Ilford Ilfotec DD-X Black and White Film Developer 1 Litre

Product Information

Perhaps the best part about using DD-X, is that it gives users the maximum amount of tonality on their negatives. That means that the negatives will look relatively flat when compared to other developers like Rodinal or pyro-based developers. But in return, you’ll get negatives that can be edited to create the desired level of contrast. Dilution tends to allow the highlight development to exhaust in between agitations, an effect which will be enhanced by increasing the time in between agitations (what is known as "stand" and "semi-stand" development). Such increases in time can also lead to muddling of consistent tones in an image due to the buildup of byproducts from the development process (such as "bromides", etc.), and this problem is worse with some developers yet essentially non-existent with others. However, the dilution alone along with consistent 5 second agitations at one minute intervals will generally still tend to improve shadow detail and highlight separation because of the dilution of the developers. The main reason why this developer is still on the shelves today is because of just how good the results are with faster films. Which I’ve found to be true in my own use as well — the day that I truly started loving Ilford Delta 3200 was the once I started developing it with DD-X. The results were stunning compared to what I was used to getting with HC-110.

I really like DD-X and plan on continuing to use it, but I can't offer much in the way of reasoning as to why it's better than anything else given that it's all I've ever used since I began home-developing in the spring. I have used Rodinal (in the form of Adox Adonal) on one roll of Fomapan 100, and I wasn't unhappy with the results, but I still prefer the way DD-X works on the same film. For everything else DD-X has produced results I'm very happy with - just as nice as the lab results I've had in XTol - and it's handled everything I've thrown at it with aplomb, including pushing HP5+ on and two stops (I also plan on shooting a roll at 3200asa at some point to see how that fares). It's also not helped by all the American forum users insisting on using Farenheit instead of Celcius and intermingling their terms for time conversions between 'x1.4' and 'add 175%' ... I'm a maths-biff at the best of times, so keeping this all straight in my head is a challenge anyway... Ilford Multigrade Fibre Based variable contrast papers. They provide a powerful creative tool. Having different levels of contrast in parts of the same print seems to create images with an extra dimension compared to single grade papers. Stop Bath

Menu

I know the definitive answer is 'test it yourself' but Delta 100 is bloody expensive compared to Fomapan and DDX isn't cheap either compared to HC110... No, I only use this tone with people who waste my time by posting irrelevancies over the why's and wherefore's. It's my business as to why I want to do it. . If you don't know the answer, say so. You've been spectacularly unhelpful by the way - I can see your profile descriptor is pretty accurate... There seems to be some consensus on Delta 400 and Delta 3200 especially when pushed, but almost nothing regarding Delta 100 at box speed...

A single 1L bottle isn’t that expensive, but when you consider that it requires a 1+4 dilution, that means you’re only getting 10 cycles out of a single bottle. For example, Rodinal, which usually comes in a 500ml bottle at a cheaper price, can develop up to 50 rounds, totaling 100 rolls of 35mm film — all in a solution that doesn’t expire over time. That’s why I always recommend Rodinal (or Blazinal in Canad) to be the first film developer for new film photographers.

