400TX with HC-110

[nobbylon]

After a 30 year break I have decided to process some of my own film rather than just hand it over to the lab.
My question is regarding developing time and mixing ratio.
I'm going to be scanning the resulting negs, NOT printing them for now.
I've done some reading on the Covington site but would like your thoughts. I'm going to go with solution B at 1:31 for 6mins 30 secs at 68 deg. Film exposed at 400.
Does anyone have any tried and trusted times and ratios that they consistantly use.
Please don't be offended but I don't want people recommending D76, Xtol etc etc.
I'm after some honest help from the members that actually use this combo.
I'd like times and ratios for 800 and 1600 as well if possible.
The film is packaged 400TX.
Lastly a question re scanning. I'm using an Epson 4990 with Silverfast.
I've usually scanned all my film as neg and used the profiles provided however I've read that it may be better scanning as a positive and then flipping in Photoshop. Any thoughts? Silverfast settings etc. Thanks for any help. I'm going to do some scanning experimentation this morning but all help gratefully received,
j

 

[Ljós]

Your time of 6:30 is, in my opinion, a little on the high side if your goal is to scan. I would start with 5:30 and take it from there.

Congratulations on getting back in the developing game!

All the best, Ljós

 

[maddoc]

It is my standard combination that I use since a couple of years. From my experience, HC-110 "B" is better to use (more consisten results and easier to mix) as a "stock-solution" (syrup + water: 1 + 3) and before usage that stock solution diluted 1 + 7. The stock solution can be well stored in the fridge for a month or so (I usually make 400ml stock, equivalent for ~ 6 - 7 rolls of 135-36).

At 20 degrees C the time is 4:30 according to "digitaltruth" dev-chart and that is my standard, too (For scanning). I invert slowly the first 40 seconds and three inversions every minute after that. Stop-bath is water and fix is 5 minutes in Ilford-fixing solution.

I my case, when using HC-110 "B" the film still has some very slight purple stain after washing and drying but it does not effect much the scanning.

 

[delft]

I finally arrived at 12' at dil H (should be equiv. to 6' at dil B) for Tri-X at 20 Celcius. Negatives scan good, but are a little soft(!) for printing. Agitation continuous for the 1st 30 sec. then 5 sec. every 30 sec.
My current regime is TMY in XTOL. Much finer grain and less blue sensitivity, giving darker skies without a yellow-filter.

When I scan, I do it as a positive and use colorperfect to reverse the negative. (Yes, it works for B&W too).

Welcome back to film.

Dirk

 

[Chris101]

...
I'm going to go with solution B at 1:31 for 6mins 30 secs at 68 deg. Film exposed at 400.
...

That is exactly what I do - 59 rolls over the last couple of years. I like to print my negatives in the darkroom though. With this scheme, I find that the negatives wet print well, and a bit of easing off the gain during scanning results in a very nice scan.

...
I'd like times and ratios for 800 and 1600 as well if possible.
...

I do not push trix for speed, but will increase the development for a very low contrast scene. I've done some forrest scenes, where the highlights to the shadows was less than 3 stops, by increasing the time to 10 minutes, and exposing at EI 1000.

On the other hand high contrast scenes, are often dark, and so pulling the film is counterproductive. Therefore if I need to use a higher speed for the sake of a higher speed, I use faster film. My favorite is Delta 3200. I expose it at EI 1600 and develop it in HC110b for 9 minutes, or for 14.5 minutes at EI 3200. I have developed about the same amount of Delta 3200 as I have trix.

With trix, if I want to contract the contrast - if a part of the scene is sunlit, and part in the shade, I pull it by developing the film in HC110b for 5 minutes. I expose it at EI 250 to 320 for that.

All my times are for 68F (20C). If I cannot get to that temperature, I use the nomograph at the digitaltruth.com site to convert the time. I agitate for the first minute, then 5 seconds every 30 seconds thereafter. I invert the tank 3 times in 5 seconds. After each agitation I shake the tank slightly to dislodge bubbles and bang it on the sink to cause them to rise off the film.

...
Lastly a question re scanning. I'm using an Epson 4990 with Silverfast.
I've usually scanned all my film as neg and used the profiles provided however I've read that it may be better scanning as a positive and then flipping in Photoshop.
...

