Ilford Delta 100 Black and White Film Review | All About Film

[@tgchism]

Thank you for a great very detailed video!! You truly have me excited about trying this film. I shot film from high school in the early 80's I started developing my own B&W film and prints in the mid 80's and worked in a photo lab in there late 80's. I was slow to switch to digital because I feared not having a negatives to hold onto instead if digital files which still seem too easy to loose comparatively. I eventually settled into Sony digital cameras starting with the A6000. One of the nice thing about Sony cameras is the ease that you can mount just about any lens from any manufacture with the right adaptor. This opened a whole new experience of trying several classic lenses on the A6000. Collecting classic lenses eventually led me back to fun-frame photography and the Sony A7III. For the first year or so owning the camera I literally only had manual lenses to use on it. During my time collecting classic lenses to use, I acquired several older 35mm film cameras in the process. I really didn't have planned usage for them until I started to scan my old library of film. Seeing the quality of the scans from my film has rekindled my interest in shooting film again. To that end I purchased 4 35mm rolls of Delta 100. I also purchased Ifosal-3 developer for the process. That's what led me to your video. I wanted to see which times I wanted to use and if I had actually picked up the right developer for the job. I will certainly use the time and dilutions you mention for the film. I'm also planning on introducing my youngest son to the film shooting and developing process. He ended up with my Sony A6000 camera and has really taken to photography. This will be fun because he has never shot anything but digital. Thank you again for all the wonderful information!

[@DavidHancock]

Thank you!

[@samue1991]

I've picked up several rolls of this since I watched this video and just yesterday got the absolute sharpest and clearest 35mm photos I've ever taken. I'm blown away by the ifosol and delta 100 combo, it'll be a staple for me for sure. Thanks for the video!!

[@DavidHancock]

Thank you!

[@richardsimms251]

Wonderful presentation and review of this film. Also the foregrounds and backgrounds and skies are so well balanced in so many of your photographs. Terrific work and effort. Thank you. RS. Canada.

[@DavidHancock]

Thank you, Richard!

[@jimpurcell]

Thanks, I have been waiting/hoping for this video. You truly help us understand our films better!!!

[@DavidHancock]

Thank you, Jim!

[@emotown1]

I dev the stuff in Ilford HC at 1:50 dilution, semi-stand. Technically I'm probably devving it to iso160, but I shoot at box-speed. That's more because I hate accidental under-exposure (easily done), so over-developing slightly covers my ass a bit there. I try for a slight "compensating" effect with the 1-50 dilution and semi stand method - I've noticed an inherent tendency of the Delta films to build up highlight density very harshly (no gentle roll-off like with FP4+, for example) which makes the whites look overly "radioactive" and slightly washed out, and this seems to be true whatever developer you use (although apparently Xtol and DDX help in this regard). So any slight compensating effect I'm getting with HC will theoretically create more of a "roll-off" in the highlights. (I'm almost always burning in highlight detail in the darkroom anyway - once burned in, this film gives good highlights) So, that seems to work! HC is a great one-shot universal developer - kind of a half-way hotel between D76 and Rodinal in terms of accutance and how it handles grain. I have to say one thing about Delta 100: if you like a warm tonality this film cannot be beat. It sometimes looks like the prints have been mildly toned, it's that warm. And I don't really buy into this whole idea that different developers "dramatically" change how a film "looks" (accutance and apparent graininess being the obvious exceptions}. I can often recognize what films prints were made from, regardless of what they were souped in. TriX always looks like TriX, whether it's grain is D76-silky or Rodinal-was-this-taken-in-a-blizzard :) People get way too obsessed with trying to find that Eureka moment when they hit on the "perfect" film/dev combo - it's like that pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, a mirage. Just stick to what you know works well enough and get good at it - Delta 100 will still look like Delta 100.

[@DavidHancock]

Thank you!

[@emotown1]

@@DavidHancock You are welcome, and thank you for a very involved analysis!

[@liveinaweorg]

Timely. I have my first roll of Delta 100 in my Mamiya C3 and I'm planning to develop it at home (it'll be my fifth roll developed at home). Thanks Dave.

[@DavidHancock]

Nice! That sounds like an awesome combo.

