I generally use the manufacturer’s recommendations for film and paper processing, except for film development where I find the Ilford recommended development times rather long for my way of working. Rodinal – 6 ml + 494 ml water or 10 ml + 990 ml water – 30+30 (minutes) with 10-second stir at the start and midpoint

Ilfotec DD-X is the best developer for developing B&W film that is ISO 400 and above. This liquid-concentrate developer enhances shadow details, and creates images with rich tonality, making it one of the top options for pushing film without creating overly-grainy images. Because of its performance, DD-X is one of the most common developers found at professional film labs around the world for a simple reason: this is the developer that will give photographers the best negatives even in challenging lighting scenarios. In my own uses, I’ve found DD-X to be the absolute best developer for pushing and pulling, especially with t-grain films like Ilford Delta 3200 and Kodak P3200.

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.

So interestingly, whilst I was developing the 2 test rolls I also had a roll of HP5 shot at 1600 to do. I decided to dev it in DD-X.

ILFOTEC DD-X Collections

Here are my tested recipes for SSD, regardless of whether using 35mm or 120 medium formats . I prefer SSD over SD. YMMV. Experiment at your risk. I always use water at 68 F and a minimum of 5-6 ml of chemistry in all my recipes , even if the math says to use less . Again, I use 500 ml for either developing 1 120 rolls or 2×35 mm rolls and 1,000 ml for developing either 3×35 mm rolls or 2×120 rolls or 1×35 mm and 1×120 – all in the same tank. Learn more about how to handle film chemical waste here. This image was taken on HP5 pushed to ISO 1600, but you’d hardly be able to tell when using an incredible developer like Ilfotec DD-X. What is the difference between Infotec DD and 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.

Well, I've used Rodinal and HC110 and ID-11 - as you know Rodinal and HC110 act differently to developers like ID-11, D-76, Microphen etc. - and now I want to compare those results to DDX at various dilutions without wasting too much film... If I have a reasonable starting point that others have successfully used, maybe I'll waste less film than if I just guess... if that's OK with you? In fact, the only developer on the market that pushes film better is Ilford’s Microphen, which is a niche developer that comes in powdered format rather than liquid.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)... Mamiya m645 – Mamiya-Sekor C 1:2.8 f=80mm – Kodak TMax 400 @ ASA-400 – Ilford Ilfotec DD-X (1+4) 8:00 @ 20C Mamiya m645 – Mamiya-Sekor C 1:2.8 f=80mm – Kodak TMax 400 @ ASA-400 – Ilford Ilfotec DD-X (1+4) 8:00 @ 20C Mamiya m645 – Mamiya-Sekor C 1:2.8 f=80mm – Kodak TMax 400 @ ASA-400 – Ilford Ilfotec DD-X (1+4) 8:00 @ 20C Mamiya m645 – Mamiya-Sekor C 1:2.8 f=80mm – Kodak TMax 400 @ ASA-400 – Ilford Ilfotec DD-X (1+4) 8:00 @ 20C It is more expensive on a roll-for-roll costing, but I've also found that it's cheaper to buy a bottle than the more economical developers. It's a false economy, but sometimes it works for the wallet that way.

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. However I have successfully scanned Images that I took in the 50's using Adox R17 and processed in one shot Neofin blue, a very highly dilute Beutler type developer that gives great compensation, sharpness and high actuance. Adox R17 was a single coated high silver content thin emulsion, with massive resolution and extraordinary tonal rendition, When correctly processed. I was able to produce fine quality 3meter square bromide enlargements for store window displays, from Rollie negatives. These were able to stand up sufficiently well with others from 5x7 negatives. Rolleiflex 2.8F – Carl Zeiss Planar 80mm 1:2.8 – Ilford Delta 400 @ ASA-200 – Ilford Ilfotec DD-X (1+4) 6:00 @ 20C Rolleiflex 2.8F – Carl Zeiss Planar 80mm 1:2.8 – Ilford Delta 400 @ ASA-200 – Ilford Ilfotec DD-X (1+4) 6:00 @ 20C Rolleiflex 2.8F – Carl Zeiss Planar 80mm 1:2.8 – Ilford Delta 400 @ ASA-200 – Ilford Ilfotec DD-X (1+4) 6:00 @ 20C Rolleiflex 2.8F – Carl Zeiss Planar 80mm 1:2.8 – Ilford Delta 400 @ ASA-200 – Ilford Ilfotec DD-X (1+4) 6:00 @ 20C

Paper

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... 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... 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 To start with, IMO, the DD-X isn't 3x better. It's not noticeably sharper (take my word for it because forum compression will kill these screenies) and whilst the grain is lessened, it's really only visible at 100% which as any pixel peeper will know isn't that useful.