Urnes
[color=#505050][size=smalHello everyone,[/size][/colo
[color=#505050][size=smalkan anyone tell me how to get a soft look with Ilford Delta 100 and FX-39 II?[/size][/colo
[color=#505050][size=smalAfter the key question, now the background:[/size][/colo
[color=#505050][size=smalLast winter I tested the FX-39 with a 400 Delta. Unlike the A 49 I usually use, it was super sharp, but I found it too granular for 645. I then tested the FX-39 in the studio on FP4 and my old Classicpan, this time as flat film. Everything was fine, super sharp, and the grain doesn’t matter at 4x5".[/size][/colo
[color=#505050][size=smalI’ve now exposed a few rolls of Delta 100 in the field and noticed that it looks about 1–2 stops overexposed. For the night shots I then took on Delta 400 – you can always compensate, after all – I diluted the developer more (1+15 instead of 1+9) and developed for twice as long. The result is still quite dense, but the street lamps still have detail and don’t blow out.[/size][/colo
[color=#505050][size=smalThe data sheet wasn’t particularly helpful either. It stated that at a dilution of 1+19, the films only reach their nominal speed. Is the actual speed at the standard dilution higher than the nominal speed?[/size][/colo
[color=#505050][size=smalI realise I can’t avoid testing this now. I’m just wondering which direction to take. Increase the dilution to 1+19 and then test the speed? When using A 49, my contrast is around grade 2.5; with FX-39, I have to go down to 1 and even then it’s still quite harsh.[/size][/colo
[color=#505050][size=smalRegards, Sven. [/size][/colo
MirkoBoeddecker
Is it overexposed or overdeveloped?
This might be helpful: http://www.adox.de/Photo/push-pull/
Best regards,
Mirko
Urnes
Yes. Exactly. :D
I reckon it’s a combination of both.
In fact, I’ve introduced four new parameters into the equation:
1. The Delta 100 (in A49, the differences between the 100 and the 400 are marginal)
2. Long exposure and thus the extension due to the Schwarzschild factor (I could probably have done without that at 1 second)
3. A new developer.
4. Instead of the 7 minutes from the datasheet, I took 10 minutes for roll film from the Massivdev chart and, of course, rotated it.
I think I’ll start by exposing a roll of film again without extending the time, using a grey card over 9 stops, and developing it at 1+19. Then I’ll see what speed I get and decide which way I need to correct it.
Of course, this is just whingeing on a high level. With A49, I get great results very easily. But the sharpness with FX-39 is simply on a whole different level.
Cheers, Sven!
Urnes
Right, I’ve tested the 100 Delta at a scale of 1:19. With a density of 0.65, I get a time of 11 minutes and 11 seconds at 21 degrees (my old CPE can’t maintain the temperature any lower than that) in rotation.
So I reckon that at a scale of 1:9, I should be looking at around 6 minutes.
Regards, Sven.
