400TX at box speed, HC110 or Xtol?

[Takkun]

As some of you knew, I was in PA last month and thanks to a lovely reccomendation of a film dealer, loaded up for the rest of my trip, though with Tri-X, the only fast BW stock they had. I ended up spending a few days shooting abandoned houses and factories in North Philly in the snow (read: high contrast). I shot them at box speed, not really thinking I probably should have shot at EI 200 to compensate.
Since the summer, I've been trying to master the combo of TMax and XTOL, which is a fairly easy to work with combo. On my last B&M run I picked up a bottle of HC110, since they were out of the former.
I'm getting ready to develop these rolls, and I'm curious which you suggest I use; I still have a bit of XTOl in the fridge but I've heard great things about 110. Any tips or tricks to manage contrast, especially for scanning?

 

[totifoto]

I shoot Kodak Tri-X and develop it in Xtol 1:1 all the time. I usually shot it @800 ISO and over develop by 2-3 minutes to get more contrast.

 

[rolfe]

Very subjective subject, but my own opinion is that Xtol gives full box speed (maybe even +1/3 stop) and excellent separation in the highlights. HC110 would, IMHO, be more appropriate for documentary subject matter and seems to have more "guts" in the midtones. Used 1:1, Xtol will have somewhat less grain and slightly greater accuance than HC110. (This can be good or bad depending on your aesthetic).

 

[Takkun]

Bad news..
They turned out very, very thin. I think this batch of Xtol went bad, so I'm off to HC110 for the last 3 rolls since that's all I've got. First roll with that combo looks nice, so we'll see when they scan.

 

[sevo]

I dump the remaining XTOL after four to six weeks - I've never had any turn bad on me within less than three months, so I suppose that I am safe within these limits. Given the low price, it still is economical even if I only use a quarter of it. There is no point in wasting half an hour and a sheet of film on running a test strip ahead of each processing batch.

 

[Takkun]

Exactly; its amazing how cheap it is (between that and is environmental friendliness is why I went with it). I just forgot that this batch was mixed back in December, before I went on a photographic hiatus for a while. Other than that, I've absolutely loved it. Every so often I just get the urge to branch out, if anything to have options for different photographic situations.

 

[filmtwit]

The problems you're having might because of shooting in snow to start with.
Shooting in snow can be deceptive on your light meter and can be anywhere from 1-2 stops off.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/exposing_snow.shtml
This might help

 

[traveler_101]

Xtol?

Xtol?

I dump the remaining XTOL after four to six weeks - I've never had any turn bad on me within less than three months, so I suppose that I am safe within these limits. Given the low price, it still is economical even if I only use a quarter of it. There is no point in wasting half an hour and a sheet of film on running a test strip ahead of each processing batch.

Geez . . . you only use 25% of it ! Why do people put up with such nonsense in order to use XTOL? I made the mistake of buying a package of it before I understood how much of a pain in the neck it is to use . . . and I also think in the case of Tri-X, tones are better with D-76.

I have an unopened package of XTOL. Anyone around Oslo that wants to pay me $5 (30 NOK) for it? I am happy to be rid of it.

 

[kanzlr]

simply put: I love HC-110 for everything.
Tri-X and HP5 in particular. It holds up for ages, is easy to use and always results in nicely not to grainy negs.

 

[Bob Michaels]

Is this simply not a case of letting your light meter determine your exposure rather than using your brain which considers the meter reading as no more than one of the inputs?

The problems you're having might because of shooting in snow to start with.
Shooting in snow can be deceptive on your light meter and can be anywhere from 1-2 stops off. ......

 

[Fotohuis]

I have an unopened package of XTOL. Anyone around Oslo that wants to pay me $5 (30 NOK) for it? I am happy to be rid of it.

You can put it in an enveloppe to Holland. I can send you a few films back in return.

The problem of Xtol is that you have to use good water for the stock solution and that the Ascorbic Acid ingredient has a limited life span of 6-8 months.
Furher in 1+1 you have 10 ltr. of film developer which is a pretty large amount for most people.

Xtol is an optimum compromize between sharpness, box speed and fine grain.
HC-110 is more like D76, only a bit less details in the shadows at box speed but easy in handling and has for a liquid concentrate a fabulous long life span of 3-4 years.

http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/chemistry/bwFilmProcessing/selecting.jhtml?pq-path=14053

 

[charjohncarter]

Another great mini essay on developers by Fotohuis, I agree you lose some speed with HC-110, therefore a little less shadow detail at box speed.

 

[Takkun]

To those that asked about metering, of course I knew not to meter in the snow. I mentioned it only because highlight control would be a possible issue.

 

[robbeiflex]

In such conditions I would shoot Tri-x at 320 and knock 10% off the xtol development time. Just like mid summer high contrast scenes. If you already shot it at 400 then it's probably still worth reducing the dev time by 5 to 10% to avoid blowing the highlights.

Cheers,
Rob

 

[Turtle]

Xtol 1+1.

Simple.

 

[Fotohuis]

Not forget to mention that the chemical factory Foton (Poland) from Foma produces Fomadon Excel W27 1 ltr. package which is an almost 100% Xtol clone. Also cheap to order, at least in Europe.
They are also producing Fomadon P W37 1 ltr. an exact ID-11 copy for half price.