Double X and Ilsofol S

[tenderobject]

Hi,

I have a few double X rolls to develop and unfortunately i only got ilfosol S here in iran. i searched digitaltruth and the net for proper developing times but i can't find any info for ilfosol S. digitaltruth only has dev times for Ilfotec DD-X.

anyone can help me out?

[timor]

Someone is doing DXN in Ilfosol 1+14
http://www.flickr.com/photos/13975945@N02/4919318222/
Time for TX in 1+9 is 7.5 min. I would go with it and correct for the next film if needed. Or give me one week to experiment for you. (The nearest opportunity to buy Ilfosol 3 I will have in two days.)

[tenderobject]

will check on the link. would love to get some results from others as well

so, what i understand is ilfosol S and 3 are almost the same?

Originally Posted by timor

Someone is doing DXN in Ilfosol 1+14
http://www.flickr.com/photos/13975945@N02/4919318222/
Time for TX in 1+9 is 7.5 min. I would go with it and correct for the next film if needed. Or give me one week to experiment for you. (The nearest opportunity to buy Ilfosol 3 I will have in two days.)

[John Bragg]

Ilfosol 3 is the improved version with much better keeping properties. the old version was a lovely dev but very prone to sudden death.

[tenderobject]

that's what i read about. so, i'm kinda anxious of my stock as well. since i have to go back to tehran just to get another one. i need to expose a lot of rolls quickly just to use my 500ml bottle. ha. so if this an old version of ilfosol 3 maybe using the dev time for it would be ok?hmm theres no info for ilsofol 3 for 5222 also. what a shame

Originally Posted by John Bragg

Ilfosol 3 is the improved version with much better keeping properties. the old version was a lovely dev but very prone to sudden death.

[timor]

Originally Posted by tenderobject

theres no info for ilsofol 3 for 5222 also. what a shame

Looks like you found a hole in the fabric of our shared knowledge. I will start first development of 5222 in Ilfosol3 tonight.

[timor]

If anyone is still reading it. 7.5' at 20C seems too much, neg is quite dense, however printable.

[John Bragg]

Originally Posted by timor

If anyone is still reading it. 7.5' at 20C seems too much, neg is quite dense, however printable.

That sounds about right. I always found Ilfosol to produce bright negatives with restrained highlights. as long as you don't over cook it or over agitate. I think it contains Phenodone and Hydroquinone and behaves well on contrasty subjects.

[timor]

Hydroquinone is there, so is saying the the label.
Next try will be with 6min 15 sec. with even less agitation. I don't agitate too much in general, but let try treat it like Beutler. Thank's for your comment.

[tenderobject]

let us know timor thanks for the help..

[timor]

OK. Now we are getting somewhere. I changed my plan a bit and cut dev. time to 6 min. as in meantime I developed a roll of Ultrafine Extreme 400 aka cheap, no antihalation coating, HP5Plus at 30 sec less, then Ilford recommendation, with my normal agitation, and it was too much. So this try for 5222, shot using spot and red filter ( I measured for ISO 32), was developed in: 1+9, 20C, 6min and very light agitation (first 60 sec. and then after 3th and 5th min just two turns, left-right, of the spool). Neg looks great, off course final test in enlarger, but it is promising enough to consider Ilfosol as standard developer for 5222. If I have a chance to do some prints, I will post them.

[timor]

I don't have a negative scanner so here is a digital photo taken from my light table :

[Nokton48]

Those look pretty good to my eye. I prefer a bit more density, myself, but that's just me. Those negs should scan well or make good wet prints.

[tenderobject]

whoa! very nice timor! i will try to dev this week and post the result. please post your scanned prints as well.

Originally Posted by timor

OK. Now we are getting somewhere. I changed my plan a bit and cut dev. time to 6 min. as in meantime I developed a roll of Ultrafine Extreme 400 aka cheap, no antihalation coating, HP5Plus at 30 sec less, then Ilford recommendation, with my normal agitation, and it was too much. So this try for 5222, shot using spot and red filter ( I measured for ISO 32), was developed in: 1+9, 20C, 6min and very light agitation (first 60 sec. and then after 3th and 5th min just two turns, left-right, of the spool). Neg looks great, off course final test in enlarger, but it is promising enough to consider Ilfosol as standard developer for 5222. If I have a chance to do some prints, I will post them.

