D76 vs HC110

[jeremy_4146]

Only a few people on this list mention HC110; there are many references to D76.

I use HC110. My impression is that D76 is a non-compensating developer and might produce higher contrast, apparently too much contrast for Ansel Addams. But I wonder if I should try it for lower constrast scenes.

Can anyone who has tried both discuss the differences?

[Ken Lee]

For what it's worth, I think that it's often confusing to talk about a developer on its own. You may find it more helpful to discuss film+developer combinations. For example, Tri-X in HC-110, versus Tri-X in D-76.

[Gem Singer]

Hi Jeremy,

There is a world of information regarding these two developers, used with various films, in "The Film Developing Cookbook", by Anchell and Troop. It contains the answers to your questions, and it's well worth reading.

Adams book,"The Negative" gives technical information that was available up to the early 1980's. "The Film Developing Cookbook" takes the reader forward, into the 21st century, discussing present day films, and processing chemicals.

[Paul Kierstead]

Still being somewhat confused w.r.t. developers, I went looking for this book at my local amazon.ca.

There appears to be two different versions...a '98 version (176 pages) and a '03 version (192 pages, very confusingly listed as not yet released and appears to be an import from the UK). Does anybody know the differences, what is updated, etc? Would hate to buy the '98 version only to want the '03 version a month later...

[Nick_3536]

I think the 03 version is actually delayed. At least that's what I remember from the discussion on rec.photo.darkroom. But I'll say this. D-76 was invented in 192x. While films have changed I'm not sure how much really new stuff there really is.

[jeremy_4146]

Ken,

Good point. I am using TRI-X. All my old tri-x is gone so I am on the new tri-x.

[Gem Singer]

Jeremy,

The "new" Tri-X film is not mentioned in the original book, since that film was introduced after the 1998 publication date. The book contains a lot of discussion about the "old" Tri-X film. Perhaps the latest edition now includes the "new" Tri-X. The film has not really changed that much. However, your question was about the difference in characteristics between HC-110 and D-76 developers. "The Darkroom Cookbook" discusses the difference between compensating and non-compensating developers, and goes into great detail about D-76.

[jeremy_4146]

Thanks! Looks like an informative book. I am checking it out.

[Jon_2416]

I use HC110 most of the time in my rotary with 4x5 HP5+. I haven't used D76 for ages, so I can't really give you a comparison. Email me if you want to ask some specific questions. Check this page out for info:

http://covingtoninnovations.com/hc110/index.html

[Jay DeFehr]

D-76 is a benchmark developer and as such is invaluable in making meaningful comparisons. Every film ever made had a developing time for D-76 in the packaging. Ansel Adams had a lot of influence and promoted the use of HC 110 which has become another benchmark of sorts, though a different class of developer from D-76. As 21st century photographers, we have lost many great films and papers, but we have gained some as well. What's new? T-grain films, Xtol and really good VC papers, for a start. These materials have evolved to address the shortcomings of their predecessors and as such represent a departure in many important ways. Photographers who have learned to use and prefer the old materials are quite reasonably resistant to these new ones, but for those of us who cut our photographic teeth in the Tmax/Xtol age, there is a new standard for grain and flexibility. I believe that Xtol is superior to D-76 in every measurable way, but the legacy of D-76 is formidable and it's use is ubiquitous. I think you can expect to see continued discussion of D-76 very prominently into the foreseeable future, but I wouldn't be surprised to see the use of HC-110 decline as Ansel Adams' influence is diluted and diminished. If you're considering D-76 you would do well to consider Xtol instead. It can be diluted up to 1:3 for a range of applications. Like D-76, it is a great all-purpose, fine grain developer, only more so.

[Ken Lee]

At the risk of sounding redundant or nit-picking, I believe that what Ansel promoted was not HC-110 per se, but rather Tri-X in HC-110, diluted 1:32, and exposed at a speed of somewhere between 200 to 320.

I was around during that time (mid-1970's), and at that time my teacher, a student of Ansel, used this combination exclusively, because that's what Ansel used and recommended at that time.

As you point out, many have stuck with that combination, for obvious reasons. I was recently cleaning out some old boxes, and found some HC-110 from that era. Well, it didn't smell any worse :-)

[Lou Nargi]

I'v been useing Tri-x for 25 years . I developed it in D-76 for a few years , until I read the Negative by Ansel Adems. I don't think he promoted anything, he just told you what he did and other peaple tryed and found out he was right. I switched from using D-76 and Tri-x to HC-110 and yhis combination to be better than D-76.

[Jeff_1630]

Developer!?!?!?!?! Is that the thingy in my computer that takes the RAW images and turns them into something I can see on screen? (Sorry couldn't resit :-))

[Gustavo Torres]

Developer!!!! This is what makes you able to scan a 500 mega pixels image instead of one with only a few... Quality, it is not even under question. Sorry, I could not resisit. Gustavo