Reformulated: Kodak HC-110

[Freakscene]

Marty, ilfotec-hc is “waterless”, “syruppy”, and “lasts forever”. All these qualities have been wonderfully ignored in favor of underlining how bringing such a product to market would very difficult, almost impossible 🥴

Yes, there are slight differendes. Different scent, ilfotec-HC has this nice nutty aroma while kodak has a stronger scent of fish.

Ilfotec-HC is also ever so slightly less viscous. My fingers tell me it’s around 92-95% that of original kodak hc-110.

Ilfotec-HC has similar but different activity, tonality and timing across a range of films. Ilfotec-HC does not work at very high dilution; nor does it increase its activity as much when ascorbate is added. It lasts a long time, but not as long as HC-110. Bubbling sulfur dioxide and hydrobromic acid through diethanolamine is tricky, failure prone and a lot of effort for low volume products like developers for black and white film. I am genuinely surprised that Adox gave this a go and I applaud them for doing it and bringing it to market. Hopefully it does all the things that users are used to doing with HC-110. I’m happy you’re laughing in your beard too Ned.

 

[Ororaro]

Hey Marty, who would not laugh in his beard after using twelve years old ilfotec-hc with impeccable results, even at 1:63 dilutions?

Times are different only because kodak and ilford have different contrast targets, and also because Kodak did not care to give proper times. The kodak recomended times were notoriously regarded as being absolutely wrong. That’s also why Ilford recommends hc-110 times to match its own ilfotec-hc times. I remember way too well back in 2004 when kodak was highly criticized for misguiding users with improper times regarding D76 and especially HC-110. They never corrected their errors. I also clearly remember Kodak reps stating that it was preferable to under-develop a film than to push. Their recomended times for hc-110 were universally accepted as plain bs. For reference, Thom Abrahamsson was very vocal about it.

 

[Freakscene]

Hey Marty, who would not laugh in his beard after using twelve years old ilfotec-hc with impeccable results, even at 1:63 dilutions?

But it doesn’t work at 1:128, 1:183 (a la Barnbaum) or 1:200, whereas old HC-110 did. That’s one difference.

Times are different only because kodak and ilford have different contrast targets, and also because Kodak did not care to give proper times. The kodak recomended times were notoriously regarded as being absolutely wrong. That’s also why Ilford recommends hc-110 times to match its own ilfotec-hc times. I remember way too well back in 2004 when kodak was highly criticized for misguiding users with improper times regarding D76 and especially HC-110. They never corrected their errors. I also clearly remember Kodak reps stating that it was preferable to under-develop a film than to push. Their recomended times for hc-110 were universally accepted as plain bs. For reference, Thom Abrahamsson was very vocal about it.

Yes, the times were wrong, Tom and I discussed it at length. But even corrected for density and contrast the times are not exactly the same.

Keep laughing Ned, we are too.

 

[yossi]

Instead of laughing, I have just pre-ordered for two bottles of ADOX syrup 110 film developer from Freestyle.
That should be enough for developing the two 400ft-bulk rolls of 5222 that I got recently.

​

 

[Godfrey]

Hmm. A 1L bottle of Ilfotec-HC concentrate is about double the price of Kodak HC-110 or Adox HC ...

G

 

[Freakscene]

Hmm. A 1L bottle of Ilfotec-HC concentrate is about double the price of Kodak HC-110 or Adox HC ...

G

That depends on where you are. In the UK and much of Europe, Ilfotec-HC is cheaper. In the US, HC-110 is cheaper. Other places, it can often be roughly even.

 

[yossi]

That depends on where you are. In the UK and much if Europe, Ilfotec-HC is cheaper. In the US, HC-110 is cheaper. Other places, it can often be roughly even.

Where I am (SG), 1L of Ilfotec-HC is $94 (available locally) and HC-110 from ADOX is $75 (imported with shipping and tax). Not that much different.

 

[Freakscene]

Where I am (SG), 1L of Ilfotec-HC is $94 (available locally) and HC-110 from ADOX is $75 (imported with shipping and tax). Not that much different.

It’s similar retail in Australia.

 

[Godfrey]

That depends on where you are. In the UK and much of Europe, Ilfotec-HC is cheaper. In the US, HC-110 is cheaper. Other places, it can often be roughly even.

Where I am (SG), 1L of Ilfotec-HC is $94 (available locally) and HC-110 from ADOX is $75 (imported with shipping and tax). Not that much different.

Hmm. A 25% difference in price is "not that much different" or "roughly even" ...?
LOL! My partner scrutinizes the grocery receipts and complains to me when a $2 item one week is $2.05 the next. 😉

I was just noting that the Ilfotec-HC price from my usual supplier was double the HC-110 price, before tax and shipping. I'm not so price sensitive as my partner, but a price doubling is worth noticing. I'm in the USA, can't see myself importing this kind of consumable from out of the country given the additional shipping costs required. Of course, it's all trivialized by the fact that, if the stuff lasts as well as the Kodak HC-110 I've got on hand has, it'll be a decade or more before I need another bottle, and it is only $100... I use between 1 and 3 ml per month. That's a lot of months for a 1 liter supply... about 27 years worth. 😀

G

 

[yossi]

Assuming that I favor Ilfotec HC, paying $19 more to get a bottle of it is not a big deal to me, YMMV. (And my wife would never question how I spend my money on my hobby btw😉). But I prefer the original syrup Kodak HC-110, hence I prefer-order the ADOX new syrup HC-110. So I saved $19. Big deal lol.

 

[Godfrey]

Assuming that I favor Ilfotec HC, paying $19 more to get a bottle of it is not a big deal to me, YMMV. (And my wife would never question how I spend my money on my hobby btw😉). But I prefer the original syrup Kodak HC-110, hence I prefer-order the ADOX new syrup HC-110. So I saved $19. Big deal lol.

Oh, my partner never looks or comments on what I spend on my camera/car/other entertainment. But I can see him sprouting more gray hairs if I mention any of it in passing. I try not to... 😇

I have a bottle of the ADOX stuff on the way too.

G

 

[yossi]

Not to further OT... hey @Freakscene , can you please enlighten us which ingredients in the following HC-110 formula makes it syrup?


(Woah, looking at the table this stuff look nasty😱)

 

[Freakscene]

Not to further OT... hey @Freakscene , can you please enlighten us which ingredients in the following HC-110 formula makes it syrup?

View attachment 4856724
(Woah, looking at the table this stuff look nasty😱)

So, firstly, HC-110 is relatively low toxicity because the amount of developing and other agents it requires is low. Follow the instructions and take reasonable care but don’t be too paranoid. Remember that exposure is key. So if you work in a darkroom you need to be more and routinely careful than if you develop one tank of films a month. These chemicals also have environmental toxicity and should be disposed of responsibly (what ‘responsibly’ means depends on where you are).

In the table above:
The first component is hydroquinone, a developing agent. In its pure form it is a white crystalline powder.
The second is monoethanolamine (MEA) - a viscous liquid at room temperature, but 1-3% MEA is not enough to make a mixture ‘syrupy’. It is alkaline in solution, and is one of the alkali/activator components of HC-110.
The third component is diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid (DTPA) - a chelating agent to manage calcium, magnesium and other nasties in your water. It is like a longer molecule version of EDTA. It is also a powder in pure form.
The fourth, potassium bromide, is a restrainer, and is another powder.
The fifth is dimezone, a developing agent like phenidone but more resistant to oxidation. Also a powder.
The last is catechol, another developing agent that is a powder at room temperature.

MDS/MSDS documents are a terrible source of information about formulations - they do not need to show non-toxic/non-hazardous components, and they do not need to show anything that is in the product at less than 2%. I also do not know if German MDS documents state the perfectage in the syrup or the working solution. My guess is the former, but I wouldn’t guarantee it.

So the short answer is probably that none of those make it syrupy, but what does is something like MEA but is non-toxic or generally recognized as safe (GRAS). Both diethanolamine (DEA) and triethanolamine (TEA) are used in cosmetics and may be used in HC-110, as are propylene glycol or dimethylsulfoxide, which are also largely inert but very good solvents. HC-110 is complex, and there is also probably a non-active carrier, which may be part of what makes it thick.

I may write a long HC-110 rant ( like my Long Xtol rant) some time (when I have time) if anyone is interested.

 

[pyeh]

Marty, I am!

 

[yossi]

Wow Marty, when come to chemicals, you are the man👍🏻

What word is this? - diethylenetriaminepentaacetic 🥶

 

[Freakscene]

Wow Marty, when come to chemicals, you are the man👍🏻

What word is this? - diethylenetriaminepentaacetic 🥶

You are welcome. In a past life I was known as ‘Chemical Marty’ until that had some unpleasant and suspicious connotations added to it in popular awareness.

The name of DTPA is mild compared to some I know . . . 🤦🏻‍♂️

 

[Prest_400]

I may write a long HC-110 rant ( like my Long Xtol rant) some time (when I have time) if anyone is interested.

Very interesting. I'd vote for such articles to be included in RFF as a longform thread or article!

Still have some thick HC110 from 2019 and when it runs out, I surely will grab Adox's. Nowadays I am using their XT3 XTOL substitute, which I find perfect for tabular grain films. But also got great prints from what I thought were flat HP5 and Kentmere 400 negs developed in it.
HC110 is just so convenient.

 

[Godfrey]

So, firstly, HC-110 is relatively low toxicity because the amount of developing and other agents it requires is low. Follow the instructions and take reasonable care but don’t be too paranoid. Remember that exposure is key. So if you work in a darkroom you need to be more and routinely careful than if you develop one tank of films a month. These chemicals also have environmental toxicity and should be disposed of responsibly (what ‘responsibly’ means depends on where you are).

In the table above:
The first component is hydroquinone, a developing agent. In its pure form it is a white crystalline powder.
The second is monoethanolamine (MEA) - a viscous liquid at room temperature, but 1-3% MEA is not enough to make a mixture ‘syrupy’. It is alkaline in solution, and is one of the alkali/activator components of HC-110.
The third component is diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid (DTPA) - a chelating agent to manage calcium, magnesium and other nasties in your water. It is like a longer molecule version of EDTA. It is also a powder in pure form.
The fourth, potassium bromide, is a restrainer, and is another powder.
The fifth is dimezone, a developing agent like phenidone but more resistant to oxidation. Also a powder.
The last is catechol, another developing agent that is a powder at room temperature.

MDS/MSDS documents are a terrible source of information about formulations - they do not need to show non-toxic/non-hazardous components, and they do not need to show anything that is in the product at less than 2%. I also do not know if German MDS documents state the perfectage in the syrup or the working solution. My guess is the former, but I wouldn’t guarantee it.

So the short answer is probably that none of those make it syrupy, but what does is something like MEA but is non-toxic or generally recognized as safe (GRAS). Both diethanolamine (DEA) and triethanolamine (TEA) are used in cosmetics and may be used in HC-110, as are propylene glycol or dimethylsulfoxide, which are also largely inert but very good solvents. HC-110 is complex, and there is also probably a non-active carrier, which may be part of what makes it thick.

I may write a long HC-110 rant ( like my Long Xtol rant) some time (when I have time) if anyone is interested.

You remind me why I only studied Chemistry for the required one class/one year in High School ... I get tongue tied just trying to read those chemical names! LOL!

Mathematics is so much simpler to read... 😇

G

 

[Freakscene]

You remind me why I only studied Chemistry for the required one class/one year in High School ... I get tongue tied just trying to read those chemical names! LOL!

Mathematics is so much simpler to read... 😇

G

It’s funny cause it’s true.

 

[ChrisPlatt]

Instead of laughing, I have just pre-ordered for two bottles of ADOX syrup 110 film developer from Freestyle.
That should be enough for developing the two 400ft-bulk rolls of 5222 that I got recently.

​

I pre-ordered one bottle of ADOX 110 Syrup and 1 large bottle of ADOX Rodinal.
I am done for now (I know; dangerous words) - or at least until those are used up.

Chris