Xtol + Ilford Delta 4x5greenspun.com : LUSENET : Large format photography : One Thread
I am trying to find times for processing Ilford Delta 100 & 400 sheet film in Xtol. I am using a rotary processor and diluting 1:1 (also full strength).
Ilford doesn't seem to have times for Xtol.
Kodak (Data sheets) only has times for Delta in roll film, not sheet - can I just use the roll film times? (I notice in the Ilford data they give the same times for roll and sheet for all developers).
I really like Delta and Xtol in 35mm, would like to use it in 4x5.
BTW I checked the archives and couldn't find the answer to this question.
-- Tim Atherton (email@example.com), November 27, 1998
For Xtol 1+1 I would start with 10.5 minutes. This is the time you can find on http://www.users.dircon.co.uk/~migol/photo/tables/dlt100.html. This will be the time for 35mm I guess. If you can use this time for 4*5 inch depends mainly on your agitation-rythm. Is it comparable to 5 seconds every half of a mitute, then use this time as a first test.
-- Lot Wouda (firstname.lastname@example.org), November 28, 1998.
I did call Ilford to ask this very question. The technician mentioned that the developing time for sheet film is the same as that for the roll film.
-- Yong-ran Zhu (email@example.com), November 28, 1998.
I just ran some tests earlier this evening using Delta 100 (at EI 100) and 400 (at EI 400) developed in Xtol 1:2 in BTZS-style tubes. I used a test scene comprised of a gray card (which I metered from), bright white paper, a wrinkled-up black sweatshirt, and a few household items including some chrome with specular highlights.
The times I got were 11 minutes at 75 degrees F for Delta 400 and 12 minutes at 75 deg for Delta 100. These times are 22% greater than the Kodak recommended time for Delta 400, 33% greater for Delta 100.
This gave negatives with a full range of tones: some detail in the black shirt, specular highlights noticeably more dense than the bright white paper. Of course, you'll have to do some fine tuning to adjust for your metering/developing, but you should get decent-looking negatives using these adjustments.
-- Mike Dixon (firstname.lastname@example.org), November 29, 1998.