Hc-110

[Csholl]

Hi,

From the looks of it HC-110 developer by Kodak seems to be discontinued. Is this true? The only other place I can find it is on ebay. Does anyone know where else to get it by chance?

[Kiwi7475]

Freestyle has it in stock

https://www.freestylephoto.com/5010541-Kodak-HC-110-Film-Developer-(1058692)-1-Liter-(Makes-32-Liters)

[nitroplait]

Fotoimpex has it in stock

https://www.fotoimpex.com/chemistry/kodak-hc-110-developer-1000-ml-conc.html?cache=1691389284

[notorius]

Well, there seems to be bad news about the HC-110 in this article (https://petapixel.com/2023/05/08/uncertainty-surrounds-the-future-of-kodak-photo-paper-and-chemistry/).

[Fungus]

My local camera store just restocked it.

Bear in mind that this is a new formulation and not the original. The original was a thick, syrupy liquid. The new stuff has the viscosity of water.

The bottle says it was made by Sino Promise.

[paulbarden]

B&H lists it as "Discontinued".
I wouldn't be surprised if all "Kodak" chemistry vanished in the next couple of years. Sino Promise doesn't seem capable of making these recipes reliably and consistently, so I suggest you plan to switch to something else, like Ilford's Ilfotec HC or the Film Photography Project's equivalent (https://filmphotographystore.com/products/darkroom-supplies-fpp-110-bw-developer-1-liter-kodak-hc-110-equivalent).

I gave up entirely on Kodak chemistry a couple years ago, after buying bad bags of Dektol, D-76 AND Xtol. Most of these common recipes can be made easily (and at 1/3 the cost) at home. (Thank you ArtCraft Chemicals)

[Drew Wiley]

Hc-110 cannot be homemade. It could be replicated by any industrial lab, but not under the same name if Sino still owns the marketing rights. They apparently didn't even make the last batch themselves. Look at where is was made - "made by Sino Promise" -where?? Not necessarily in China. But I can't keep track of all the later tweaks.
Mine still has the consistency of maple syrup.

[paulbarden]

Hc-110 cannot be homemade.

I never said it could. I'm just saying that MOST other developers are easy to make from scratch at home.

[neil poulsen]

What has been telling with the paradigm shift from analog to digital, it isn't just cameras and films that have disappeared. It's also the infrastructure.

[Csholl]

Definitely good to know. I looked up ArtCraft Chemical and it looks like something worth entertaining. For now I just might buy my own Dektol D76 etc. thx..

[Csholl]

This was definintely helpful. Good to know about photoproject. I'm getting their Kodak equivalent of Hc 110. Hopefully this meet satisfaction. thx

[Michael Wellman]

"What has been telling with the paradigm shift from analog to digital, it isn't just cameras and films that have disappeared. It's also the infrastructure."

I love analog. I have been mixing my own chemicals for years but has Neil Poulsen pointed out the analog world is slowly crumbly down. A lot of the people keeping analog going are guys who are now in the 60's to late 70's. How much longer will ArtCraft be around? How about the guys repairing the shutters and cameras? Only Leica is making analog (roll) cameras and how many people can afford that? Hope I'm wrong but the future doesn't look good.

[Kiwi7475]

"What has been telling with the paradigm shift from analog to digital, it isn't just cameras and films that have disappeared. It's also the infrastructure."

I love analog. I have been mixing my own chemicals for years but has Neil Poulsen pointed out the analog world is slowly crumbly down. A lot of the people keeping analog going are guys who are now in the 60's to late 70's. How much longer will ArtCraft be around? How about the guys repairing the shutters and cameras? Only Leica is making analog (roll) cameras and how many people can afford that? Hope I'm wrong but the future doesn't look good.

On the other hand I’ve seen many been worrying about the future of film photography for over 20 years now and we’re still here using film…. And with new LF camera manufacturers popping up, new film stocks and some come backs… and sure, some losses along the way (Fuji film anyone?), but overall I think nothing is crumbling so fast that it threatens the disappearance of film photography for quite some time….. I am hopeful!

[Mark Sawyer]

Kodak's original HC-110 had a glycol base and would last pretty much indefinitely undiluted in the bottle. The new "HC-110" has a water base and will hydrolyze (break down in water) over time, going bad even if stored undiluted in the bottle.