[@bish5196]

Thanks for another great video David! Ive always appreciated your likeness to provide in depth technical analysis of a film stock, developing methods, and lastly anecdotal experience. Truly gives an insightful and informative review and makes this series shine on your channel.

[@DavidHancock]

Thank you, Bish!

[@geophizz]

Thank you for confirming my faith in Delta 100!

[@DavidHancock]

Thank you!

[@brycepinson8641]

These videos are the best. I've been using Delta 100 as my go-to black and white for 4x5 for several years now. I have to say its really neat to hear someone else who has more experience than me, confirm my findings. I've found it remarkably flexible, able to give everything from punchy contrast to wide latitude depending on exposure and development... Interestingly I have found that the reciprocity characteristics of this film are far better than advertised. I have been using some numbers found on an online forum that go like 4sec->4.5sec, 8sec->9sec, 15sec->19sec, 30sec->41sec. These are much lower numbers than Ilford gives. I've used them and not had any issue.

[@DavidHancock]

Thank you, Bryce! Ilford always errs on the side of caution. I would expect following lower vs. Ilford reciprocity numbers will definitely yield usable results, though perhaps a hair less dense. Plus, chemistry concentration (which can be affected by mis-prints on measuring cylinders) or efficacy (which can be affected by the water source used for mixing chemistry) can alter results. It's always best to use guides like the data sheets and findings like my videos as a starting point and build out from there.

[@brycepinson8641]

@@DavidHancock thank you for the reply. Very good points. It is true that I have real way to measure density other than to look at my results and say “looks good to me”… which is hardly scientific.

[@evanduffy1015]

Wow that is some high praise, I definitely need to give this a try! I tried delta 400 a while ago and was not impressed since its almost $4 more than HP5 where I buy film and didn't give much better results. Thanks for these great deep dives!

[@FlosBlog]

Are you in the us? Those films all cost the same in Germany (and about 1-2€ less then the Kodak products)

[@DavidHancock]

Thank you! I'm not nearly as much of a fan of Delta 400 as I am of 100. It's a fine film, but my results from it so far haven't been as good as TMax 400 and HP5+.

[@Shanesshiit]

I agree! It's a main stay in my bulk roller, it's in there right now, has been for years...

[@DavidHancock]

Definitely my favorite black and white film.

[@Shanesshiit]

@@DavidHancock I like Pan F quite a bit also, but for some reason it's not common here in Canada, at least not in bulk. I'm not sure why Delta 100 is not more popular, considering I can get it at my local drug store..

[@petervanorsouw2858]

Hi David, Another great review 👍 Ilford advise Perceptol with Delta 100 at ISO 100 is a nice combination and I agree. (Also as a side note Delta 400 at ISO 320 in Perceptol 1+1 is also really worth the effort.) Maybe a future review of Perceptol with various films would be of interest. I'm not sure about a film being the best. FP4+ with its latitude or HP5+ for grain, as an example. I'd say it is horses for courses. My favorite films at the moment is 100 TMAX, FP4+ and HP5+ And you have made some wonderful reviews with those films. Thank you for those programs as well👍

[@DavidHancock]

Thank you! I have thought a LOT about developer reviews. I have an outline, format, and series name already developed. The hurdle is time.

[@petervanorsouw2858]

@@DavidHancock yes, time a real asset these days. You do put so much effort into your programs. Thanks for that. Nice pun, I also hope that you can Develop more of your expertise with all types of film photographery.

[@nicovincenti]

Once again, fantastic video as always, David!.

[@DavidHancock]

Thank you, Agustin!

[@jw48335]

Another fantastic installment! I will say the gap of Xtol/DD-X stuck out to me though. DD-X occupies 6/7 slots in the Ilford liquid sheet. I find Xtol 1+3 yields very similar results to DD-X 1+4. It is so similar that I don't use DD-X anymore as Xtol is cheaper 1-shot and yields slightly less grain on D3200. A few years ago I even took D100 to 800 using DD-X 1+9 stand for 75 minutes with solid results. It was an entertaining accident:) Cheers!

[@DavidHancock]

Thank you and yes, XTOL is a glaring hole here, solely because I didn't have a 5L container for it (I do now.) It was always a pain for me to use because I calculate all my stock for Kodak solutions in gallons.