I don't use a 4990 or Silverfast. I had an older Epson scanner a while ago (1660 I believe) and I liked the Epson software. Silverfast's interface drives me nuts. According to it's specs, the 4990 has a high dmax, so having a denser negative will not adversely affect the highlight detail. I use a Coolscan and it's not a problem. I routinely print my scans and they stack up well when compared to wet prints. It just takes a bit of tweeking, but I don't know how much of that Silverfast allows.

 

[Bob Michaels]

I have used HC-110 for Dil. H 10+ years with Neopan 400 and now Tri-X. I expose at 320. Normal times are 10 minutes (20C), 12 if shot in flat light. I recently shot some at e.i. 800 in flat light and developed for 17 minutes. They look fine.

Your scanner does not know if it is scanning a negative or a positive. It is just shining light through a piece of film, reading the shadows on a sensor and outputting that unmanipulated data to the scanner driver software. Some of the scanner driver software begins making adjustments when it outputs that data as a positive or negative. And the adjustments are different for positive or negatives. Hence the old tale about "scanning as a positive (or negative) is better. Don't know about Silverfast. I do know there is no difference in Vuescan.

 

[nobbylon]

Thank you all for taking the time to reply. I am of course going to experiment for my own optimum settings. I found this also,
http://www.mironchuk.com/hc-110.html

I've just been experimenting with scanning. I have a roll here and have found with my scanner and silverfast that the best TO ME results come from scanning as a positive and inverting. Much less contrast and more detail in the result.
I do seem however to be picking up noise even from a 4 pass scan.
Workflow so far for best result is
scan as positive with auto button pressed for highlight shadow and mid tones as a tiff.
photoshop, invert and run smart sharpen with 100% 1.5 radius and lens blur selected.
then to get rid of the noise i run through dfine 2.0
Is it me or does everyone find that it takes an age to discover their optimum work flow.
It took me near 5-6 years of messing with digital to get to a place that i'm happy with.
I'm hoping I stumble onto my best dev and mix for film a little quicker!
Keep the ideas coming as im printing them out for a reference aid, thanks j

 

[Bob Michaels]

............................. Keep the ideas coming as im printing them out for a reference aid, thanks j

OK, #1 suggestion: Do not evaluate your scan workflow by the quality of the file that comes out of the scanner software. A good looking scan rarely yields the best final result.

Do evaluate your scan workflow by what gives you the best final result after adjustment in your image editor. This means the best scan will be one that contains the most data. Typically these look flat.

Suggestion #2: do not believe that a more complex process will give better final results. Quite often, the best is also the simplest.

 

[nobbylon]

OK, #1 suggestion: Do not evaluate your scan workflow by the quality of the file that comes out of the scanner software. A good looking scan rarely yields the best final result.

Do evaluate your scan workflow by what gives you the best final result after adjustment in your image editor. This means the best scan will be one that contains the most data. Typically these look flat.

Suggestion #2: do not believe that a more complex process will give better final results. Quite often, the best is also the simplest.

Suggestion 2 is exactly how I do my digital.
I use Nikon NX2 for RAW conversion and just tweak exposure and not a lot else. The camera is already loaded with Nikon D2X profiles which is my default.
Can anyone who uses Silverfast give any tips for maximum data scanning?

 

[Chris101]

...
the best TO ME results
...

That is what's important. You can read and digest all the advice you can, but the real learning comes from doing it yourself. Keep on "j". I'm looking forward to hearing all about your own process.

 

[boffen]

I just developed a roll for the first time ever. Tri-X in dilution B @ 24C for two and a half minutes (as it said on the HC-110 container), and the negatives look fine, I think. They are sort of tinted purple though, I don't know if it's supposed to be like that.

Also, there are water drops on the drying negatives, should I wipe it of with my squeegee, or will it dry by itself (I used ilfotol)? I'm sorry for asking here, but I didn't want to start a new thread.

 

[nobbylon]

boffen from reading the sites mentioned I think it would be hard to get consistant results with such a short time. Perhaps try the H solution?
I'm going to try B and H probably for 6'30 and 13 respectively at 68F/20C and then reduce from there.
I'm just messing with scanning settings at the moment and I think I'm at settings now that i'm happy with. As soon as I get my chemicals I will do some and post my results.

 

[gho]

Hey, I have tried HC-110 (B) with Tri-X also recently. I rate Tri-X at around 400 (sunny 16, sorry, no exact measurement).

My agitation scheme is quite conservative. I prefer rather flat negatives because I think they have the most information in them, the curve can be adjusted later, while scanning. In principle, I am trying to use the full tonal range of Tri-X.

I agitate three times in the beginning and then just once every minute for 8 (!) minutes at 20 C (68 F). This is quite a bit longer then the recommended times at the massive development chart, but I guess it is because of my reduced agitation.

Here is an example, but probably not a good one, because it was approximately one stop underexposed and needed some adjustment:

I guess you will have to find your own time, but it is just a matter of a few test frames. Good luck and enjoy! Overall I am very pleased with the HC-110 (B) - Tri-X combo and am wondering, what the other dilutions are used for.

 

[boffen]

boffen from reading the sites mentioned I think it would be hard to get consistant results with such a short time. Perhaps try the H solution?
I'm going to try B and H probably for 6'30 and 13 respectively at 68F/20C and then reduce from there.
I'm just messing with scanning settings at the moment and I think I'm at settings now that i'm happy with. As soon as I get my chemicals I will do some and post my results.

I don't know what would be best, and since the Massive Dev Chart app only had the time for 20 degrees, and since I didn't have anything important on the roll, I went with what the bottle suggested. Looks decent right now.

What would you suggest as dev. time for 24 degrees celsius (75 degrees Fahrenheit?)?

Also, any comment on the slightly purple color tint?

 

[DerekF]

What would you suggest as dev. time for 24 degrees celsius (75 degrees Fahrenheit?)?

Being summer here, it's tough to get to 20C and water temp tends to settle at 24C, so that's exactly what I've been developing at lately: HC-110 dilution H at 24C for 8:40 for Tri-X shot at 400. Gives me good results.

 

[Ljós]

Tint is normal with Tri-x

Tint is normal with Tri-x

Boffen,
the tint is normal with this latest version of Tri-x. Even when correctly fixed, it will have a stronger tint than the old version, or for example the current Tmax 400. It has to do with the anti-halation layer of the film, and is nothing to worry about, it will print fine.

Of course, as always you have to make sure that the film is sufficiently fixed - but a remaining tint is not necessarily a sign of underfixing, see above.

Now, about the time: Even if you got good results this time I agree with the above poster to try something longer. I think times around 5, 5:30 minutes can be handled well repeatedly, I have done it for years (some say to avoid times in the 5 minute region, one of the reasons Dil. H. or E is preferred). But with two and a half minutes, I would agree that you are tempting fate.

If you want to keep it at 24 degrees, try a thinner dilution than Dil. B, that would be my recommendation.

Greetings, Ljós

 

[boffen]

If anything I over fixed it. I managed to spill the remainder of my stop bath while agitating and had to clean that up while trying to keep track of time, haha.

I still have one roll worth of the B dilution, so I'll test 5:30 tomorrow. Then I'll try two rolls in the H dilution.

Also, I don't necessarily want to keep it at 24 degrees, but the combination of the hot summer weather and above ground water lines (there's some maintenance going on) makes 20 degrees unobtainable.

 

[Ljós]

Also, I don't necessarily want to keep it at 24 degrees, but the combination of the hot summer weather and above ground water lines (there's some maintenance going on) makes 20 degrees unobtainable.

I hear you, during summer it is harder for me to get the chems and washing water to 24 degrees, too, but it is not unobtainable.

I keep 1 or two liters of water in the fridge... 2 liters of, say, 8 degrees cold water will go a long way to be able to mix warmer tap water down to 20 deg. It sounds more complicated or bothersome than it is in reality.

However, you also want to cool down your fixer, so I put that in the fridge some time before I develop, too. You get pretty good at timing this, without having to make many temperature checks.

For washing, I have a leftover 5 liter distilled water canister. From tap and the fridgewater I get it to 20 degrees. It is more than enough for the Ilford wash sequence, and there is no repeat futzing with the tap water, checking or mixing temperature in between fills. Just one time.

But I agree, it is easier during the colder seasons 🙂

Greetings, Ljós

 

[jan normandale]

don't forget to check in on the Massive Dev Chart for additional ideas.. besides the ones posted by members here.

http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.php

 

[boffen]

So, following the same exact routine I did yesterday, except developing for 5 minutes and 30 seconds, my drying film now has shadows at the beginning and the end of the roll. The shadows seems to stop at exposure 3 and 32 (everything in between seems to have developed correctly), but at the edges and around the sprocket holes the shadowing continues randomly. Now, I did manage to open the camera before rewinding the roll of film, which would explain the shadowing on the last couple of frames, but what about the sprocket holes and first couple of exposures? Are there other things that could cause shadows on the negatives?