Whether the new version is otherwise similar to the old, or if a new company just bought the naming rights, is unclear, as HC-110's formula is a proprietary secret.

[Drew Wiley]

Nowadays it's easy for any serious R&D lab to precisely analyze the ingredients of just about any proprietary solution if the have the financial motive to do so. That was already done with HC-110 quite awhile back; and at least one person with access to a serious lab batch-formulated a precise equivalent for personal use. But that doesn't mean he can turn around and market it as HC-110 if he wanted to, or that the same kind of reformulation can be done in a simple darkroom, especially safely. And some of its ingredients themselves are hard to get, and require special formulation. So that leaves us with the question, in what specific manners does Col. Sander's new extra crispy fried chicken differ from the original recipe? Concentrate storage life seems to be one of them.

[tundra]

I am late to this thread but ...

1. It appears that Kodak is exiting the chemistry business entirely.

2. They've had quality problems for several years now so I'd avoid any "new' anything in this regard

3. Most of the Kodak chemistry can easily be made yourself or replaced with other products. Dektol can be mixed as D-72. Fixer is better replaced with Ilford Hypam. Hypoclear is better replaced with Permawash. There are a variety of alternatives to Photoflo. The only things I have not found equivalents for are Kodak Rapid Selenium Toner (which you do NOT want to try and make yourself) and HC-110.

If you like HC-110 (and that's almost all I used to use), you will LOVE Pyrocat-HD. Available pre-mixed from Photographer's Formulary or easily made yourself. You just want to be careful as you would with any pyro developer - wear nitrile glove, eye protection and a darkroom apron (which you ought to be doing anyway ;) BTW unconfirmed rumor has it that HC-110 had pyrocatechin in it which is what Pyrocat-HD is based on.

Used properly, Pyrocat-HD will give you somewhat better effective film speed than HC-110, much less visible grain, and very good highlight management.

[Michael R]

If Kodak chemistry does indeed disappear we should be clear it is not "Kodak" exiting the business - that happened a long time ago from a manufacturing perspective, and in 2020 from a marketing/distribution perspective when the chemistry business was acquired by Chinese company Sino Promise.

In reference to selenium toner both the Ilford and Moersch products operate identically to KRST. There's no magic going on there. Sodium sulfite, sodium selenite, ammonium thiosulfate.

HC-110 did and still does (at least as of 2019) contain a small amount of catechol. Nobody knows exactly why it is there. There could be a few reasons but it isn't known with certainty which is correct.

[Drew Wiley]

Tundra, HC-110 is kinda unique in the way it will consistently operate even at extreme dilution, for sake of very low gamma when needed. I have certain lab applications which call for that. I can't think of any pyro formula which will do the same thing. Besides, most pyros stain the image - an advantage in some cases, a disadvantage in certain others. But I'm not going to make a lot of fuss trying to find an ideal HC-110 replacement. What I already have on hand of the original syrup will last me quite awhile longer.

Wetting agent? It took me nearly 20 years to use up a little bottle of Photoflo. It will probably take another 20 to use my current bottle of Ilfosol. I might not last that long myself. Only a few drops are needed at a time. I never use wash additives. No need. I use TF4 and TF5 archival fixer instead. It takes me a long time to use up a bottle of Selenium Toner too. But Moersch products seem way overpriced. They probably just rebottle things actually made by someone else.

[Csholl]

I am late to this thread but ...

1. It appears that Kodak is exiting the chemistry business entirely.

2. They've had quality problems for several years now so I'd avoid any "new' anything in this regard

3. Most of the Kodak chemistry can easily be made yourself or replaced with other products. Dektol can be mixed as D-72. Fixer is better replaced with Ilford Hypam. Hypoclear is better replaced with Permawash. There are a variety of alternatives to Photoflo. The only things I have not found equivalents for are Kodak Rapid Selenium Toner (which you do NOT want to try and make yourself) and HC-110.

If you like HC-110 (and that's almost all I used to use), you will LOVE Pyrocat-HD. Available pre-mixed from Photographer's Formulary or easily made yourself. You just want to be careful as you would with any pyro developer - wear nitrile glove, eye protection and a darkroom apron (which you ought to be doing anyway ;) BTW unconfirmed rumor has it that HC-110 had pyrocatechin in it which is what Pyrocat-HD is based on.