[@jb-xc4oh]

Its been my go to film for well over 20 years, I do use it on 4x5 and 8x10 formats.

[@amirhoseinamini9220]

Thanks for the great video! I agree, Delta 100 is a magical film and my favourite!

[@DavidHancock]

Thank you!

[@studiosnch]

Just bought a 10-pack of Delta 100 because of this video. Will definitely compare this with my aboslute standard for ISO 100 films, ADOX CHS 100 II. And hearing that Ilfosol works best with this film gives me promise, as this developer is most available here.

[@DavidHancock]

Nice! I would think you'll be happy.

[@studiosnch]

Coming back now to you after shooting my first Delta 100 roll ever. What you all said is truth. I think I now have a new "baseline" film for anything. And yes I souped it in Ilfosol 1+14 at 5m 25s (at 24 degrees because I was in a rush when I developed my film). The film and developer are just, made for each other. A true example of a "one true pair". So yes, Ilford Delta 100 IS the best film ever made. Period.

[@GreggObst]

Delta 100 in 120, 4x5 and 5x7 is sensational in Pyrocat HD or MC at 1:1:100 with highlight detail preservation in things like bright clouds being a key advantage.

[@DavidHancock]

Thank you! I have always heard good things about Pyro but haven't ever gotten to try it.

[@terrywbreedlove]

I have shot a little Delta 100 in 35mm 120 and a few sheets of 4x5. I still have most of the 4x5 Box to work through. I shot it at 100 and develop using D76. I have yet to shoot with a filter but will be trying a Red. Reciprocity is not as good as Tmax 100 and actually I prefer the look of Tmax. But i want to switch over to Ilford and will keep trying

[@DavidHancock]

I liked this with a red filter a lot. It's definitely worth trying it on 4X5 with red.

[@Emma-zk6it]

I can't decide which one is my favorite if delta 100 or acros II . they both render beautiful images

[@DavidHancock]

I still lean toward Delta 100, but I'm also working on the Acros II AAF video, so I'll know more next year on that.

[@mathewrupp8568]

My favorite film is TMax 100 and would be willing to switch to Delta, however they raised the price as high as Tmax. With the price of everything going up I don't find myself paying for over priced film. My wife just got back from the store, she picked up a dozen eggs for over $5.00 we used to get them on sell for 88 cents. I have a couple of cameras that shoot 6x9, they just collect dust if I shoot medium format at all it's 6x4.5. My digital camera is getting a lot more use, the only way prices will come down is if people stop shooting it.

[@DavidHancock]

I hear you on prices. We only get good prices on eggs when we see them for sale at the farms we pass on hikes (I keep my eyes peeled for EGGS signs on the dirt roads.) I, too, am shooting more digital for the same reason. Film cost is making me think about other ways to make these videos (maybe just longer displays for each photo.)

[@gollariddhi]

Fantastic work, David. Many thanks for the huge work you put into every review. I do have a question, you've noted Delta 100 at ASA 100 in D-76 + 3 for 20/22 minutes & at ASA 400 for 12 minutes. Isn’t pushing the film requires to be developed for a longer period of time than box speed?

[@DavidHancock]

Good catch and you definitely should. I just drabbed the Massive Development Chart times for these. It's all over the place on those. No idea where the discrepancy comes from. Shooting at 50 with a D-76+3 developing time also has a weird time. I wonder if the MDC time for 400 is supposed to be 32 minutes.

[@gollariddhi]

@@DavidHancock I was wondering the same. Definitely going to push it to 400 in HC 110 next week!

[@gavinjenkins899]

I know a reason why you might not like it at medium format: You still want to shoot medium format handheld, but the lenses are much slower than available in 35mm. 35mm has fast lenses, so 100 ISO is no problem, and large format is on a tripod (unless you use speed graphics), so 100 ISO is no problem, but medium is slow and not on a tripod, so it starts to be a problem.

[@DavidHancock]

Good point and observation. Thank you!

[@senseofeverthing]

Have you tried the new Across II? I love the tonality of the film and started to shift more and more form Delta 100 towards Across II. Maybe you could try a direct comparison?

[@DavidHancock]

I have tried it. I haven't really ventured into direct film comparisons yet but Across II is on the list of films that I'm shooting this year for this series.

