Delta 3200 meter/develop question

kxjiru · 06-27-2016, 11:17 PM

Last night I shot a roll of Delta 3200 at my friends wedding with my LX. I only realized that's the meter wasn't on 3200 but the tick right before it when I unloaded the film. Should I have the lab develop as regular or something else?

Xmas · 06-28-2016, 12:05 AM

No treat it as normal.

You should use it at 1000 ISO for normal prints, unless you want the black shadow signature.

If you were wet printing 3200 ISO is hard work.

edmundrt · 06-28-2016, 06:22 AM

On the mark just before it shouldn't make enough difference to warrant changing the development, so don't worry

**mattt** · 06-28-2016, 09:33 AM

If you read up in Delta 3200, the verdict is it is a sub1600 speed film that pushes well.

The slightly slower (1/3 stop from "box speed") you might have exposed to won't have much an effect on the development.

Eyewanders · 06-28-2016, 01:01 PM

Yup - all the above. You're fine. Delta has a silly amount of latitude.

nickthetasmaniac · 06-28-2016, 06:19 PM

Having actually measured the real shutter speeds on a few of my older cameras, it's rare for them to be within 1/3 of a stop of the stated speed anyway - definitely within the margin of error for B&W film

**bobbotron** · 08-05-2016, 10:58 AM

Originally posted by chickentender

Yup - all the above. You're fine. Delta has a silly amount of latitude.

My experience with Delta 3200 is the opposite of that! :P

tuco · 08-05-2016, 11:06 AM

Originally posted by bobbotron

My experience with Delta 3200 is the opposite of that! :P

FYI, the Delta 3200 Data Sheet gives development times for Exposure Indexes of ISO 400 - 6400 for a bunch of developers.

I've shot and developed it successfully at EI 400, EI 800 and EI 3200. I'm convinced it has a wide exposure range. Similarly with 400TMY. I shoot it at EI 50, 100, 400 and 800 too.

Delta @ EI 3200

@ EI 800

@ EI 400

Another at EI 400.

kxjiru · 08-05-2016, 11:08 AM

I've gotten the photos back. They came out perfect. Some issues with shadows in people's eyes but way better than the tri X at 1600 I pushed that night.

kxjiru · 08-05-2016, 11:34 AM

Name: Image1470422046.704492.jpg
Views: 187
Size: 330.5 KB

Name: Image1470422061.694962.jpg
Views: 207
Size: 127.6 KB

Grainy but that was to be expected. LX, K50 1.2 for both.

**bobbotron** · 08-05-2016, 12:04 PM

Sorry, wide exposure range... but I find you reeeeeally need to get the shot correctly exposed, and underexpose == a lot of loss of detail.

Originally posted by tuco

FYI, the Delta 3200 Data Sheet gives development times for Exposure Indexes of ISO 400 - 6400 for a bunch of developers.

I've shot and developed it successfully at EI 400, EI 800 and EI 3200. I'm convinced it has a wide exposure range. Similarly with 400TMY. I shoot it at EI 50, 100, 400 and 800 too.

Delta @ EI 3200

@ EI 800

@ EI 400

Another at EI 400.

tuco · 08-05-2016, 12:13 PM

Originally posted by bobbotron

Sorry, wide exposure range... but I find you reeeeeally need to get the shot correctly exposed, and underexpose == a lot of loss of detail.

In the wet print only days, development times varied for the same film/developer combos up to 15-20% ( which is a lot) depending if you had a diffusion or condenser enlarger. Back then you needed to target a contrast index of the paper/enlarger combo.

Today, with scanning, you don't have to do that. The scanner and image editor contrast curve adjustment gives you a wider tolerance range for your development time. That is, your development time can be off easily up to 15% from normal and you'd not even notice the difference in the results with a good scanner and adjusting the contrast curve yourself. In other words, being a 1/3 or even a 1/2 stop off in exposure index is nothing. People get this 1/3 -stop exposure tolerance ( or even 1/2 stop) from positive film, I feel. BW negative film is a different animal with today's figital workflow. YMMV.

EDIT: Note all those shots were without a light meter (except the dog shot) and all rounded off to full-stop increments.