Used properly, Pyrocat-HD will give you somewhat better effective film speed than HC-110, much less visible grain, and very good highlight management.

Ok...another good thing to know. I will try pyrocat-HD. I like that sharp look that comes with developers like HC-110, so I'm sure this is quite good too. I never really thought of making my own developers or fixers and toners. I'm not sure if you get the same quality as when you purchase it directly. I might try it though, and it looks cost effective. thx

[Kevin Crisp]

First, though I have had my issues of late with Sino Promise, I don't think it fair to claim they/it have abandoned the chemical business unless somebody actually knows this is the case. I haven't seen what looks like even reliable second-hand information on that.

Second, getting to the original point of the thread, HC-110 is in stock at Freestyle as of this afternoon. It is the new, thinner stuff. It works out to about $1.40 per quart of Dilution "B," so prices have gone up. But if you have a coveted supply of the old stuff, which does indeed seem to last about forever in a fridge, you could use up the new stuff for now and if it becomes unavailable you still have your old stock.

[Kevin Crisp]

I just read the Material Safety Data sheet for the syrup version of HC-110. I've been putting my fingers in it for more than 30 years. Sounds like I shouldn't do that.

[Mark Sawyer]

BTW unconfirmed rumor has it that HC-110 had pyrocatechin in it which is what Pyrocat-HD is based on.


Pyrocatechin (Pyrocatechin-1-aldehyde 2-benzothiazolylhydrazone) isn't mentioned in any of the HC-110 MSDS sheets. I doubt Kodak would risk falsifying its records to hide it.

[Michael R]

It’s listed in most of the MSDS sheets for HC-110 as 1,2-benzenediol which is one of the names for Catechol (or what photographers sometimes refer to as Pyrocatechol or Pyrocatechin). When in doubt use the CAS number (120-80-9).


Pyrocatechin (Pyrocatechin-1-aldehyde 2-benzothiazolylhydrazone) isn't mentioned in any of the HC-110 MSDS sheets. I doubt Kodak would risk falsifying its records to hide it.

[tundra]

Tundra, HC-110 is kinda unique in the way it will consistently operate even at extreme dilution, for sake of very low gamma when needed. I have certain lab applications which call for that. I can't think of any pyro formula which will do the same thing. Besides, most pyros stain the image - an advantage in some cases, a disadvantage in certain others. But I'm not going to make a lot of fuss trying to find an ideal HC-110 replacement. What I already have on hand of the original syrup will last me quite awhile longer.

Wetting agent? It took me nearly 20 years to use up a little bottle of Photoflo. It will probably take another 20 to use my current bottle of Ilfosol. I might not last that long myself. Only a few drops are needed at a time. I never use wash additives. No need. I use TF4 and TF5 archival fixer instead. It takes me a long time to use up a bottle of Selenium Toner too. But Moersch products seem way overpriced. They probably just rebottle things actually made by someone else.


Pyrocat-HD can happily be diluted greatly. I've used it at 1.5:1:300, albeit for semistand processing, and gotten excellent results. I've also used D-23 at 1:9 by adding 0.5g/l of lye (sodium hydroxide) to boost the alkalinity. Both these concoctions give very sharp negatives and strong compensation effects when using low agitation/long duration development.

[tundra]

Ok...another good thing to know. I will try pyrocat-HD. I like that sharp look that comes with developers like HC-110, so I'm sure this is quite good too. I never really thought of making my own developers or fixers and toners. I'm not sure if you get the same quality as when you purchase it directly. I might try it though, and it looks cost effective. thx

Note that all pyro based developers do require care since you don't want the materials in contact with your skin or inhaling the dust from the powdered components. You'll need nitrile gloves, eye protection, a lab coat, a mask, etc. when mixing. I never handle the working developer without also protecting eyes, hands, clothes in this manner. To get started, I'd suggest buying Pyrocat-HD premixed from Photographer's Formulary.