[@yakovkhalip9714]

interesting tip about green filter you mentioned ! I have to try it - ! so it's good only with this film or in general with any panchromatic b-w ? I also tried few months ago Ilford Ortho-80, which must be sensitive only in green and blue part ... It's a nice film with relatevely big and cosy grain and nice halftones ))

[@DavidHancock]

Thank you! So the filters will work differently with different films based on a number of factors: 1- The specific light wave transmission of the green filter (in general, more-expensive filters filter out non-green and non-green-adjacent light whereas cheaper ones just kinda look green to our eyes.) 2- The specific spectral sensitivity of the film stock being used (Some good filters may have spectral sensitivity data available and comparing that to a film can help provide an idea of the effect the filter has.) 3- The light source used to illuminate the image. If, as an example, you're in a studio setting with a strongly orange tungsten light, then there may be nearly zero green in the light reaching your film and that would mean that the green filter eliminates all light reaching your film, conversely outside or artificial full-spectrum light will include green wavelengths.

[@yakovkhalip9714]

@@DavidHancock I see, interesting ! I use Cokin square filters) tried Red with Kodak TMAX400 and Ilford PAN400)

[@steveb7477]

So, I have a question.... You show a developer that you used and your comments about it. Are the pictures following the developer that you mentioned made with that developer? Either I missed you explaining that or you didn't state it. thanks.

[@DavidHancock]

Yes, the photos that follow each developer breaker screen were developed in that specific combo until the next developer screen arrives.

[@rickylee1894]

Hi thanks for your video. Always watch and enjoyed your video. Want to get your opinion on Illford FP4 Plus 120 film. Recently I shot 2 rolls and self-developed them. Some of the shots on one roll have smudges like scratches and another roll all have the same issues. This is similar to HP5 plus which I encountered previously and wrote to the company. This time I wrote to them and didn’t receive any response from them. It seemed like backing paper issues? For storage I followed their recommendation to store in freezer and let them reach room temperature before using them. By the way these 2 rolls have expiry Jun 2023. Would appreciate your help.

[@DavidHancock]

Can you drop me an Instagram message with a link to some scans? It might help to see them.

[@rickylee1894]

@@DavidHancock I don’t have Instagram. Furthermore they are personal photos, I do not wish to share them widely. Is it possible to send them to you via your personal email etc? Thanks and really appreciate your reply.

[@DavidHancock]

@@rickylee1894 You can reach me at my Proton account, [e-mail]

[@TrashTheLens]

David, what is Fomadon LQP? As far as I know, and what Foma's webpage says, they make LQN (liquid, normal working PQ developer) and LQR (liquid, contrast-working PQ dev) and P (powder, D76-like). Did you mix LQN with LQR and ended up with something alphabetically in between? :)

[@DavidHancock]

Pretty sure it's LQR but forgetting to write the"R's" leg on my darkroom notes and the error perpetuating endlessly.

[@TrashTheLens]

@@DavidHancock Gotcha! Thanks.

[@normtesch1126]

im shooting delta 100..no matter how i meter for the seen my highlights are always blown out...i shoot mainly waterfalls.

[@DavidHancock]

A few things that come to mind in that situation would be the developer choice (some create higher contrast) and the lighting. In high-contrast lighting, that could be a problem. Have you tried pulling it a couple of stops? That can help mute contrast.

[@ivaa7777JAWA]

Great video

[@DavidHancock]

Thank you!

[@MidwestBriar]

20:00 Hey I have that camera 😃

[@DavidHancock]

Nice! It's a great camera.

[@user-ti9zc1xv2b]

I could never like delta 100, too flat, love fp4

[@DavidHancock]

Nothing wrong with FP4+, either.

[@ZommBleed]

If you had images of Sasquatch I'd believe these photos were real. You didn't even have a blurry picture of Bigfoot, much less coffee. I rate this video as a B-minus. Next time try a Canon 5D Mk. ii with Ilford 100. Your images will turn out much better.

[@DavidHancock]

I do like to just glue a bit of film onto an image sensor and use my digitals that way.

[@ZommBleed]

@@DavidHancock It works. Positive print paper does ok, too.