I'd been using HC-110 on and off with really poor consistency (I think due to the short development times for dilution B).
I developed two rolls of box-speed Tri-X in Kodak's TMax developer, and with Kodak-recommended label times, really liked the result.
I just thought I'd throw that out there. By the way, the title TMax on the developer is only a Kodak name for current b&w products...it doesn't mean it's only good for TMax film. For a while, they were calling BW400CN Tmax also.
---David.
I followed a similar path all those years ago when I started developing my own film. I also intially used HC110-B dilution with mixed results. After three months of achieving burnt highlights with photos taken on a sunny day as well as negatives with a full range of zone, I came to the conclusion that HC110-B is a very finicky combination that requires precise care.
In my case the inconsistent results were due to four factors:
a) Pouring the correct amount of developer can be quite difficult if you don't have a syringe, as it is very viscous, especially compared to Rodinal. If memory serves correctly, I was using 16ml for a two reel Jobo tank. This stuff is sticky and getting an accurate measure can require patience and care.
b) For film shot at EI:200 on sunny days with strong highlights, B dilution is not the way to go as reduction in development is too much. If I recall I was souping TRI-X at EI:400 for between 6 and 7 minutes. Now if you want to shorten that time to account for the extra stop exposure, then you are looking at a time that is very short.
c) Pour times have to be accurate.
d) Highlights can go zap, even with the EI:400 time, as this is a very high energy developer.
SO,
If you want to achieve fantastic results, go with HC110-H dilution, with 8ml for a 2 reel Jobo tank. I was doing times between 9 and 11 minutes depending on my EI and light conditions.
However, I sooned moved to D76 1:1 as that was all I could purchase. That is one of the great internet debates, you know the better developer for TRI-X, either D76 or HC110.
In my opinion, the negatives from HC110 are better to my eye than the old favorite D76 1:1 and Rodinal. Shot on a Leica lens, the tonality and sharpness was something else. That is just my personal taste. But, having said that I now use only Rodinal as I prefer the bigger grain and back to point A - I think Rodinal is much easier to deal with and pour, as it doesn't stick to the sides of the beaker like honey does.
Chris has provided some stunning examples done with TMAX developer. I personally could never replicate results like this, so I personally wouldn't recommend it. The reasons being that it is not only expensive, but I much prefer the grain from D76, HC110 and Rodinal. However, used in competent hands you can achieve fantastic results.
History is on the side of D76 in terms of heritage when mixed with TRI-X. In a sense, all of those thousands of photojournalists had a very good reason for using this combination. Tom A has written a fantastic post recently on D76 1:1 as a combination with TRI-X. Thats where I would head if I were you. It is best to learn on that combination and branch out from there.
Cheers
