moreammo
Established
:bang:
I am having trouble and am not sure where my problem is, I am hoping some of you can assist. I am still troubleshooting my steps on my own but hopefully yall can help
The problem is i am getting a TON of grain in my self processed photos. i don't know if its just how the film looks, the developer i am using, how i am processing it or the scanner. I have not been able to make it to the dark room to try a print yet.
I have two examples here. both taken with the same lens and camera, M6 w/ Zeiss biogon-c 35 2.8. Both where taken at F4. The one of the guy at the podium is Ilford Delta 400 Developed by me at home in my bathroom. I used HC110 B at 68 degrees for 7 minutes and 30 seconds. My agitation was 4 inversions every minute (about the first 10 seconds of each minute). exposure looks good on the negative and i have some daytime shots on this roll with similar grain. The Guy at the table was Tri-X 400 processed at Holland Photo here in Austin. Both were scanned by the same Epson v500 scanner with the same settings. the one of the podium was cropped; the table one is full frame. I have been practicing developing at home and am trying to determine what i am doing wrong. I would prefer a look like what i got out of the TRI-X and Hollands developing but was told to try Delta 400 and that it was similar. I plan to ask them what developer they are using and trying to duplicate that same developer and film and see what results i get at home. I am hoping my error is clear to someone else out there.
Right now i think it is not the scanner or the developer but maybe that is what the film looks like, but since all my delta 400 has been self processed it could be my agitation.
Any thoughts yall have would be help full
Thanks!
I am having trouble and am not sure where my problem is, I am hoping some of you can assist. I am still troubleshooting my steps on my own but hopefully yall can help
The problem is i am getting a TON of grain in my self processed photos. i don't know if its just how the film looks, the developer i am using, how i am processing it or the scanner. I have not been able to make it to the dark room to try a print yet.
I have two examples here. both taken with the same lens and camera, M6 w/ Zeiss biogon-c 35 2.8. Both where taken at F4. The one of the guy at the podium is Ilford Delta 400 Developed by me at home in my bathroom. I used HC110 B at 68 degrees for 7 minutes and 30 seconds. My agitation was 4 inversions every minute (about the first 10 seconds of each minute). exposure looks good on the negative and i have some daytime shots on this roll with similar grain. The Guy at the table was Tri-X 400 processed at Holland Photo here in Austin. Both were scanned by the same Epson v500 scanner with the same settings. the one of the podium was cropped; the table one is full frame. I have been practicing developing at home and am trying to determine what i am doing wrong. I would prefer a look like what i got out of the TRI-X and Hollands developing but was told to try Delta 400 and that it was similar. I plan to ask them what developer they are using and trying to duplicate that same developer and film and see what results i get at home. I am hoping my error is clear to someone else out there.
Right now i think it is not the scanner or the developer but maybe that is what the film looks like, but since all my delta 400 has been self processed it could be my agitation.
Any thoughts yall have would be help full
Thanks!
Attachments
Last edited:
35mmdelux
Veni, vidi, vici
are you stopping down the enlarger lens? also, are you scanning negs or prints?
btgc
Veteran
First looks underexposed and seconds is spot on, at least to me.
moreammo
Established
I have not printed any yet these are just scans
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
Yes, Delta 400 gets VERY grainy when underexposed. Also, HC-110 is not a good developer for flat-grain films like Delta and Tmax. Its ok for Tri-X. You'll get a lot better results with Delta 400 in D-76 1+1 or Tmax Developer. Still, watch the exposure. That is 90% if the problem with your Delta shot.
This is Delta 400 in Rodinal 1+50, 35mm film. Its not too bad, but it is grainier than Tri-X in D-76. I exposed this at 200, Delta loses speed in Rodinal. It might in HC-110.
120 size Delta 400 in Rodinal 1+50, EI 200. This was shot in 645 size and is GORGEOUS.
moreammo
Established
Yeah as a scan it deffinately looks underexposed, and it may have been shot underexposed, the negative looks good on the light table. all the shots from this roll have this much grain though and some of those are perfectly exposed, this was the only shot i cared about though
. On the podium shot I metered on the palm of my hand right where his face is, I was afraid his face would get over exposed if I metered from where i was standing. on the table shot i just took the meter from the camera where i was. I am still learning all around so it is very possible this is a combination of errors. Thanks for the input!
j.scooter
Veteran
I find that my Epson v600 introduces LOTS of grain when I scan an underexposed negative.
moreammo
Established
Chriscrawfordphoto Thanks for the input! those shots look much better! I will get some d-76 and run some tests on the delta, also i will try some tri-x in d-76. I should have bracketed the photo. he was anxious to get away from the stand though. i may need to play with how i meter in dark rooms also
Last edited:
moreammo
Established
Jaans
Well-known
Yes, Delta 400 gets VERY grainy when underexposed. Also, HC-110 is not a good developer for flat-grain films like Delta and Tmax. Its ok for Tri-X. You'll get a lot better results with Delta 400 in D-76 1+1 or Tmax Developer. Still, watch the exposure. That is 90% if the problem with your Delta shot.
This is Delta 400 in Rodinal 1+50, 35mm film. Its not too bad, but it is grainier than Tri-X in D-76. I exposed this at 200, Delta loses speed in Rodinal. It might in HC-110.
120 size Delta 400 in Rodinal 1+50, EI 200. This was shot in 645 size and is GORGEOUS.
Thats wonderful tonality Chris. I have always operated under the assumption that Delta was one of those films that was in the too hard basket to get the times right. It certainly looks like I should reinvestigate that notion based on what you achieved here.
I do know that in 35mm it is more fickle than the TRI-X and Hp5 Plus that I use - those two are more tolerant of exposure errors when you are caught in the 'heat of the moment' on the street.
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
Thanks. I have not actually used Delta 400 in about 10 years, these are old. The local store quit selling it, so I went back to Kodak fils, which are also wonderful, and forgot about Delta. I remembered these when I read this thread and dug them up. I really do need to get more of this film, the tonality is nicer than I remembered!