HC110 ... using it as you would Rodinal.

Cool thread. I have also started using HC-110 dilution B with Tri-X recently and like the results. I have also been wondering about the different dilutions.
Maddoc: The result is looking great.
 
HC-110 is my standard developer for Tri-X. I find dilution H more convenient than dilution B because the development time of the modern Tri-X in dilution B is on the very short side (less than 4min). Dilution H is also more economical.

- N.
 
Keith said:
I've had a bottle of concentrate HC110 sitting on the shelf for a while but could never be bothered getting my head around all the 'dilution H' 'dilution whatever' nonsense and read that many people just use it like Rodinal.

It's no longer available in OZ because Kodak (bless their souls) decided to stop bringing it into this fair land ... so I may as well just use it I guess! 🙄

What's your experience with HC110 and do you bother with all the variations of dilutions ... H, A, B etc?
Click to expand...

Keith, was that the bottle I got for you in one of the Freestyle orders? That was quite a while ago!
 
I read someone saying that Tri-X in dilution B at 24Cfor 9.5 minutes and max 2 aggitations will give good results with both shadow and highlight details. So that's what I'm doing. No expert but can't complain.

My first attempt was 1:64 10 min. but that was way too thin for my taste.
 
HP5 HC110 1:119 25 min 20C semi stand (1 min initial gentle agitation, 30 seconds at halfway)

450082300_16c01df6a1.jpg
 
kmack said:
HP5 HC110 1:119 25 min 20C semi stand (1 min initial gentle agitation, 30 seconds at halfway)

450082300_16c01df6a1.jpg
Click to expand...

I am definitely not an expert on stand development or semi-stand, but I have tried HC-110 semi-stand and stand. What I can't understand is the complete infatuation of people with Rodinal stand (which I have tried often, in fact more than HC-110 stand). I find HC-110 gives none of the uneven development that Rodinal does, and very much more predictable results. Well, that is my plug for HC-110 stand. But semi-stand was good enough for Ansel Adams with HC-110 so it is good enough for me.

By the way, the above picture is not one that would, in the traditional sense, be done with compensating development.
 
Haven't used it in a long while, but it was once my standard. I never bothered with the "H" and whatnot dilution thing. I just worked out times for 1:30 and 1:50, depending on the film. I shoot for a time in the 7 minute range. HC110 is very consistent at various dilutions. My old prof Arnold Gassen worked out a system where the time remained the same and the dilution changed to get a full set of zone system expansions and contractions using HC-110. No reason at all not to use it just like Rodinal, it's great stuff.
 
ChrisN said:
Keith, was that the bottle I got for you in one of the Freestyle orders? That was quite a while ago!
Click to expand...


That's the one Chris ... I'm finally getting a little low on Rodinal and thought it was time to try it out!

The other day I used it with some Adox CHS 100 Art and really liked the way the images looked ... the best result I've had with Adox so far IMO. Then I tried it with some Tmax 100 and was a little disappointed, the images seemed a little wimpy ... but then I've never really been a Tmax fan!
 
I got two x 500ml bottles of Rodinal from Vanbar when their last stock came in - that should keep me going for a while! I use it mainly for medium format, so there's enough grain so I can focus under the enlarger! PAN-F is just about impossible otherwise! For 35mm I prefer ID-11 at the moment.
 
Chris101 said:
For those who are considering stand development using HC110 - try adding 3mL of syrup per 36 exp roll of 35mm or roll of 120 film to enough water to fill the tank. This much HC110 will completely develop the film in about an hour, and be fully exhausted after that. I learNed this from a former memBer here.
Click to expand...

I am giving it a try right now with Tri-X. 480ml water, 6ml HC-110 (~Dilution F), two rolls of film, 30 seconds initial agitation, one hour full stand at 20C. Quite similar to what I am used to do with Rodinal. I am curious how the negs will turn out.

Edit: The negatives are hanging to dry. Some frames are actually a bit dark (overexposed or overdeveloped), but all seem to be quite usable. Maybe 50 minutes next time or less light. I will post some scans later.
 
Last edited:
Keith said:
The other day I used it with some Adox CHS 100 Art and really liked the way the images looked ... the best result I've had with Adox so far IMO.
Click to expand...

I like the Adox CHS 100 also in 120 and 135. Good film, the emulsion is a bit soft when still wet though. I have not tested it extensively, as I am predominantly using Tri-X for its' versatility, but CHS 100 clearly has an interesting look.

Mostly I developed CHS with Rodinal stand, but I did not explore that combo any futher, because I have refrained from using the Rodinal stand developement method for normal (EV) light situations. But if you are lucky, the results with Rodinal stand are looking great, especially the edge effect is something I like.

So CHS 100 with HC-110 may also be something to try out for the adventurous darkroom freak. However, I find that rotating film and developer too heavily may also throw one back and prevent one from discovering the many possibilities of just one film and developer combo. I have not factored in printing yet, because I simply do not print. Yet.
 
Last edited:
Ok, here are three samples, with very little scanning adjustments, except for the last one. Overall I would say that the rolls were overdeveloped by approximately 1 stop or so. Good for those who like higher shutter speeds. The grain is very nice and cirsp for my taste.

6137863936_7c7df08fc1_z.jpg



6137388319_bb9fd46a98_z.jpg


6137495001_7223e581e7_z.jpg
 
Last edited:
Bob Michaels said:
Keith: my personal opinion is that this one developer vs. another is as overblown as one lens vs. another. It is still what you eye sees that counts.
Click to expand...

Undoubtedly content is most important, but it's our technique that lets people see the content. Many developers produce similar results. People's preferences are based on a lot of things, including their experience and what other people who they like use. Some developers do produce a different look - Rodinal and HC110 tend to give darker midtones for a given CI than, say Xtol or D76. One thing that i see often that I do not like is when a photo series that is meant to be viewed as a series has tones that are mixed through a series of photos. It isn't wrong, it's preference, but I just don't like it. I really recommend Bob's approach for a project or photo series. His work, and Chris Crawford's work are really good examples of this. Chris' B&W work is also a really good display of matching tonalities across different film speeds - vital, in my opinion, for presenting a series of work shot under different circumstances.

Marty
 
Last edited:
Freakscene said:
............................. I really recommend Bob's approach for a project or photo series. His work, and Chris Crawford's work are really good examples of this. .........................
Click to expand...

My definition of "efficient" is what others call "lazy". I use one format, one film, one developer for an entire series to simplify the similarity of the prints. Each series will take six months to several years and it is good to eliminate as many variables as possible. I make the final exhibition prints all at one time as well. When the technical consistency is easier, I have more effort to devote to the content delivering the message.

Now I have changed from Neopan 400 to Tri-X in the middle of a series but that is not a difference I can detect. Similarly I have changed 28mm lenses.
 
Bob Michaels said:
My definition of "efficient" is what others call "lazy". I use one format, one film, one developer for an entire series to simplify the similarity of the prints. Each series will take six months to several years and it is good to eliminate as many variables as possible. I make the final exhibition prints all at one time as well. When the technical consistency is easier, I have more effort to devote to the content delivering the message.

Now I have changed from Neopan 400 to Tri-X in the middle of a series but that is not a difference I can detect. Similarly I have changed 28mm lenses.
Click to expand...

That is a good way to do it. I don't 'show' but if I were going to; I would use your method. It is definitely the little details that make the final product great.
 
charjohncarter said:
That is a good way to do it. I don't 'show' but if I were going to; I would use your method. It is definitely the little details that make the final product great.
Click to expand...

You should show! I find your images extremely good, they have a beautiful symmetry and clarity of space that really allows the viewer to see beyond the often simple subjects you often photograph.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom