My first roll of medium format film I have ever developed! Ilford Delta 400 using Cinestill DF96 monobath.
And I screwed up... a case of RTFM. I did not follow instructions which were clearly displayed and developed it the same way as my Arista 400.
Cinestill clearly states that films like Delta:
It also works well with tabular grain films with color dye technology, like Tmax or Delta films, but require double the processing time to clear the pink/purple dyes in the emulsion.
Anyway, I still really like my pics cuz these were just having fun and learning the process. Next time I'll pay attention! You can see the effects in the light foggy looking areas on the bottom. On the neg the dyed layers are still visible.
It kinda gives it a nice vintage charm (making lemonade from lemons!)
Some really lovely shots here! New to Fred Miranda, been shooting film for the last 8 or so years, young enough to have mostly started with digital. Got in way too deep and somehow ended up with a full on film lab. Currently running a Phototherm sidekick processor, Fujifilm SP3000, Kodak f135+, and Kodak Hr500 Scanners, as well as fiddling with camera scanning.
Feel free to check out more results from that over at www.coastalfilmlab.com
This frame of a musician friend was shot through my Pentax 67 on Ektachrome 100, scanned on my Kodak HR500.
Desmolicious wrote:
My first roll of medium format film I have ever developed! Ilford Delta 400 using Cinestill DF96 monobath.
And I screwed up... a case of RTFM. I did not follow instructions which were clearly displayed and developed it the same way as my Arista 400.
Cinestill clearly states that films like Delta:
It also works well with tabular grain films with color dye technology, like Tmax or Delta films, but require double the processing time to clear the pink/purple dyes in the emulsion.
Anyway, I still really like my pics cuz these were just having fun and learning the process. Next time I'll pay attention! You can see the effects in the light foggy looking areas on the bottom. On the neg the dyed layers are still visible.
It kinda gives it a nice vintage charm (making lemonade from lemons!)
amethystwed wrote:
Some really lovely shots here! New to Fred Miranda, been shooting film for the last 8 or so years, young enough to have mostly started with digital. Got in way too deep and somehow ended up with a full on film lab. Currently running a Phototherm sidekick processor, Fujifilm SP3000, Kodak f135+, and Kodak Hr500 Scanners, as well as fiddling with camera scanning.
Feel free to check out more results from that over at www.coastalfilmlab.com
This frame of a musician friend was shot through my Pentax 67 on Ektachrome 100, scanned on my Kodak HR500.
d.s. wrote:
Would refixing, or a second dose of the monobath, do the trick?
Fixing just involves washing it with water. Which I have done so it is fixed, and so trying to continue the development will not help. But it's ok, it was my fault for not reading the BASIC instructions! And it was a test roll so I could scratch the itch to develop my first roll of 120 film.
I gotta pay attention to what film I am using...
While it is very good, I wasn't quite as happy with the DF96 as I was with "FF No.1 Monobath". I think FF No.1 gives more consistent results / better contrast, and no need for the doubled develop time with T Max.
DF96 is convenient because you can buy it powdered and store until needed, but if I ever get back to shooting film, I'd go with the FF No. 1.
Activatedfx wrote:
While it is very good, I wasn't quite as happy with the DF96 as I was with "FF No.1 Monobath". I think FF No.1 gives more consistent results / better contrast, and no need for the doubled develop time with T Max.
DF96 is convenient because you can buy it powdered and store until needed, but if I ever get back to shooting film, I'd go with the FF No. 1.
I prefer DF96 because it is odorless, has development time/heat options and can develop way more film per liter than FF#1. 16+rolls of 35mm vs 7 rolls. And is cheaper.
Desmolicious wrote:
I prefer DF96 because it is odorless, has development time/heat options and can develop way more film per liter than FF#1. 16+rolls of 35mm vs 7 rolls. And is cheaper.
You are correct on all points! The FF No.1 has a strong ammonia odor.