**bobbotron** · 08-05-2016, 12:59 PM

Originally posted by tuco

In the wet print only days, development times varied for the same film/developer combos up to 15-20% ( which is a lot) depending if you had a diffusion or condenser enlarger. Back then you needed to target a contrast index of the paper/enlarger combo.

Today, with scanning, you don't have to do that. The scanner and image editor contrast curve adjustment gives you a wider tolerance range for your development time. That is, your development time can be off easily up to 15% from normal and you'd not even notice the difference in the results with a good scanner and adjusting the contrast curve yourself. In other words, being a 1/3 or even a 1/2 stop off in exposure index is nothing. People get this 1/3 -stop exposure tolerance ( or even 1/2 stop) from positive film, I feel. BW negative film is a different animal with today's figital workflow. YMMV.

I found, deving it with DD-X, if underexposed it trends to totally clear negative. It gives really neat results... but in low light situations there's no shadow detail to bring up if you've slightly underexposed.

This is 3200, and one of my fav photos of these two dogs.

Same roll, I guess slightly under exposed, and there was not a lot of silver on the negative to work with.

tuco · 08-05-2016, 01:19 PM

Originally posted by bobbotron

...but in low light situations there's no shadow detail to bring up if you've slightly

Nice pictures.

Xmas · 08-05-2016, 06:26 PM

Originally posted by kxjiru

I've gotten the photos back. They came out perfect. Some issues with shadows in people's eyes but way better than the tri X at 1600 I pushed that night.

If you like shadows 800 ISO is it.
If you were on graded paper you were careful with lighting and development.
A outdoor cine team had a vehicle for reflectors they printed by contact!

06-27-2016, 11:17 PM	#1
kxjiru Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2013 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 102	Delta 3200 meter/develop question Last night I shot a roll of Delta 3200 at my friends wedding with my LX. I only realized that's the meter wasn't on 3200 but the tick right before it when I unloaded the film. Should I have the lab develop as regular or something else?

08-05-2016, 11:06 AM	#8
tuco Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pugetopolis Posts: 11,024	Originally posted by bobbotron My experience with Delta 3200 is the opposite of that! :P FYI, the Delta 3200 Data Sheet gives development times for Exposure Indexes of ISO 400 - 6400 for a bunch of developers. I've shot and developed it successfully at EI 400, EI 800 and EI 3200. I'm convinced it has a wide exposure range. Similarly with 400TMY. I shoot it at EI 50, 100, 400 and 800 too. Delta @ EI 3200 @ EI 800 @ EI 400 Another at EI 400. Last edited by tuco; 08-05-2016 at 11:58 AM. Reason: Another example

08-05-2016, 12:13 PM	#12
tuco Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pugetopolis Posts: 11,024	Originally posted by bobbotron Sorry, wide exposure range... but I find you reeeeeally need to get the shot correctly exposed, and underexpose == a lot of loss of detail. In the wet print only days, development times varied for the same film/developer combos up to 15-20% ( which is a lot) depending if you had a diffusion or condenser enlarger. Back then you needed to target a contrast index of the paper/enlarger combo. Today, with scanning, you don't have to do that. The scanner and image editor contrast curve adjustment gives you a wider tolerance range for your development time. That is, your development time can be off easily up to 15% from normal and you'd not even notice the difference in the results with a good scanner and adjusting the contrast curve yourself. In other words, being a 1/3 or even a 1/2 stop off in exposure index is nothing. People get this 1/3 -stop exposure tolerance ( or even 1/2 stop) from positive film, I feel. BW negative film is a different animal with today's figital workflow. YMMV. EDIT: Note all those shots were without a light meter (except the dog shot) and all rounded off to full-stop increments. Last edited by tuco; 08-05-2016 at 12:55 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Issues developing Delta 3200	bobbotron	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	18	01-09-2016 12:03 PM
TriX 400 pushed or Delta 3200?	dugrant153	Film Processing, Scanning, and Darkroom	12	05-20-2011 06:43 PM
Pentax 645 + Ilford Delta 3200 @ 1600 = awesomeness	dugrant153	Pentax Medium Format	26	04-11-2011 03:54 PM
Ilford Delta 3200 - shoot at 800-1600, develop at 1600?	dugrant153	Film Processing, Scanning, and Darkroom	15	11-08-2010 02:27 AM
Amsterdam, Delta 3200, M6-60	Erasmo	Post Your Photos!	4	10-25-2008 05:30 PM

06-28-2016, 12:05 AM	#2
Xmas Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2015 Posts: 617	No treat it as normal. You should use it at 1000 ISO for normal prints, unless you want the black shadow signature. If you were wet printing 3200 ISO is hard work.

06-28-2016, 06:22 AM	#3
edmundrt Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2014 Location: Nagoya Posts: 577	On the mark just before it shouldn't make enough difference to warrant changing the development, so don't worry

06-28-2016, 09:33 AM	#4
mattt Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Niagara Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,907	If you read up in Delta 3200, the verdict is it is a sub1600 speed film that pushes well. The slightly slower (1/3 stop from "box speed") you might have exposed to won't have much an effect on the development.

06-28-2016, 01:01 PM	#5
Eyewanders Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Land of the Salish Sea Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,343	Yup - all the above. You're fine. Delta has a silly amount of latitude.

06-28-2016, 06:19 PM	#6
nickthetasmaniac Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 2,361	Having actually measured the real shutter speeds on a few of my older cameras, it's rare for them to be within 1/3 of a stop of the stated speed anyway - definitely within the margin of error for B&W film

08-05-2016, 10:58 AM	#7
bobbotron Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2015 Location: Ottawa, ON Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,349	Originally posted by chickentender Yup - all the above. You're fine. Delta has a silly amount of latitude. My experience with Delta 3200 is the opposite of that! :P

08-05-2016, 11:08 AM	#9
kxjiru Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2013 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 102 Original Poster	I've gotten the photos back. They came out perfect. Some issues with shadows in people's eyes but way better than the tri X at 1600 I pushed that night.

08-05-2016, 11:34 AM	#10
kxjiru Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2013 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 102 Original Poster	Grainy but that was to be expected. LX, K50 1.2 for both.

08-05-2016, 12:04 PM	#11
bobbotron Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2015 Location: Ottawa, ON Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,349	Sorry, wide exposure range... but I find you reeeeeally need to get the shot correctly exposed, and underexpose == a lot of loss of detail. Originally posted by tuco FYI, the Delta 3200 Data Sheet gives development times for Exposure Indexes of ISO 400 - 6400 for a bunch of developers. I've shot and developed it successfully at EI 400, EI 800 and EI 3200. I'm convinced it has a wide exposure range. Similarly with 400TMY. I shoot it at EI 50, 100, 400 and 800 too. Delta @ EI 3200 @ EI 800 @ EI 400 Another at EI 400.

08-05-2016, 12:59 PM	#13
bobbotron Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2015 Location: Ottawa, ON Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,349	Originally posted by tuco In the wet print only days, development times varied for the same film/developer combos up to 15-20% ( which is a lot) depending if you had a diffusion or condenser enlarger. Back then you needed to target a contrast index of the paper/enlarger combo. Today, with scanning, you don't have to do that. The scanner and image editor contrast curve adjustment gives you a wider tolerance range for your development time. That is, your development time can be off easily up to 15% from normal and you'd not even notice the difference in the results with a good scanner and adjusting the contrast curve yourself. In other words, being a 1/3 or even a 1/2 stop off in exposure index is nothing. People get this 1/3 -stop exposure tolerance ( or even 1/2 stop) from positive film, I feel. BW negative film is a different animal with today's figital workflow. YMMV. I found, deving it with DD-X, if underexposed it trends to totally clear negative. It gives really neat results... but in low light situations there's no shadow detail to bring up if you've slightly underexposed. This is 3200, and one of my fav photos of these two dogs. Same roll, I guess slightly under exposed, and there was not a lot of silver on the negative to work with.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-05-2016, 01:19 PM	#14
tuco Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pugetopolis Posts: 11,024	Originally posted by bobbotron ...but in low light situations there's no shadow detail to bring up if you've slightly Nice pictures.

08-05-2016, 06:26 PM	#15
Xmas Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2015 Posts: 617	Originally posted by kxjiru I've gotten the photos back. They came out perfect. Some issues with shadows in people's eyes but way better than the tri X at 1600 I pushed that night. If you like shadows 800 ISO is it. If you were on graded paper you were careful with lighting and development. A outdoor cine team had a vehicle for reflectors they printed by contact!