Kodak P3200 in Perceptol ?

[aldobonnard]

Hi,
the other day I loaded a kodak P3200, and implicitely thinking that as with Delta 3200, I'd use perceptol therefore I set manually minus 2/3 stop on the M7 back dial (should have thought, I know...I was maybe guided by the "3200" figure only)
I realise now that I have no idea what time Kodak P3200 would require in perceptol... D3200 is 18', maybe it's a good base ?
Another alternative could be to develop in another developer and not bother with perceptol, but I've already shot with minus 2/3 stop therefore the standard times for ilford-DDX or Microphen (I've got both here on hand) are also messed up...
Any advice on both little problems ?
thanks a lot

 

[Roger Hicks]

Uhhh...

True ISO at an informed guess: 500-650.

Sure, try Perceptol but give 15-30% more development.

Alternatively, dev. for your normal (Delta 3200) time in either DD-X or Microphen. You may find the tonality delightful!

Cheers,

R.

 

[aldobonnard]

Hi Roger, I think when aiming at developing with Perceptol, Ilford recommends to tell your camera that your film sensitivity is 2/3 stop lower, which is what I did. I have always found it a bit weird that Ilford did not give recommended times for the actual sensitivity once developed with Perceptol. Because it is clear that if one sets its camera -for instance- at ISO400, it will mean once developed in Perceptol, that the actual sensitivity is 250 (or "was").
I will try based on the Delta + XX% (I'd think as you, around 20-25%, and let you know how it turns out...
Next time, Ilford DDX and Delta, it was only that now the DDX bottle was empty!
Merci

 

[aldobonnard]

ok guys...here are the results...
NOT RECOMMENDED !
🙂
I guess I overdevelopped it; next time I'll stick to some normal developer.
sorry not very useful...but research progresses mostly by exclusions, doesn't it?..

 

[Ronald M]

I gave up playing with developers about 10 years back. I did a massive investigation to find the correct times for HC110, D76 various dilutions, percetol at various, Xtol various, DDx, then went out and did a landscape and developed and printed all the negs meticuously. Then you lay out all the prints and pick what you like. Practically there is not a whole lot of differece except for high dilution, like D76 1:3. stuff that gets grainy and sharp.

The other thing I learned was Ilford Delta 400, the current varient, only looks good in Xtol and DDX. Thr previous two versions gone for 5+ years now, worked well in D76.
It is outstanding in those developers, but I dilike them both for various reasons. New T Max 400 looks beautiful in D76 so now I am back to Kodak.
So pick something and learn to use it and don`t waste time looking for some magic formula. It can not be found.

If you want cleaner images, bigger format is the true answer. Digital is even better.