ILFORD Delta 100 – мелкозернистая черно-белая пленка. Обладает ровным и необычайно мелким для пленки с такой чувствительностью (ISO 100) зерном. Идеальна для черно-белой художественной фотографии. Высокая резкость с проработкой…
Обзор:13 Color and Black and White Film Stocks Compared Ilford Delta 3200 + Bronica SQ-Ai
Фотоматериалы и химикаты ilford — широкий выбор на 3. Поиск по цене товара и рейтингу магазина, варианты с доставкой и самовывозом — сравнить, выбрать 3 купить то что нужно стало проще.
Flickr: Discussing FP4 vs. Delta 100 and HP5 vs. Delta 400 in Ilford
Доставка в Санкт-Петербурге. Описания и сравнения цен, а также характеристики для товаров из категории - фотопленки ilford fp4 на сайте Compumir.
Ilford PAN 400 черный и белый 35 мм 36 экспозиционная пленка X 5 рулонов.Приложения AliExpress Покупайте в любом месте, в 3 время!
Сканируйте или нажмите, чтобы скачать. Submit photographs shot on Ilford films only.
Please mention what film and developer was used in photo description or tag, if.
нажмите чтобы узнать больше am coming to really dislike Delta 100 compared to FP4.
I always get great results with this film and will not be using Delta anymore.
Is FP4 more forgiving for development than Delta?
I get mine developed at a lab and the Delta grain always comes out looking like an iso 400 film or more obtrusive 3 the image is flat looking.
How are the dynamic ranges compared?
As for a 400 film, I have yet to decide which I like better.
Same applies to HP5 versus Delta 400 as far as I am concerned.
I prefer the older more grainy, but otherwise superb, HP5.
It's a personal thing, but you can control much through the developer you use.
I like DD-X with Delta.
It's a fantastic combination.
Still, once you move to larger formats, the grain issues tends to go away.
I have some HP5 in 4x5 that shows no grain at 16x20 prints.
A drastic difference from HP5 in 35mm souped in any developer.
Have mixed feelings about the other Deltas.
HP5 is solid classic.
Looks very mechanical - almost like a digital image.
It's a rather grainy film for 100-ish speed.
I like the Delta 100 tonal curve, which has very little toe and shoulder.
Even for portraits it's really nice.
I am нажмите чтобы прочитать больше and forth between that and TMX.
Both have the same tonal curves, though they look a bit different.
That's my preference, that's all.
The looks are very different.
A lot of labs use a single developing time for all films and they end up being overdeveloped.
I use it for general shooting.
I don't know what it is with the deltas, but I can never seem to get 3 that wow me it's probably me, I'm sure.
FP4 and HP5 usually give me the "punch" I like and the spectral response seem to be more to my liking.
I love the Ilford photo papers though, even though I am not shooting too much of their films.
Helinophoto edited this topic 85 months ago.
I really like each of them for their own special qualities.
Delta 100 is nearly grain free and just has a lovely straight line characteristic curve.
If you are seeing any grain 3 all in Delta 100 it is being developed incorrectly really very overdeveloped.
Do it yourself or find a competent lab.
I've developed it in dd-x and ilfosol 3 with no issues resulting in fine grains with a wide tonal range.
I ordered a 100' roll of the Delta and have it больше на странице in a rangefinder right now.
Delta 100 developed in Perceptol rocks!
I can't wait to scan them.
My favorite 100 speed is Neopan Acros and I've been shooting a lot of Fomapan 100 lately, but FP4 certainly didn't disappoint.
I don't particularly love Ilford films, but their papers 3 узнать больше />Delta 400 sensitivity chart: Hp5: - I HATE pale lips, hate it, delta 400 always tend to give me that for some reason, never hp5.
I also feel hp5 has more snap, but this is personal, some prefer these light, weak contrast, straight curve photos that the delta 400 tend to give.
It may also be related 3 true speed.
However, there seem to be very little difference between delta 100 and fp4 though, actually fp4 seems to be more sensitive to red, however, for some reason I find fp4 to 3 more gritty and have more snap.
May be the resulting toe and shoulder from development, true speed, plus the grain 3 that does this, no idea Delta 100: Fp4: Originally posted 82 3 ago.
Helinophoto edited this topic 82 months ago.
The Delta films seem to me to be very "clinical".
While they are technically probably quite flawless images, I rarely see images that I've shot with Delta films that really make me want to stop and admire them.
Traditional films, though, including FP4+ and HP5+ are a different story.
I'm the same photographer using 3 same equipment and my eye is drawn to the читать далее kinds of subject matter, and yet I find images that 3 shot with the traditional emulsions to be more appealing 3 my eye.
The only modern film that has really gotten my attention in that way is Fuji Neopan Acros, but my results with it have been inconsistent.
I've been very happy with images shot in strong sunlight but not on overcast days, for example.
I haven't really shot enough of it to draw any conclusions, but then the only new film investments that I'm making are for films that I believe will still be around in 10 years Ilford and Fomapan come to mind.
продолжить чтение prefer Delta's on 35mm 120 prefer delta 400 but hp5 gives decent results.
When I want traditional, I like the Ilford line of traditional emulsions, plus Kodak Tri-X.
T-Max 400 and Delta 100 are rather flat-looking.
FP4+ is very good as is Tri-X, HP5+ isn't bad, and none of these are T-grained.
I'll leave it to the viewer to decide for themselves whether or not this is "flat".
I rather like it.