Please help me get started. Diafine vs HC-110.

Alowisney

Alowisney

Established
Local time
9:41 AM
Joined
Aug 8, 2010
Messages
182
I'm ready and excited to get started developing my own black and white film. I plan to develop then scan the negatives; printing may come later. So far all I have is a 2 reel plastic tank.

I have a friend that suggested Diafine to start out with to "save a lot of aggravation". I also made a trip to the local camera shop and they only carry Kodak chemicals and suggested HC-110. What do you guys think?

So far, all I have on my shopping list is 650ml and 50ml graduated cylinders, a thermometer, and stainless steel film clips. If I go with Diafine, what else do I need? How about HC-110? The camera shop doesn't have graduated cylinders or much else besides the chemicals, but they do have good stocks of those. The HC-110 they had was in a see-through bottle. I don't know which dilution that is. Every time I see it online it's in a silver bottle.

Thanks for any advice and input!
 
What film? If Tri-X use D76. I don't recommend HC-100 for your first developing try. D76 is much simpler to use as the dilution is simple (half D76, half water). The temperature is easy (20C), and the time is good (10 minutes).
 
Diafine is a "lowest common denominator" developer- it will always give you something; but I've found that I can always get better results using another developer if I have any idea how the film was exposed. Bottom line on Diafine, IMO- skip it. Even as a beginner it's not worth it. Take a little care with your film and in the end you'll be happier with your results if you use a better developer, even if it's a little trickier at first.

HC-110 on the other hand is a very nice developer with a wide range of films, and an excellent choice for one to start with, IMO. I like to use it at dilution H (one part developer syrup to 63 parts water); although the times are slightly longer than with lower dilutions, the results are particularly nice. Even at the standard dilution B, HC 110 will give great negatives- particularly if you are careful with your temperatures, times, and agitation technique. And really, whatever soup you use care with these factors is always recommended. If you learn to do it right from the start, these habits will always serve you well going forward.

Here's a good resource page for HC-110:
http://www.covingtoninnovations.com/hc110/
 
I started film developing using Diafine, and it is easier in the sense that you don't need to worry about temperature or calculating development times. But you do need to decide what iso to shoot your film at, b/c Diafine will give a speed boost, particularly to Tri-X. Search some of the threads in the film developing forum for suggestions on speeds to shoot Tri-X. My impression is that Tri-X in Diafine works best about iso 1200, but I've seen nice results at 800 and 1600 too; the point is, you won't be shooting Tri-X at box speed if you plan to develop in Diafine. Personally, I have not been terribly satisfied w/ the results I've gotten w/ Tri-X in Diafine. Plus-X (Arista 100) is a different matter. I've gotten some nice results shooting the latter film at iso 320 for development in Diafine.

In the end, however, I think you'll be better off w/ HC 110, and you'll find, once you've developed a few rolls in Diafine, that the greater control you have over the development process w/ HC 110 outweighs the need to monitor temperature, time, and dilution (none of which are that difficult to manage, btw).

BTW, you probably knew this but, Arista Premium 400 = Tri-X; Arista Premium 100 = Plus-X.

Good luck, and post some results!
 
Bingley said:
BTW, you probably knew this but, Arista Premium 400 = Tri-X; Arista Premium 100 = Plus-X.

Good luck, and post some results!
Click to expand...

I did because of this forum! I've got a 100' spool of each sitting in my cart at Freestyle along with a bulk loader.

I was leaning toward the HC-110 after reading several threads here and I'd like to buy something from the local shop. It's good to do business with them when I can.
 
hi hi!

Tri-x in Diafine

** Image Deleted ** you can download the
ISO comparison of Trix in Diafine here:

http://retro.ms11.net/diafinemedium.jpg

iso 100 200 400 800 1600 3200

Tri-x in HC-110

bruno.jpg


Plus-X in Diafine
plusxdiafine.jpg


Sorry. I don't have Plus-X in HC-110 on this computer BUT I prefer Plus-x in XTOL.

Frankly... both are so-so developers, HC-110 is a good average developer. Diafine is a special developer when Tri-x needs a iso of 1200-1600 :)
 
Last edited:
Even though it's aimed at photogs w/ some experience in developing, you might benefit from looking at the thread "how charjohncarter does it" here on RFF. He's a master and uses HC 110. Skip the Rodinal mix (for now) and try the Massive Development Chart as a starting point for dev times for your specific film at particular dilutions. Otherwise, follow his recommendations, including for agitation. Very good advice, IMO.
 
See http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=101767 for HC-110 experiences plus debate. I started with T-Max Dev, and then used D76 and then HC-110 shortly after due to a shortage of space in my apartment. Personally, I don't like the results of HC-110 compared with D76 or XTOL. I strongly recommend not using anything on the massive dev site; instead read the _source_ documentation from Kodak on their developers. The covington link above is also excellent.
 
PS, whoever posted the super long image above... please split it into something reasonably wide. It destroys the readability of this thread!
 
I would start with HC-110. D-76 is also another all-purpose developer.

D-76 comes in powered packages. After you mix the powder, the solution has a limited shelf life. HC-110 is a liquid concentrate. I find the results to be similar to my amateur eye, but the HC-110 is easier because it won't go bad. I just use a dropper to get my 7.5ml per 480ml.

While you don't have to worry as much about times and tempertures with Diafine, it is a two step developing process, versus one for HC-110 or D-76.

This gallery photo is Tri-X in HC-110 dilution H.
 
I just use a dropper to get my 7.5ml per 480ml
Click to expand...

That's precisely why I dislike HC-110. If you use the dilution B you get pretty fast development times which are bad. if you use small quantities its also bad because it harms repeatability using such small quantities of developer. Even relatively small errors in the quantity of concentrate ) results in a large percentage error. Lets say you accidently added 1ml more of concentrate. That is a 13% increase in the amount of developer which a pretty large increase.
 
HC 110 isn't that hard..

HC 110 isn't that hard..

D76 is standard and works well. As an alternative maybe they stock ID11?? HC 110 is not a bad developer either. It's slightly higher contrast, but it can be mixed easier than some people make it appear- Use a shot glass sized measuring cup, and add 1/2 oz HC 110 syrup (straight from the bottle) to 15 1/2 oz of water. This will be enough for two rolls of 35mm film. This is dilution B, and you can just discard it after it is done. Using it one shot like this should develop roughly sixty-four rolls of film. I recently moved and have not yet brought all of my chemicals, so decided to add HC 110 to my other developers (TMax, ID11, Technidol, & D76). One way to avoid such short dev times is to lower the temperature of your water and when mixing with tap water, this is pretty easily done. Get it down to 65 degrees Fahrenheit and you'll have ample time for even development.
I am not as adamant as some others using a specific developer in mind, but I push a lot, shoot fast films, do handheld low light photography, and like a lot of contrast. I'm even thinking about adding D19!
 
I find this an interesting question because when I first started (a couple years ago), I was considering the same two developers. I guess I'm not good at making decisions because in the end, I got both!

My strategy with the Diafine was that since some of my initial efforts were going to be done with a Holga, the compensating properties of this developer might provide some additional margin. Given the limited exposure adjustment available on that camera, I wanted to kind of hedge my bets! The speed enhancing aspect of the developer (a gain of around 1-1/2 stops by most accounts) factored in as well, since I knew there would be times when I could use the extra speed from my Tri-X.

In comparison, I was attracted to the HC-110 as an easy to use, classic developer, that was very economical and lasted basically forever. As a more "standard" developer, I liked that I could learn basic techniques, play with times, temperatures, dilutions and all that; push/pull if I wanted to, try stand development, and basically experiment to "dial it in" to suit my tastes. With Diafine I knew I couldn't really do that since the process was basically fixed.

I found that I liked both, and felt that each of them had turned out to be a good choice for the newbie that I was. They pretty much met my expectations described above. Both give good results, have great shelf life, are easy to use, and are very economical considering the number of rolls that can be developed.

In terms of the ultimate image quality on film, my estimation is that HC-110 has a bit of an edge, at least with Tri-X. I felt that it gave smoother results overall, especially in the highlights. At an EI of 200-400 for the Tri-X, it seemed to provide a better tonal gradation. The Diafine may have been sometimes sharper, but typically had more prominent grain (and not necessarily in a good way). On the other hand, the exceptional thing about Diafine was that it always provided at least one more stop of shadow detail compared to the HC-110. I felt Tri-X was best at 800-1200 in the Diafine, whereas I couldn't seem to "get there" at all with the HC-110. It is for that reason that I sometimes still use the Diafine - especially if I have any uncertainty about exposures or feel I might need that speed boost (and that is only with Tri-X). Otherwise (and especially for more "serious" shots), I prefer the HC-110.

I would agree with the previous poster that the HC-110 isn't that hard to use. Mixing directly from the syrup is actually very easy. As with any developer, you just need to have an appropriately sized container for decanting the stuff. The amounts may be small, but with the baby syringe method (as discussed on the Covington site), dispensing repeatable volumes of the syrup is not that challenging. I would estimate that the syringe gives you repeatability to about 0.1ml, if not a little better. If you are sloppy, 0.2ml worst case.

Those are my thoughts. Hope it helps!

Jeff
 
Those of you speaking of D76 shelf life, how old can it get and still be usable, or rather how old can it be before the quality of the results diminishes?
 
dogbunny said:
Those of you speaking of D76 shelf life, how old can it get and still be usable, or rather how old can it be before the quality of the results diminishes?
Click to expand...
I generally buy a gallon of ID-11 z(Same thing but cheaper locally) and after mixing I put it in 2 1/2 gallon jugs. I label the jugs with the date. I mix it 1:1. It is good for 6 months but recently I opened a bottle that was past 11 months and it worked fine (however I dumped it). So, unopened I'd say 10 months and opened 6 months.
 
dfoo said:
That's precisely why I dislike HC-110. If you use the dilution B you get pretty fast development times which are bad. if you use small quantities its also bad because it harms repeatability using such small quantities of developer. Even relatively small errors in the quantity of concentrate ) results in a large percentage error. Lets say you accidently added 1ml more of concentrate. That is a 13% increase in the amount of developer which a pretty large increase.
Click to expand...

The dropper I use would be impossible to be off by 1 mL without making a gross error. Perhaps 0.1mL

Of course, you can make a gross error by calculating your developing times based on 75F instead of 68F , or developing per stock D-76 versus D-76 1:1.
 
dogbunny said:
Those of you speaking of D76 shelf life, how old can it get and still be usable, or rather how old can it be before the quality of the results diminishes?
Click to expand...


If I can remember, Kodak says 6 months if the bottle is full, and 2 months if it is not full. It's on the packet.

I'm not sure about the true shelf life, because who wants to take a chance?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom