Neopan souped in DD-X

[CaeSiuM]

Backside itchy so I decided to steer away from my favourite formula of Neopan 400 souped in HC-110. Never bought DD-X before due to it's :bigeyes: price but decided to give it a shot anyway and got a bottle. Had 2 rolls of Neopan 400 shot at the rated EI and developed it using DD-X at the recommended timing of 7mins@20C, water stop, fixed, rinse using pump-dump and photoflo-ed as usual.

I had the negatives scanned without any adjustments and found the results disappointing compared to what I get with HC-110.

My findings:

Grain seemed to be more pronounced with DD-X than HC-110. Granted that higher acutance developer result in more apparent grains but then again, the DD-X negs doesn't exactly look "sharper" than the HC-110 souped ones.

The resulting negatives also have very flat scene contrast as compared to the HC-110 ones. I have no knowledge of darkroom printing but I guess the DD-X souped negatives would probably print better than the HC-110 in the darkroom but I don't really like the look of the DD-X negs when scanned.

Anyone have other experience with this luxury-priced developer? I don't want to put it down so fast.

 

[hongsien]

I have never used DD-X before (have been using HC-110 since I started photography).........from what you stated, have you compared the same kind of images? I mean do the scenes have contrast in the first place......

Also, you may be able to increase contrast by changing the way you develop, increase the agitation.......different developers may require different ways of developing.....good luck! Try to find the optimal method for each developer.....again adapt for your kind/style of images.

HS

 

[CaeSiuM]

Thanks for sharing your views, hongsien.

Yeah I think I'll take up your suggestion and probably adjust my agitation routine. Here's two comparision shots taken within minutes of each other, around the same spot and same metering technique.

Neopan 400 in HC-110

Neopan 400 in DD-X

I know there are a lot of differing elements in these 2 photos and aren't really conclusive but I think you can get what I mean by comparing them.

 

[CaeSiuM]

Pretty good combi when shot under soft lighting. Pardon the slight tilt though, it wasn't intentional.

Neopan 400 in DD-X

 

[canturn]

I used DD-X for HP5, tri-x and Neopan 1600. So far, it gives the best tonality and fine grain esp for pushed film.

How did you agitate your tank during development?

 

[CaeSiuM]

I shot it at EI 400 and standard agitation of first 30s and then 10s every minute.

 

[canturn]

I agitate for about 5 secs every 1 minute, VERY GENTLY, when using dd-x.

Try printing it...scanning tells only half the truth.

Personally, I find film souped in T-max and Hc-110 more "scannable" than those souped in Diafine or dd-x, esp on consumer level scanners.

Have tried scanning diafine developed film and highlights were totally blown....printing it using grade 1.5-2 actually brings out all these highlight details.