[Mark Sawyer]

It’s listed in most of the MSDS sheets for HC-110 as 1,2-benzenediol which is one of the names for Catechol (or what photographers sometimes refer to as Pyrocatechol or Pyrocatechin). When in doubt use the CAS number (120-80-9).

Thank you! We have way too many names for the same chemicals. I'm still learning...

[Michael R]

Yeah nomenclature isn't always straight forward in chemistry, but basically 1,2-benzenediol is more descriptive of the molecular structure. Catechol is a benzene ring with 2 hydroxyl (OH) groups in the 1 and 2 positions on the ring. There are several developing agents of this general type. Examples:

Catechol = 1,2-dihydroxybenzene or 1,2-benzenediol etc.

Hydroquinone = 1,4-dihydroxybenzene or 1,4-benzenediol etc.

Pyrogallol (Pyro) = 1,2,3-trihydroxybenzene or 1,2,3-benzenetriol etc.


Thank you! We have way too many names for the same chemicals. I'm still learning...

[Fungus]

It’s listed in most of the MSDS sheets for HC-110 as 1,2-benzenediol which is one of the names for Catechol (or what photographers sometimes refer to as Pyrocatechol or Pyrocatechin). When in doubt use the CAS number (120-80-9).

I've always known it as 1,2-dihydroxybenzene. It's one of the three benzenediols. Another is 1,4-dihydroxybenzene, which is more commonly known to photographers as hydroquinone.

[Michael R]

Like most compounds it goes by many different names: 1,2-dihydroxybenzene, (ortho)o-dihydroxybenzene, benzene-1,2-diol, 1,2-benzenediol etc. That's why a good fail-safe is to check the CAS number. Kodak MSDSs and/or ingredients labelling can sometimes be confusing.


I've always known it as 1,2-dihydroxbenzene. It's one of the three benzenediols. Another is 1,4-dihydroxybenzene, which is more commonly known to photographers as hydroquinone.

[Drew Wiley]

Thanks, Tundra. I'm familiar with Pyrocat. But my own needs for a very dilute developer mostly pertains to contrast masking, generally color film wise, where any kind of staining developer would be a felony. There also need to be a very consistent straight line characteristic, even at very low gamma, so the highlight taming properties of pyro developers actually becomes counterproductive in those cases.

[tundra]

Thanks, Tundra. I'm familiar with Pyrocat. But my own needs for a very dilute developer mostly pertains to contrast masking, generally color film wise, where any kind of staining developer would be a felony. There also need to be a very consistent straight line characteristic, even at very low gamma, so the highlight taming properties of pyro developers actually becomes counterproductive in those cases.


You might look at D-23 at higher dilutions. There is so little metol in solution that you'll get what you want, very sharp negs, but at the cost of film speed unless you do long/low dilution development (which won't give you low gamma).

[John Layton]

Although its been many years since I've processed any film with D-23...I feel myself lately being drawn back to it.

As for HC-110...I still have a bit of this and its turned black with age (must be going on 25 years). But recently, having used it to process some even more ancient (1988 expiry) 11x14 Tri-X...the stuff worked great!!

[Drew Wiley]

Thanks again, Tundra, but dilute D23 leads to an exceptionally long toe - exactly the opposite of what I need. This is all relative to technical lab applications. Film speed is irrelevant; and I'm after an unusually low contrast gamma, not a high one. It's quite a different situation than shooting black and white film in the field, and then processing it, when I most often use PMK pyro.

[Fungus]

Like most compounds it goes by many different names: 1,2-dihydroxybenzene, (ortho)o-dihydroxybenzene, benzene-1,2-diol, 1,2-benzenediol etc. That's why a good fail-safe is to check the CAS number. Kodak MSDSs and/or ingredients labelling can sometimes be confusing.

The IUPAC name is probably the most definitive, although those names are not always in common use. For hydroquinone it's Benzene-1,4-diol and for catechol it's the same--just replace the 4 with a 2.

[Edward Pierce]

What I really liked about HC-110 was the convenience of being able to mix a stronger batch to increase contrast while keeping the developing time down to a reasonable level. But after a third bottle of it crystallized I gave up. Yes I heard it’s still ok but I didn’t feel good about having to filter it before using it. I tried D-23 for a while but I was getting into some crazy long development times for N+2. These days I’m in the midst of trying home-made D-76H.