Mottled 35mm negative

[moggi1964]

The developer was a fresh batch of DDX 1:4 that was already open for about a year but sealed. Film is Ilford3200 shot at 1600.

Agitated on a Jobo machine. Times as per MassiveDev adjusted by 15% for machine agitation.

Is this a sign of a dying developer?

 

[Dave_P]

Are the negs particularly thin? To me that sort of exagerated grain just looks typical of underexposure of fast/grainy film
.

 

[moggi1964]

Are the negs particularly thin? To me that sort of exagerated grain just looks typical of underexposure of fast/grainy film
.

A little but not terribly so. Good question though and something for me to think about.

 

[Barney]

I do not wish to rude, or unappreciative of your experience but could it possibly be 16000 instead of 1600

 

[moggi1964]

I do not wish to rude, or unappreciative of your experience but could it possibly be 16000 instead of 1600

Definitely 1600 (my lightmeter only goes to 3200) but again a valid question cause some mistakes are often the obvious ones.

 

[Nas]

Was the film within date? I've found this film does not age well.

 

[moggi1964]

Was the film within date? I've found this film does not age well.

Yes, bought it new about 6 months ago.
I'm thinking I'll just pick up some fresh developer and see how the next batch of film goes.

I appreciate the helpful responses. Thanks.

 

[~RJ]

The developer was a fresh batch of DDX 1:4 that was already open for about a year but sealed. Film is Ilford3200 shot at 1600.

Agitated on a Jobo machine. Times as per MassiveDev adjusted by 15% for machine agitation.

Is this a sign of a dying developer?

Your scanner is certainly struggling to manage the golf ball grain from Delta 3200.

I find the Jobo wrecks by agitation - and your DDX certainly does seem like a confounding doubt which cannot be resolved until binned. You have the highlights (washed out) and the shadow detail (blocked up). In between the long grey scale of Delta 3200 is usually richer than this - it excels in backlit high contrast environments like the live piano playing however all of this seems lost with a dull flat appearance - which looks more like excessive agitation and development of rapid highlight shoulder curve too fast and underdevelopment of the shadows.

Thus when DDX expires, it fails in its shadow compensating characteristics.

Its longevity has never been as good as up to a year for me - the kind of scan image you are getting appears similar to using Rodinal for 3200 but the reticulated appearance might have a digital workflow process solution.