Delta 100 in Xtol - Beautiful +misc thoughts

[Turtle]

For those of you who might be looking for a combo (1+1) to really show up the crispness of modern lenses, try this combo. It might not be sexy, but here are some comments:

Delta 100 has a very sharp/crisp/tight grain structure in many devs. Despite Xtol doing nothing to assist acutance, the grain remains very crisp and shows no mushiness whatsoever. Enlargements are stunning. 18" prints from 35mm show a very fine tight grain that is visible if you get up close and sniff for grain, but this is seriously fine stuff, whilst preserving a degree of bite. I cannot stand fluffy prints, but in this developer although you might not have the greatest acutance compared to dedicated devs, images do not go soft looking. At normal viewing distance you are nowhere close to seeing the grain and the images have a wonderful tonality. The overall tonal scale is very pleasing and I have just pushed out some of the best prints for along time. Enlarging 645 negs you wont find the grain at 18" unless you are really squiting madly and then will only be able to sense it rather than see it.

I was a bit concerned that I would lose acutance in this developer. I normally shoot APX100 and Fp4+ and also developed those in this same dev. for some reason the Fp4+ was really disappointing compared to the Delta 100 with the images lacking the same resolution, definition and having far coarser less well defined grain. In all respects to my eye (and this is looking for pleasing prints not just for technical point scoring) then Delta negs looked better all round and this ranges from overcast conditions to full sun. This combo has really encouraged me. I will experiment some more with FX39 for when I want more bite still and may well try throwing Delta 400 into the mix....esp to see what it can do in 120.

As an aside, both developed in Xtol 1+1, fp4+ and new TriX are bloody close on grain. Size is comparable, wit the TriX grain being a touch better defined (crisper) and thus more noticeable, but only very slightly. I am not joking when I say there is little point losing two stops with FP4+ in 35mm over TriX. This was from comparing 11" enlargements. I am now dropping Fp4+ entirely in smaller formats and sticking with Delta 100 and TriX, whilst using up my remaining APX100.

There you go, not scientific, but I have produces about 100 prints over the last week, from about 30 different negs and the above is clear....

 

[visiondr]

I've become a little disillusioned with FP4+ for exactly the same reason: "mushiness". Tonal range is fine, degree of grain is fine, but the grain looks like overcooked porridge with no bite to images.

 

[Keith]

I quite like Xtol ... I got a packet from Freestyle to give it a try ... I was using it with Neopan400 and getting the best results I'd achieved with that paticular film. Then I ran out unfortunately and switched back to D76 and was somewhat disappointed with how that developer works with the Fuji. I now have some more Xtol and look forward to the way Neopan reacts with it once again. 🙂

 

[craygc]

Delta 100 and XTOL 1:1 is fanstastic....

 

[Turtle]

I've become a little disillusioned with FP4+ for exactly the same reason: "mushiness". Tonal range is fine, degree of grain is fine, but the grain looks like overcooked porridge with no bite to images.

I was used to using FP4+ in 120 and 5x4 where I did not see any grain issues because there was rarely grain at the sizes I printed. Boy was I disappointed with some of my 35mm Fp4+....when compared to the Delta. In all fairness, they are OK, just side by side left wanting. As you say, tonal range is fine, but grain is badly defined. I would also add that the Delta far better separates the low values (as does APX100). Perceptol used to be popular with this film and I can see why. I remeber hearing from people that this film stands up very well to fine grain developers, retaining crisply defined grain no matter what you do to it and it would appear to be true. Xtol and Pan F would not be a good combo to me as that film has very little bite and needs an acutance developer to my eye, for most subjects.

I have just stood shaking my head at a 19.5" print from this combo that has the tightest, sharpest grain, masses of detail and where the only weakness is a very slight loss of grain crispness at the edges having clonked by enlarger and just upset the until recently perfect alignment. still, you have to sniff to see. I am blown away and know what I will be using in 35mm and 120 for the forseeable future. It seems to have been a Zen like combo. ZM lenses, Delta 100 and Xtol 1+1. I am not joking when I say that at up to 20" you would have to get pretty close before you realised it was not shot on MF. Sure you can tell, but it is not casually obvious. I absolutely cannot wait to see what this combo does in 120 at larger print sizes.....

Great speed too (box).

 

[rich815]

Man, is this stuff subjective, as usual for B&W. Personally I've yet to find a film I like in Xtol. Nothing too bad but nothing that sings for me. I prefer Delta 100 in D-76 1-1 or Rodinal. ANd FP4? I love it in 120 and even in 35mm I've been very pleased and experienced nothing that turtle describes, developed in Xtol, D-76, Rodinal or DiXactol. A few examples:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rich8155/171069654/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rich8155/132682615/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rich8155/223399213/

 

[Turtle]

rich,

Absolutely, we all have different wants. I have had no issues with FP4+ in 120 either, nor 35mm really until printing images with a variety of Z5-7 grays in the skies or those where very fine detail is apparent. In this regard it seem clear that it retains far less resolution/detail compared to delta and also has less crisp grain. The APX100 is as grainy if not slightly more so, but the grain is better defined and more pleasing to my eye. I to have shot a fair bit of 120 FP4+ in staining devs (in my case pyrocat HD) and it is great (I see you have used DiXactol) but none was 35mm so I cannot comment there. Dont get me wrong, I have a number of 11x14 prints now sitting in my portfolio and I like them, but compared to similar images on delta in Xtol they are less detailed and lack the same bite. I guess we all have our own preferences and I would agree that Xtol can make images look rather edgeless with some films, but to me, Delta 100 retains crisp grain despite this. APX100 goes super smooth and produces wonderful skin tones and tonality in general, but would not be my choice for street/gritty images as it is too creamy looking. If shooting 35mm FP4+ again there is no doubt that I would use either D76 1+1 for more acutance of use something with altogether more bite, like FX-39. Pyrocat. In Xtol it seems to have neither the fine grain one can get from Delta nor the resolution, nor tonality...nor the crisp well defined grain. Seems to lose out on all counts. Shot on the same camera/lenses, I was quite surprised just how much extra detail the delta retains over the FP4+. Its like they were shot on slightly different formats.