1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. REMINDER

    Any content, information, or advice found on social media platforms and the wider Internet, including forums such as AP, should NOT be acted upon unless checked against a reliable, authoritative source, and re-checked, particularly where personal health is at stake. Seek professional advice/confirmation before acting on such at all times.

ID11 .. is it me ?

Discussion in 'Everything Film' started by Stephen Rundle, May 27, 2020.

  1. Stephen Rundle

    Stephen Rundle In the Stop Bath

    See both images, the first one is from Ilfords data sheet download the second from ID11 card insert ????

    FP4 development times at 125asa ?????
    Is it 14 or 21 minutes at 1-3

    1.jpg 2.jpg
     
  2. Andrew Flannigan

    Andrew Flannigan Well-Known Member

    Unless it's a simple misprint it could be all about contrast, which is a big subject with monochrome film.

    The simple rule of thumb is that if you print a 35mm frame in an enlarger using point source lighting and condensers you want to develop to a lower contrast than when you print roll or sheet film in an enlarger using cold cathode (diffuse) lighting. The longer the development the greater the contrast (all else being equal) because the shadow areas have fewer activated halide crystals while the lightest areas have more.

    This is an old, old negative of mine which is overexposed and over developed. Can you see how the shadows have blocked up?

    Pentacon FM 1968 01-18.jpg
     
  3. Stephen Rundle

    Stephen Rundle In the Stop Bath

    ID11 is a film developer not a print developer I am asking about film processing times which can be critical not print processing

    Awaiting return from Harmans
     
  4. Andrew Flannigan

    Andrew Flannigan Well-Known Member

    So was I. :rolleyes:
     
    Stephen Rundle and neilt3 like this.
  5. Stephen Rundle

    Stephen Rundle In the Stop Bath

    Right, another ID11 question................... anyone

    There is a LOT of confusion on the web (I'll be taking up with Harmans when they return (Ilford UK))

    When made up to 1Ltr do you use it as is or dilute ????
     
  6. spinno

    spinno Well-Known Member

    Either
    You can use it as stock solution or dilute it for economy
     
  7. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

  8. John Tarrant

    John Tarrant Active Member

    Historically FP4+ developed in ID11/D76 diluted 1:1 works well at 100 0r 125asa. FP4+ and its predecessors are well known for their excellent exposure latitude. Incidentally I find that using a dilution of 1:1 is an excellent way of providing development consistency rather than economy.
     
  9. Stephen Rundle

    Stephen Rundle In the Stop Bath

    2.jpg

    ALL THREE of thesE are from Ilford, the developer box, the factsheet and the download (Harmans) so which one would you follow ???




    a1.jpg a2.jpg ?
     
  10. spinno

    spinno Well-Known Member

    Clear as mud but as with all these you have to be capable of reading in two directions at the same time
     
  11. Stephen Rundle

    Stephen Rundle In the Stop Bath

    When you over develop a film say 15 minutes instead of 8 what would you expect to see, once I would have known the answer :(

    Thanks
     
  12. Stephen Rundle

    Stephen Rundle In the Stop Bath


    Thanks then you answer this, BOTH of these pages are from THAT sheet ???????????? !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


    Image1.jpg

    Image2.jpg
     
  13. spinno

    spinno Well-Known Member

    What they've done is pivoted the values round, they are the same, but because they've "changed direction" they appear to be the wrong values if you don't look closely at the exposure values and dilution values and developing values.
    Top Table stock solution, at ev 22 is 81/2 minutes,
    second table it reads ev 22, 81/2 minutes stock solution.

    As Eric Morecambe said I am playing the right notes but not necessarily in the right order
     
  14. Andrew Flannigan

    Andrew Flannigan Well-Known Member

    They're not. The upper sheet is marked "3 of 6" and the lower is marked "5 of 9"
     
  15. Stephen Rundle

    Stephen Rundle In the Stop Bath

    Ok I should have said BOTH are from Ilford
     
  16. Stephen Rundle

    Stephen Rundle In the Stop Bath

    THANKS ALL.

    At LAST.

    I finally decided, ok, split a 24 roll into 3 pieces, 7.5, 9 and 10.5 minutes

    Here is NINE minutes, I am happy

    Thanks again jksdufjk.jpg
     
  17. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    The direct answer to the question is, yes it is you.
    You are misreading the tables both give the same development times at Stock, 1+1 and 1+3 for the same ISO it is just that one runs the table top to bottom and the other left to right.
    Thus
    50 ISO stock 6" 30" 1+1 8' 1+3 17'
    125 stock 8' 1+1 11' 1+3 20'
    200 stock 10' 1+1 15' 1+3 not recommended

    Both tables give the same values for the same ISO and dilution.
     
    Stephen Rundle likes this.
  18. Stephen Rundle

    Stephen Rundle In the Stop Bath


    Perhaps but it is not very clear
     
  19. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    It certainly isn't clever to run the tables in different directions.
     
    Stephen Rundle likes this.
  20. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

    I agree. The first time around I just assumed that there was a misprint. The second time round I read the data sheets and saw there wasn't.
     

Share This Page