Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 16 of 16

Thread: HC110 1:63 mushy flat negatives dilution H

  1. #11

    Re: HC110 1:63 mushy flat negatives dilution H

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeroen View Post
    https://imaging.kodakalaris.com/site...mistry/j24.pdf doesn't mention dilution H. Is that since the 'new' formula I saw in recent posts on this forum? I don't know. But do check page 7 on that PDF about developer capacity, that could be your problem.
    I was using 22ml HC110 to 1380ml water. Developing 6 sheets at a time. That's 3.6ml per sheet.

  2. #12

    Re: HC110 1:63 mushy flat negatives dilution H

    Quote Originally Posted by John Layton View Post
    Its been awhile since I've used HC-110 on a regular basis...having, by and large, gone over to pyro and pyrocat (staining) developers. But I've recently begun to reconsider a return to HC-110 - at least for certain types of images. My hope is that this "new" formula of HC-110 can compare favorably to the old one, assuming also that there will likely be some "tweaks" necessary to achieve this.
    Pyro is my preferred developer I wouldn't switch if I didn't have to for the moment

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    519

    Re: HC110 1:63 mushy flat negatives dilution H

    I must sound like a broken record by now, but if you don't do your own basic testing you will get nothing worth printing.



    Years ago I learned an excellent method to find the correct developing time and EI for any film. The source was an article by William Mortensen. Mortensen wrote some excellent books and articles about basic sensitometry. The last time I did this test was when I abandoned Tri-X in HC100 and switched to HP5+ in Ilfotec HC due to cost about five years ago. I proceed as follows.

    I set up my trays with my favorite developer HC110B (1:31), now Ilfotec HC (1:31). I pull out a sheet from the package in the dark. and then when the package is sealed again I turn on the room lights. This part of the test is done under the lights. I cut the sheet into five strips and mark them 1-5 by punching holes with a paper punch. Lets say the recommended time is 5:00. I want to see 3:00, 4:00, 5:00, 6:00 and 7:00, so I throw all the strips into the developer and agitate as usual until 3:00 when I move the No.1 strip over to the stop bath. Then I pull No.2 at 4:00, No.3 at 5:00, etc. I fix, wash and dry the strips as usual. What we are looking for is the best usable film DMax value. Obviously the film has been fully exposed! When strips dry lay down a page of news print on a table in good light. Find the strip through which the news print is barely visible. That's your developing time. Now to find the film speed.

    Go outside in unchanging light conditions and expose five sheets and expose one at the manufacturers rating and then the other four at one half a stop and one stop less and one half a stop and one stop more. In the dark, develop them all together for your newly derived time. Contact print them together exposing and developing the paper for maximum usable paper DMax value through the film base plus fog negative rebate area. Pick out the best-looking contact print and you have your film speed.

    Because my 7:00 negative looked the best on the first test, I did the test again with 7:00 as the central developing time and found that 8:00 was indeed too dense. This HP5+ time was the same as the as the developing time I had been using for Tri-X and film speed was also the same, EI400. I have also switched to Ilfotec HC developer due to cost and availability and find it to be a clone of HC110.

    Many of the last generation of B&W gurus favored a development time of 5:00 for Tri-X and suggested an EI of 64-100. You can do the above test backwards, developing for 5:00 minutes and finding the film speed. I like 100. The difference between negatives exposed at 100 and developed for 5:00 and those exposed at 400 and developed for 7:00 is quite subtle. Both could be considered "normal" or N negatives. The 100 negative has slightly greater shadow and highlight detail that only a careful, knowledgeable viewer could detect. This slight improvement might not be worthwhile trading for two stops in the field. I do routinely rate HP5+ at 100 under powerful strobe light in the studio and it produces beautiful skin tones.

    From here, if you are still with me, you can derive expansion and contraction schemes for both the 100 and 400 "normal negs". I do this by changing dilution rather than time. Make sure you have at least 1 oz. of the concentrated sauce for each 8X10 sheet or equivalent. For contractions I found that 3/4 oz. concentrate to 31 1/4 ozs. H20 yields an N-1 neg at a one stop loss in film speed and 1/2 oz. concentrate to 31 1/2 ozs. H20 yields an N-2 neg at a two stop loss in film speed. For expansions, 1 1/4 oz. of concentrate to 30 3/4 ozs. H20 yields an N+1 neg at a one stop gain in speed and 1 1/2 ozs. concentrate to 30 1/2 ozs. H20 produces an N+2 negative with a two stop gain in speed.

    If you look at the chart of Tri-X film speed in Phil Davis' BTZS book you can easily pick out the film speed in HC110B 5:00 as EI 64.

    Don't apply reciprosity exposure and development corrections for long exposures (1/2 sec. +) based on published data. Test for yourself and you may be surprised. I wasted a lot of time and effort producing long exposure negatives that were thick and flat. When I finally tested, I found no compensation was required for TXP or now HP5+ out to one minute.

  4. #14

    Re: HC110 1:63 mushy flat negatives dilution H

    Update: SUCCESS

    I upped my total developer volume to 2000ml using 30ml of HC110. I also brought development time to 12 minutes and the results are unreal night and day difference. Thanks for everyone's input I am now able to confidently proceed.

  5. #15

    Re: HC110 1:63 mushy flat negatives dilution H

    Quote Originally Posted by RodinalDuchamp View Post
    Update: SUCCESS

    I upped my total developer volume to 2000ml using 30ml of HC110. I also brought development time to 12 minutes and the results are unreal night and day difference. Thanks for everyone's input I am now able to confidently proceed.
    Quote Originally Posted by RodinalDuchamp View Post
    the massive dev charts time
    The massive dev charts times are often wrong, IMHO.

    E.g. Ilford FP4+@50 needs 9'00'' at 20C and 30/30-5. https://grossformatfotografie.de/thr...ger-ikea-tank/

    devchart says Ilford FP4+ in HC-110H @100ASA needs 9'00 at 21C - in a Jobo rotary tube processor! https://digitaltruth.com/devchart.ph...=C&TimeUnits=D
    4x5, 120, 135

  6. #16
    Tin Can's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    12,350

    Re: HC110 1:63 mushy flat negatives dilution H

    I know you solved your problem, congratulations!

    There is a limit to how little actual developer is necessary no matter the dilution

    Some years ago SergeiR tested extensively and published here that some X-Ray film requires 10 ml or more of RODINAL to develop specifically 80 sq inches of double sided X-Ray film


    He did test down to 3 ml

    Of course HC110 may be different


    Quote Originally Posted by RodinalDuchamp View Post
    I was using 22ml HC110 to 1380ml water. Developing 6 sheets at a time. That's 3.6ml per sheet.
    sin eater

Similar Threads

  1. Is your film flat? Or do you make it not flat.
    By Tin Can in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 29-Sep-2015, 07:18
  2. Tri X - HC110 dilution G
    By steve barry in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 29-May-2013, 08:11
  3. HC110 Dilution H
    By pound in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 17-Sep-2010, 13:22

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •