 14 minutes. Here is the table for delta from the book -
View attachment 15845
 
The book wasn't wrong when it was published - but it was in 1998, so you're relying on information that is probably 2 decades old and I'm sure Ilford has changed Delta 400 since then. The latest Delta 400 data sheet is from 2010, and should be your first-line resource.
 
That makes sense. They've clearly changed it quite a bit :) For some reason the Ilford docs look quite old to me and I forget how old the book is.

So I have my plan of what to do based on various sources -

Put film in tank (I rewound with the leader left out so I can get it started before loading the rest in the changing bag?)
Mix fixer (Ilford rapid fix at 1:4) and test with leader, fix time is double clearing time
Put 290ml (300 to be sure?) of D76 1:1 into the tank and start timer for 14 minutes (assuming 20 celsius)
Use agitator thing\tapping to remove bubbles?
Is there a pause here?
Invert for 60 seconds, then for 10 seconds every minute after that
Pour out dev
Pour in stop (water at the same temp) - How much?
30 second agitation\inversion then drain
Then fill again, agitate for 10 seconds and drain, repeated 6 times
Pour in 290ml fixer
Agitate for first 10 seconds, then for 10 seconds every minute for duration of calculated fix time

Now here I have a method for washing in the tank, but can I just remove the film on the reel and wash under the tap set to the correct temp?

Wash - fill with water at correct temp, invert 5 times, stand 5 minutes.
Drain, fill, invert 10 times, stand 5 mins.
Drain, fill, invert 20 times, stand 5 mins.
Drain, do final wash with drop of washing up liquid.

Hang film to dry.

Keep fingers crossed.
 
i only invert for the first 30 secs ,,,,then 3 times at the end of each minute .
im trying to work out why you are washing between stop and fixer ,,,theres no need ,,,and as to how much stop ???until i see it at the top of the pot .
you dont need to let the film stand for any time between washing inversions ...

http://www.ilfordphoto.com/Webfiles/200629163442455.pdf

developing info starts from page 8
 
Last edited:
I generally put in about as much wash water as chemicals, so for 35mm I'd put in roughly 300ml though I just pour I'm not exact at this stage.
 
No point in washing after stop - good point! Probably related to methods where an actual stop chemical is used?

I read that the 5 minute stands were needed, and even that the method had been published without the stand steps which was also incorrect. But if the method works without stands I'd rather follow peoples experience than the written word :)
 
It doesn't matter if you use water or a stop solution, its not necessary to wash between the stop and fix. I've never heard anywhere saying that 5 minute stands were needed when washing using the "Ilford method" (which saves masses of water; the conventional way is to simply run the tap into the tank for 5 minutes or so), all you're doing is rinsing the film, the inversions will quite satisfactorily remove any traces of fixer and wash the film.
 
i generally run the tap into the tank for a minute then add a tiny drop of washing up liquid and agitate away from the tap for two mins then back under the tap for five more minutes. Seems to have worked so far, i have only devved about 20 rolls though so I'm no expert.
 
Definitely no need to stand for 5 minutes with the Ilford method - the washing comes up with the agitation, not just the presence of clean water on the film.

If you take the film out and notice the Tri-X has a purple tinge, you need to wash it a couple more times. Tri-X and T-Max both have a purple base which can be harder to wash out.
 
The debate about the 5 minute stands is centred around the resulting archival quality of the negatives. That being the case, we won't be able to judge the relative success of the conflicting methods for decades to come. For me the main factor affecting my choice of washing method is the presence or absence of a metered supply. If on an unmetered supply I would always opt for a 5 minute wash in a fairly fast flow. Now that I have a water meter I use the Ilford method without the 5 minute stands, as i don't care what the negatives will look like in 2064. The ones from 2013 still look OK though.
 
NickT said:
The debate about the 5 minute stands is centred around the resulting archival quality of the negatives. That being the case, we won't be able to judge the relative success of the conflicting methods for decades to come. For me the main factor affecting my choice of washing method is the presence or absence of a metered supply. If on an unmetered supply I would always opt for a 5 minute wash in a fairly fast flow. Now that I have a water meter I use the Ilford method without the 5 minute stands, as i don't care what the negatives will look like in 2064. The ones from 2013 still look OK though.
Click to expand...


I've got an unmetered supply and we're hardly short of water up here and I still use the Ilford method. It's quicker, doesn't waste water and it's more thorough than just running a tap on top of the water standing in the tank.
 
@Andysnap thats 20 more rolls experience than me :)

I think its conclusive that the 5 minute stand is not required. And looking back at my notes I dont have a wash step there after the stop so I think that was a transcription error.

Is it important for the final wash to still be the same temperature as everything else or can you just run the cold tap into the tank?
 
steveo_mcg said:
I've got an unmetered supply and we're hardly short of water up here and I still use the Ilford method. It's quicker, doesn't waste water and it's more thorough than just running a tap on top of the water standing in the tank.
Click to expand...
True, except with the Paterson Super System 4 and the plug in washer hose it forces the water down the centre of the spiral to emerge at the bottom.
 
NickT said:
True, except with the Paterson Super System 4 and the plug in washer hose it forces the water down the centre of the spiral to emerge at the bottom.
Click to expand...
---------and then it gets forced up through the film on the reel ,,,,,so not just running a tap on top of the water standing in the tank .
and Simon its best to have the wash water as near to everything else temperature wise if possible ,,but not overly so ,,,,the main problem would be a big drop in temperature can crack the film emulsion, but it would have to be quite a difference i believe ( look up film reticulation ) and i think a warmer temp washes better than a cold one ,,,,so its quicker
 
Well I've finally gone ahead and developed my first film. Temp was 24 for everything so adjusted accordingly using the massive dev app. Followed various bits of advice throughout the process, and when I opened up the tank and took the film off the reel there seemed to be reasonably well developed images! Obviously I cant tell how well due to lack of experience, so now is the agonising wait till I can scan them in (tomorrow evening probably) but they look pretty good from what i can see.

Just want to say a big thanks to everyone who has helped with advice recently, it's hugely appreciated. Looking forwards to posting my first home dev'd image in a couple of days :)
 
Well done Simon, very satisfying isn't it.

Andy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top