View Full Version : Is Delta 100 a modern replacement for TriX ?

22-Jul-2000, 14:46
I did some film testing the other weekend and found that Delta 100 (in roll film ) developed in XTOL has almost the same density curve as what Adams published fo r TriX developed in HC110. Has anyone used both of these films? Do you find that Delta 100 has a look most similar to TriX? Since I am using mostly roll-film, I need a low-grain alternative to TriX. Thanks!

pat krentz
22-Jul-2000, 19:32
NO! Pat

William Marderness
22-Jul-2000, 22:17
I second that "No." Read the Film Developing Cookbook if you want to learn about various films.

22-Jul-2000, 23:26
Could you please elaborate on your answer a bit - what makes it different: better shadow details, less muddy highlights, or what...

And where can I find the "Cookbook"? - Thanks!!!

Scott Walton
22-Jul-2000, 23:46
Andreas, I have to agree with the rest... NO. Delta, a better alternative to TMA X still IMHO doesn't have the range of luminosity as the older emulsions. The T-grained films were a "cheap" imitation to films as we know them . I may get flamed for this but Kodak is marketing to the masses with this. Ilford has played the catch up game with Kodak because they have had to. If you want a nice film, slow that it might be, try Ilford Pan F. It is a 50 ASA film and is a beaut! If this is to slow for your purposes, the re is always Ilford FP4+ (100ASA) or HP5+ a 400 film. Cheers, Scott

George Nedleman
23-Jul-2000, 00:17
When Sexton and Bond give up TMax So will I. My sens. curves with TMax 100 and TMax dev. give me an almost straight line with a short toe up way past 2.00. Vague descriptions of film characteristics such as "luminous mid range" etc. rank right up there with wine descriptions- "a young but presumptuous blend" George

John Hicks
23-Jul-2000, 00:58
Delta 100 in many developers has a curve shape in common with HP5+ and TMX; it's dead straight _way_ out there up to at least 2.0DU. In fact it takes what amoun ts to heroic measures to put a shoulder into these films and lower densities.

David N. VanMeter
24-Jul-2000, 08:36
Might as well jump on this bandwagon. I agree with the thumbs down to Delta 100. I initially used this film (8x10) with Pyro developer and had satisfactory results. When I finally got ahold of some HP5 and FP4 I was a much happier camper. These two films from Ilford sing in Pyro.

John Hicks
25-Jul-2000, 02:50
C'mon guys, films really shouldn't be religions.

I can't simply answer the question because I don't use TX, haven't tested it i n any way. If the curve shapes are similar then it _should_ look pretty much lik e TX; if not, then not.

In many developers Delta 100 has very slightly decreased shadow contrast to ab out Zone III, then the curve shape is just about ruler-straight out to at least 2.25DU. This shape is consistent and is rather difficult to alter by developer c hoice, although of course CI can be readily changed.

The curve shapes of Delta 100 and HP5+ are very close matches; indeed in large formats it can be rather difficult to impossible to tell what was shot with whi ch film in "reasonable" enlargement sizes.

Sal Santamaura
5-Oct-2000, 12:58
John, in which developers *doesn't* Delta 100 have very slightly reduced shadow contrast to about Zone III? Also, have you tried it in DD-X, and, if so, did you have the same increased speed and high grain results (which you characterized as Microphen-like) as with Delta 3200 in that developer? Thanks!

John Hicks
5-Oct-2000, 15:06
> in which developers *doesn't* Delta 100 have very slightly reduced shadow contrast to about Zone III?

None that I've tried. The only reason I said "many" was that otherwise someone would surely correct me. <g>

> Also, have you tried it in DD-X, and, if so, did you have the same increased s peed and high grain results

No, I never have, for precisely the reason that I'd expect more grain and a li ttle more speed, probably too much more grain for too little speed increase.

Actually, based on .10DU for Zone I, I measure Delta 100 in D-76 1:1 to be EI 125 to EI 160 but because of the low shadow contrast I expose it at EI 100.

Brian Rowland
10-Oct-2000, 08:02

I discontinued using Delta films about 2 years ago after spoiling the film guides on (1) a Leica 35mm camera and (2) a new 6X9 Toyo Roll Film hoder due to the film becoming "glued" to the metal guides rails and deposiiting an ugly black gunck.

I can only assume the film contains some caustic developer product in the emulsion that can react with aluminium.... I have never had this problem with any other product in 25 years of phootography.

In terms of that hard to obtain "classic" 3D tonal characteristic the real sleeper in the Ilford range is HP5 Plus - developed in the Pyro PMK formula (12mins/21degC) it is truly superb and in my opinion one of the very best roll films currently available.

Tonally I didn't find that Delta 100 produced anything special. Sure it's sharp and maybe has a "straight" transfer curve but in my opinion was not very inspiring tonally in PMK. If you are interested in a classic "thick emulsion" characteristic HP5/(PMK)is hard to beat.

Question: Can anyone advise me how to safely clean the guide rails of the above film deposit?