Ilford Ilfotec DDX 1+6, 9 minutes for Ilford FP4+ and SFX 120 (I process 5 rolls at a time and process FP4+ in the same tank with SFX). I was the Ilford Technical Manager responsible for chemical products at the time that DDX was specified and developed. In my opinion it is the best film developer, both in terms of performance and reliability, that Ilford make. The top line of the specification was that it give performance similar to ID11 powder developer but in a convenient liquid concentrate rather than powder. It was optimised for the Ilford Plus films as well as the newer Delta range and is based on a modern, more stable, version of Phenidone and hydroquinone. If you are unsure of what developer to use try Ilfotec DDX (in 1 litre bottles) or Ilfotec DD (identical developer to DDX but in 5 litre bottles). Minolta Maxxum 9 – Minolta Maxxum AF 28-135mm 1:4-4.5 – Ilford Delta 100 @ ASA-100 – Ilford DD-X (1+4) 10:30 @ 20C Minolta Maxxum 9 – Minolta Maxxum AF 28-135mm 1:4-4.5 – Ilford Delta 100 @ ASA-100 – Ilford DD-X (1+4) 10:30 @ 20C Minolta Maxxum 9 – Minolta Maxxum AF 28-135mm 1:4-4.5 – Ilford Delta 100 @ ASA-100 – Ilford DD-X (1+4) 10:30 @ 20C Minolta Maxxum 9 – Minolta Maxxum AF 28-135mm 1:4-4.5 – Ilford Delta 100 @ ASA-100 – Ilford DD-X (1+4) 10:30 @ 20C Ilford Multigrade 1+4, 1 minute resin coated (RC), 2.5 minutes fibre based (FB). Multigrade developer gives a slightly warm tone compared to Ilford PQU (also at 1+4), which I also occasionally use. Both can be used at 1+9 using longer development times to achieve the same result. Paper While the grain structure doesn’t seem to be anymore prominent between the two diluted developers, I feel the HC-110B dilution added a little more grain making the photos sharper. I am not sure exactly how developers work, but it is my understanding that the more you dilute it, the more grain you get. Kodak HC-110B Ilfotec DD-X

Like I said though, I am not versed in the particulars of how developers work, if you are, please let me know in the comments if dilution does make a difference in the amount of grain you get in your images. Nikon F5 – AF Nikkor 35mm 1:2D – Adox HR-50 @ ASA-50 – Ilford Ilfotec DD-X (1+4) 7:30 @ 20C Nikon F5 – AF Nikkor 35mm 1:2D – Adox HR-50 @ ASA-50 – Ilford Ilfotec DD-X (1+4) 7:30 @ 20C Nikon F5 – AF Nikkor 35mm 1:2D – Adox HR-50 @ ASA-50 – Ilford Ilfotec DD-X (1+4) 7:30 @ 20C Nikon F5 – AF Nikkor 35mm 1:2D – Adox HR-50 @ ASA-50 – Ilford Ilfotec DD-X (1+4) 7:30 @ 20C Certainly, the developer is not hampering my capability as a photographer as I perhaps suspected. It must be something else Though the compensating effect of dilute developers is welcome. A simple developer like D76 or ID11 (same) used diluted is about as good as one can get in terms of quality and as an excellent compromise between the various factors. Most scanners tend to struggle with high density highlights. and they respond badly to high actuance, as edge effects are accentuated by digital processing.

It seems the rule of thumb for increasing development time is generally agreed-on at being x1.41 for a doubling of the dilution (or halving the amount of developer for a given volume), so the recommended 10.30mins at 1+4 @ 20C would be theoretically be 14.50mins at 1+9 (ish). In which case, the Massive Dev Chart seems way off with 1+9 timed at 18.30 at 20C (converted from their posted timings for 1+9 which are at 24C - sigh)... As you can see from the above DDX recipe, my cost per roll goes down with SSD. Now, I use 15 ml per roll or 25 ml per two rolls (or 12.5 ml per roll). I get 1,000ml / 25 = 80 rolls if I develop two at a time or 1,000 / 25 = 66 rolls if I develop one at a time compared to using 60ml per roll in normal development. This makes DDX quite affordable to use regularly. I’ve developed hundreds of rolls of film over the last couple of years, and DD-X has been by far my favorite developer for most of that time. The results that this solution gets are second to none with faster films, which is one of the major reasons why I almost always keep a bottle of it on my shelf to this day. In Semi-Stand Development (SSD), the approach is the same with one minor variation. Going with the Ilfosol 3 example above, I would do 2 x 30 minutes and stir 10 seconds initially and 10 seconds before the second 30-minute time slot. Nothing else changes. Why break it down into two slots instead of just letting it stand for 30 minutes? Depending on the chemistry I am using, I may want to enhance the effect of that chemistry slightly. So, the second stir at the midpoint works harder to produce the desired effect.