Ilford HP5+ at 1600 DD-X or HC-110 ?

[Thomas78]

Hello,

today I used HP5+ for my first time at 1600 for available light photography.

Tomorrow I would like to develop the film. I have both DD-X and HC-110 at hand. (And also Rodinal, but I don`t think that it is a good idea for pushing films to 1600)

Which developer would you suggest?
I would like to have moderate grain (for 1600) and ideally medium to slightly enhanced contrast.

Best Regards,
Thomas

 

[RObert Budding]

My suggestion would have been to use Delta 3200 . . . But I like shadow detail.

 

[scottyb70]

HC-110 1:119 @20 c for 90mins semi stand. Agitate first 30secs then once at 30 min mark and 60 min mark. If you google , flikr has a thread on this.

 

[Thomas78]

Hello Robert,

I already tried Delta 3200 with DD-X, but

a) it is a bit grainy

b) I had severel times problems with uneven develoment using Delta + DD-X in 135: I can see the pattern of the sprocket holes as vertical lines on some of the negatives.

Delta 3200 at 3200:



Canon P_Canon 50 1,2_03_Delta 3200_012 von thomas.78 auf Flickr

Delta 3200 at 1000:


Canon P Canon 35 1,5 04 Delta 3200 1000 33 von thomas.78 auf Flickr

 

[Thomas78]

HC-110 1:119 @20 c for 90mins semi stand. Agitate first 30secs then once at 30 min mark and 60 min mark. If you google , flikr has a thread on this.

This would be a "stand development" like with Rodinal 1:000 ?

Whould it also help with non perfect exposures at some images?

 

[scottyb70]

Yes, here is the link

http://www.flickr.com/groups/hc-110/discuss/72157627740433943/

 

[charjohncarter]

I don't know about DD-X but HC-110 is a speed losing developer. It doesn't lose as much as Rodinal, but I would check on DD-X if you want true 1600.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Hello Robert,

I already tried Delta 3200 with DD-X, but

a) it is a bit grainy

b) I had severel times problems with uneven develoment using Delta + DD-X in 135: I can see the pattern of the sprocket holes as vertical lines on some of the negatives.

. . .

How much were you agitating? And how were you agitating? Because with anything resembling normal agitation, this should be impossible.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Thomas78]

How much were you agitating? And how were you agitating? Because with anything resembling normal agitation, this should be impossible.

Cheers,

R.

Four agitations every minute as advised by Ilford. (These 4 agitations take about 15 s of the minute).

My procedure ist moving the tank to upside-down (by rotating it), keeping it there for about 3 s and moving back to upright position.

Interesting ist that I see it with Delta 3200, but not with Delta 100...

 

[Roger Hicks]

Four agitations every minute as advised by Ilford. (These 4 agitations take about 15 s of the minute).

My procedure ist moving the tank to upside-down (by rotating it), keeping it there for about 3 s and moving back to upright position.

Interesting ist that I see it with Delta 3200, but not with Delta 100...

That is WEIRD! It should be (just about) enough agitation. On the other hand, have you tried more vigorous agitation? Four inversions in 15 seconds is VERY slow and does not match any Ilford recommendation I know: I normally do six agitations in ten seconds. I also use a twisting movement during the agitation, which will of course ensure still better movement of the developer. Another thought: have you plenty of air space over the reels? An excess of developer can also cripple agitation.

My suspicion is that because the developer is exhausted faster by the numerous big crystals of Delta 3200, agitation that is marginally OK with Delta 100 is marginally inadequate with delta 3200.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Thomas78]

Thank you for your reply, Roger!

Indeet, my agitation might be a littel to gentle.

Interesting ist that I don´t have this problem with other developers like Rodinal (where I do one agitation every 2 minutes) or HC-110 (one agitation every 15 s).


Anyway I have developed the HP5+ in HC-110 1+109 (I could only put 660 ml in my big tank) for 90 min and the negatives look OK at first glance.
(Exept two adjacent images, where a part (divdet through both images) looks like blown out.)


Regards,
Thomas

 

[Photo_Smith]

Thomas
Those streaks are bromide streaks. You say it's interesting you don't see them with Rodinal, but that is what I would expect.
During development bromide is produced as a by product, different developers and dilutions will produce different amounts of bromide, Rodinal produces very little and that could account for its large stand developing fanbase.

Bromide retards the developing action in localised patches, normally at high density areas or at sprockets where too gentle agitation can cause streaks like you show, although they are some of the worst I've ever seen.(almost like stress marks)

My advice with pushing would be use DDX as it will give you better shadow detail, but you might like to look at your agitation, less is more in some ways with Rodinal, this is certainly not the case with MQ based developers.

 

[Thomas78]

...

Anyway I have developed the HP5+ in HC-110 1+109 (I could only put 660 ml in my big tank) for 90 min and the negatives look OK at first glance.
(Exept two adjacent images, where a part (divdet through both images) looks like blown out.)


Regards,
Thomas

Here some of the pictures I got:

(Leica III and Hektor 73 mm f/1.9 (uncoated))


Leica III bl_Hektor 73 1,9_03_Ilford HP5+ 1600_021b von thomas.78 auf Flickr


Leica III bl_Hektor 73 1,9_03_Ilford HP5+ 1600_022 von thomas.78 auf Flickr