Ilfotec DDX - samples/questions

[Steveh]

Hi all - I started developing my own film a few weeks ago and have done several rolls of HP5 in ID-11, which for whatever reason weren't really working for me - I develop to scan and had been having real trouble getting images I liked out of my negs.

Today I was in central London and nipped into Jessops for some Ilfotec DDX instead - it was a murky English winter day and I was shooting at 800 so I thought it would be interesting for push-prcessing. Souped the film in the DDX when I got home, and I'm very impressed indeed - less grain and (to me) better tonality than I was getting with ID-11, and much, much easier to get decent results out of the scanner (Coolscan V with Vuescan). A couple of samples attached - the "Roman" was a human statue outside Covent Garden tube.

I now definitely want to try the DDX as a new "standard" - which is where I need some help. Will it work with Acros 100 or is it a "fast" developer only? And has anyone used it with the Fuji Neopan films? I really like the look of Neopan 400 so that's next on my list if it would work with the DDX. All thoughts appreciated!

Thanks, Steve

 

[mr_phillip]

DD-X is great developer, although it's certainly not the cheapest. It works well for pushing and for slow films too. I've souped a few rolls of Acros in it and was quite impressed, there are a few examples on my Flickr stream which were taken on an overcast day last summer.

 

[photophorous]

I just recently started experimenting with DD-X, and I'm liking it a lot too. I'm also scanning with a Coolscan V. My primary developer has been D76, but I think I might switch to DD-X. So far, I've only developed high speed films in it, but I just did a roll of Tri-X at 1600 and the resulting grain looks better than I've been getting at 400 in D76 1:1, and IMO it looks much better than 1250 ISO in Diafine. Tonality is not quite as good as 400 ISO in D76, but considering the two-stop push, I'm very pleased.

Sorry, I can't answer your questions about slower speed films, except to say that I will be trying Acros and other slow films as soon as I'm finished testing fast films.

Paul

 

[photophorous]

I forgot to mention sample pics. The only samples I have available so far are Delta 400 pushed to 1600 and you can see them at this link:
http://forums.photographyreview.com/showthread.php?t=40558

We are working on a database of film and developer combinations over on that site, and I will be adding my recent examples from Tmax P3200 and TriX at 1600 in DD-X to this Index page sometime in the next few days. Whenever I get around to testing some slower films, this is where I'll be posting examples. Anyone is welcome to contribute.
http://forums.photographyreview.com/showthread.php?t=38207

Paul

 

[Teus]

I've tried DD-X and liked it, but it's hopelessly expensive and only lasts for 3 months. I found out I still had some TMAX developer from 18 months ago: it stinks with any normal EI (too flat), but is a great pusher.

 

[charjohncarter]

I really hope Roger Hicks kicks in here. I have never tried this developer. But Roger says it is his favorite developer. And I think, personally, Roger knows a thing or two.

 

[wintoid]

And has anyone used it with the Fuji Neopan films? I really like the look of Neopan 400 so that's next on my list if it would work with the DDX.

I've had some good results in the past with Neopan and DDX, so I've just started testing it in more depth to see how best to use it. See http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?p=762151

 

[WoolenMammoth]

DDX is fantastic for pushing and Acros totally rules in this developer. Be careful with your agitation though, the only time I ever really blow my highlights out is with DDX. I like other developers much better, but if I had to pick one for everything it would likely be ddx.

 

[underbyte]

I have processed a lot of Acros in DD-X rated at EI80. I don't have my notes in front of me but my standard time is either 9 or 10 minutes at 20˚ C. I have some samples on my flickr site tagged with DD-X but I have processed a lot more than the 9 shots that showed up in the search.
I keep a bottle of HC-110 around for when I run out of DD-X, I think the films I use in the water that I have come out better with DD-X too. When I scan the negs, there is always more trouble with little spots and pinholes with HC-110 vs. DD-X. I have also push processed with it and even done infra-red successfully.

Here are a few examples:
http://www.flickr.com/search/?w=39041610@N00&q=dd-x+ddx&m=tags
if that link doesn't work, start here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/scottstillman/

 

[titrisol]

Neopan 400 and DDX is a match made in heaven
incredible creamy tonality and no grain.

I find DDX a great developer for 400 and faster film, it is not cheap but can be resued in one session to develop several films (depending on how many spirals you have)

Hi all - I started developing my own film a few weeks ago and have done several rolls of HP5 in ID-11, which for whatever reason weren't really working for me - I develop to scan and had been having real trouble getting images I liked out of my negs.

Today I was in central London and nipped into Jessops for some Ilfotec DDX instead - it was a murky English winter day and I was shooting at 800 so I thought it would be interesting for push-prcessing. Souped the film in the DDX when I got home, and I'm very impressed indeed - less grain and (to me) better tonality than I was getting with ID-11, and much, much easier to get decent results out of the scanner (Coolscan V with Vuescan). A couple of samples attached - the "Roman" was a human statue outside Covent Garden tube.

I now definitely want to try the DDX as a new "standard" - which is where I need some help. Will it work with Acros 100 or is it a "fast" developer only? And has anyone used it with the Fuji Neopan films? I really like the look of Neopan 400 so that's next on my list if it would work with the DDX. All thoughts appreciated!

Thanks, Steve

 

[Steveh]

Thanks for the replies all - I committed the cardinal sin of posting a question and not checking back for responses! Underbyte/Titrisol - many thanks for the specifics - will give both the Acros and the Neopan a shot.

 

[Xax]

i almost only use neopan and ddx, pushing it to 800 a lot, it really gives me the high contrast b&w i'm after

here are my flickr chosen ones: http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=ddx&w=23333447%40N00

i don't think that i ever used it at 400 🙂