[tenderobject]

looks like my developing with double X and ilfosol S is OK! the neg though looks contrasty. have to scan this later on and post the result.

6 mins (a few seconds added) at 1+9. having a hard time using the new paterson system 4 tank. the cap is pain in the **s.

this is the negative.

[timor]

They do look contrasty, what was your regime of agitation ? Anyway you know how is it...It is possible, that your 20C is more, then my. I have six thermometers, only one was in accord with one, big (like 4 feet long) lab thermometer. The rest is off by 1 to 2 degree. If you don't like the scans, maybe next time you should go with 19C according to your thermometer.
I hope to do some printing from my negs tonight.

[tenderobject]

first 1 min agitation (invertion) then every min rotary for 10 secs (slow movement). i'm not sure with my thermometer.i set the dev not more than 20c. i think i should buy a few more to test for accuracy. heh i will scan the result later on and post in this thread. hope its fine

thank you timor!

Originally Posted by timor

They do look contrasty, what was your regime of agitation ? Anyway you know how is it...It is possible, that your 20C is more, then my. I have six thermometers, only one was in accord with one, big (like 4 feet long) lab thermometer. The rest is off by 1 to 2 degree. If you don't like the scans, maybe next time you should go with 19C according to your thermometer.
I hope to do some printing from my negs tonight.

[tenderobject]

no editing.. straight from scan. although i'm using a cheap scanner right now. i noticed with double X is a bit grainy in whites/highlights.

[tenderobject]

some more images...


























a lot of my shots from the 2 rolls are too contrasty and grainy. one of the culprint is my cheap scanner... there's a lot of factors here.

PLUS X film is next.

[je2a3]

Nice pics and beautiful scenery, congrats Jef! Zeiss has grown up quite a bit...you'll get used to the Paterson tank, felt the same way about it in the beginning but now I find it more convenient than a screw on cap + seems you improvised on a changing bag

[tenderobject]

thank je! :P yeah zeiss has grown up fast. he is going to school soon.. i will have more time to shoot outside.

the cap is really pain in the **s to use.. i'm trying to search online how to close the tank properly. can you help me? it took me atleast 10secs just to properly close the tank a while ago

we have this huge, heavy blanket for winter that i used for a changing bag. although i'm worried about the static. hahahah

thank you!

Originally Posted by je2a3

Nice pics and beautiful scenery, congrats Jef! Zeiss has grown up quite a bit...you'll get used to the Paterson tank, felt the same way about it in the beginning but now I find it more convenient than a screw on cap + seems you improvised on a changing bag

[je2a3]

If you have the recent dished shape cap, just turn it clockwise a few degrees and it will lock (listen for the click) in place, the opposite to take off. Yes, it seems flimsy at first but it is light tight (as you already know) and I think it was designed that way for ease of pouring chemicals in/out. It also uses less chemicals than an equivalent screw type cap tank.

[timor]

Originally Posted by tenderobject

a lot of my shots from the 2 rolls are too contrasty and grainy. one of the culprint is my cheap scanner... there's a lot of factors here.

PLUS X film is next.

I don't think is your scanner. I ran into trouble while printing. Not only the contrast, but too much grain. Interestingly my Ulrafine Extreme 400, bit overcooked, has less grain and much lower contrast. Taking that this film is HP5+ technology looks like Ilfosol 3 is more compatible with ilford products, than with old technology of DXN. In D76 type of developer DXN works better for me. As soon as I scan my print I will post them.

[tenderobject]

ohh keep us updated.. my scanner is not that good and probably adds up noise to the images.. i'll try to scan this on a proper scanner next time.. so, do you think 6mins developing for doublex using ilfosol S is not good enough?

thanks!

Originally Posted by timor

I don't think is your scanner. I ran into trouble while printing. Not only the contrast, but too much grain. Interestingly my Ulrafine Extreme 400, bit overcooked, has less grain and much lower contrast. Taking that this film is HP5+ technology looks like Ilfosol 3 is more compatible with ilford products, than with old technology of DXN. In D76 type of developer DXN works better for me. As soon as I scan my print I will post them.

[timor]

Hopes are gone. DXN developed 8 min in Ilfosol 3 looks no good. Grain is sharp but sooo big I can feed horse with it. Look of the negative could be deceiving, larger print is not. I am sorry, but my conclusion is, that somehow this two products have little compatibility.