Delta 3200 @ 1600

Joined
Aug 23, 2007
Messages
5,742
Location
El Cajon, CA
Some available light shots taken in church, shot at 1600, developed as 3200 in HC110, Dilution A. Leica M2 Nokton 50/1.1


This lady was singing a solo for the congregation:
1.
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


2.
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)



I was sitting next to this lady, took the shot before she realized I was taking her picture.
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Joined
Aug 23, 2007
Messages
5,742
Location
El Cajon, CA
I have used the stuff at 3200, but this combo seems to work better. Still a bit grainy, but I like the effect. I was sitting in the front pew for these shots, out of the way of anyone else in the church. We do have one member who is the church photographer, but he uses flash, I don't. If I remember correctly, he was amusing himself with changing batteries in his camera while I was busy taking pictures. :tongue:
 
Joined
Sep 28, 2010
Messages
633
Location
Texas
I'm curious. Why do you shoot at 1600 (overexposure) and develop for 3200 (overdevelop)? Have you tried exposing & developing at 1600? Have tried any other developer? HC110 isn't doing Delta 3200 any favors. My few rolls of Kodak p3200 in Xtol 1:3 don't have anywhere near the grain of Delta 3200.
 
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
596
Location
Ajman, United Arab Emirates
I'm curious. Why do you shoot at 1600 (overexposure) and develop for 3200 (overdevelop)? Have you tried exposing & developing at 1600? Have tried any other developer? HC110 isn't doing Delta 3200 any favors. My few rolls of Kodak p3200 in Xtol 1:3 don't have anywhere near the grain of Delta 3200.
And this is always making me confused about when and how to push/pull the film, as you said, why i use film ISO3200 and expose at 1600 then develop at 3200, it is like that exposing at 1600 is pointless/useless, or maybe if i underexpose the film and overdevelop it later will make better result this is another story, but i tested Delta 3200 twice only and didn't like both results [the second test was better slightly].
 
Joined
Apr 24, 2006
Messages
5,193
Location
Huntsville, Alabama
And i don't know why i am always thinking that XTOL is my favorite developer even i didn't use it at all yet.
Here's a flickr fave where Bob used HP5 dev'd in Xtol:

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


from a Yashica-Mat 124G, some Newton rings in her hair, but still a great shot
 
Joined
Aug 23, 2007
Messages
5,742
Location
El Cajon, CA
I'm curious. Why do you shoot at 1600 (overexposure) and develop for 3200 (overdevelop)? Have you tried exposing & developing at 1600? Have tried any other developer? HC110 isn't doing Delta 3200 any favors. My few rolls of Kodak p3200 in Xtol 1:3 don't have anywhere near the grain of Delta 3200.
I was trying something new. I really don't like Delta 3200, not too fond of the p3200 either, but they do seem to work for low light situations. The 1.1 lens doesn't hurt, either. I used HC110 because it is what I had. It was either that soup or Rodinal, and I figured this would be a better match. I do like the way Rodinal works with the T-max 100. As for XTOL, I have never used it. Mebbe I'll have to get some, but I do prefer liquid developers. :tongue:
 
Joined
Sep 28, 2010
Messages
633
Location
Texas
HP5+ in 3 sizes, exposed at 250, developed in Xtol 1:3, continuous agitation for 10 minutes at 68F is one of my favorite combinations.
I have a brick of Kodak Tmax p3200 and two 5 liter bags of Xtol. I plan to start shooting the p3200 this weekend. I'll be back.
I did run two rolls of the p3200 through Rodinal to make sure they were ok. One at 1:50 and continuois agitation. Yuck! The second roll at 1:100 and standing for an hour was much better.
Xtol is a liquid developer. It keeps in my fridge for a year+ in a wine in a box bladder.
Delta 3200 in 120 is more to my liking. One way you can get grain to show up in 120. Grinning.
 
Joined
Apr 24, 2006
Messages
5,193
Location
Huntsville, Alabama
This shot is nice but it didn't make me to fav XTOL, i saw better results from another film or another dev, but i know that if using XTOL right then it is unbeatable.
Sure, Tareq, likes and dislikes are subjective. I'm certainly not alone in liking the
photo posted.
 
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2005-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom