The "definitive" HC-110 and Tri-X post

Bobbo

Bobbo

Well-known
Local time
5:42 AM
Joined
Aug 29, 2003
Messages
368
There have been a bunch of questions on Tri-X and HC-110 lately. I have a bunch of Tri-X. I have a bottle of HC-110...I've only used D-76 before.

I'm looking to compile and simplify some of the rather confusing (to me and to others by the sound of it) information on the use of HC-110 with Tri-X film. I really don't understand Kodak's data sheet, especially when they say to develop the film for less than 4 minutes when they say it is bad to develop it for under 5. Is it not possible or something then?

I need to compile data for the film at ISO 200-3200 at whole stop intervals at one or two standardized dilutions. I would like to make two lists: one at 68 degrees F, and one at 75 degrees F or so.

I'm sure I'll think of something else to add, and of course I'm open to suggestions.

Thank you,
Bob Clark
 
Kodak's official recomendation is probably to use a lesser dilution to extend development times over 5 minutes. Many people who use HC-110 use the unofficial dilution "H," which is twice the dilution of B for double the time. (1:32 for 4 minutes -> 1:64 for 8 minutes).

My personal method for 400TX in HC110 is: 5cc's of syrup, 325cc's of water (1:65), 10 minutes at 20 celsius, 30 seconds initial agitation then 5 secs per minute thereafter. The results are pretty versatile, if maybe a little underexposed.
 
Bob: it isn't that you can't develop for fewer than 5 minutes, it's that you risk uneven development if you do. If you are somewhere where the water temp is only 80 degrees F or more, you may have no choice (let's say a tropical island). Usually there is a sweet spot for a given film-developer combination in the 8-14 minute range, depending on dilution, temperature, water hardness, agitation method etc. If you use a rotary processor, the shorter development times are less of an issue, IMHO.
 
I've been using HC-110 quite a bit this past year or so. I've used dil.B, dil.H, and, my current fav, dilution 1:100 (it makes measuring the thick syrup so much easier!) The Covington site is a great source of info.

For 1:100 my normal time is approx 3x dil.B, with 5 gentle inversion each 3 mins. Continuous agitation the first 30 secs. If the scene is contrasty, I make that 3 inversions every 3 mins. I get my dil.B starting times from the Massive Dev Chart.

I've had excellent results with this with Tri-X, HP5 and Neopan 400. Great shelf life, very convenient to use, and very nice negatives, rich in shadow detail and no blown highlights.

Gene
 
HC-110 (along with Diafine, which I've yet to crack open) has been my entree for my return to souping my own film as of last year, although I haven't developed any since moving some months ago - hopefully I'll get things sorted out in a few weeks. I've had good results with both HP5 and Tri-X, though I'm interested in seeing how it works with the likes of Acros 100, and one or two other slower-speed films.


- Barrett
 
GeneW said:
I've been using HC-110 quite a bit this past year or so. I've used dil.B, dil.H, and, my current fav, dilution 1:100 (it makes measuring the thick syrup so much easier!)
Click to expand...
I have always been impressed with the photos in Gene's gallery so I tried his HC110 1:100 recipe last weekend (on some FP4) , and I am very pleased with the results (Thanks Gene). I will be doing the same with some Tri-X I shot this week.

Example 1
Example 2
 
Last edited:
No, 4 minutes is not a typo. It is meant for commercial processing in a machine where consistency can be maintained and speed of processing is the goal. Stay away from shorter times (as Kodak advises) for home processing unless you have a rotary processor and very good temperature control.

I haven't tried Gene's 1:100 dilution/agitation scheme yet, but I trust him by his results and that he's a really great guy. :D

Earl
 
kmack said:
I have always been impressed with the photos in Gene's gallery so I tried his HC110 1:100 recipe last weekend (on some FP4) , and I am very pleased with the results (Thanks Gene). I will be doing the same with some Tri-X I shot this week.
Click to expand...
Thanks kindly, and I'm glad the 1:100 dilution is working for you. But I want to clarify that the person I got this recipe from is a photographer with the handle "imagemaker" on pnet and nelsonphoto. I simply tried it and liked it.

Gene
 
HC-110 was a mainstay of news photography until they switched to color film, then digital. As such, speed was important, and it was a fast developer. I can't recall my old HC-110 development times, but I do recall doing lots of hand-developed rolls at under 5 minutes, possibly with higher temps or something. (It's been a decade or so since I've done this). I think if you've got a good hand agitation system going, that it might be worth trying a few rolls at 4 minutes to see what you're getting. A 2-minute development time is impossible to finely control. But 4 minutes isn't really outlandish. It's only 20 percent shorter than to so-called 5-minute limit. Give it a try at four minutes, and if your negatives are consistent, then you're okay. Or just shoot everything at ISO 500 and push it to 5 minutes.
 
I think I'll probably do some testing with Rodinal. I've got a roll in the Canonet right now that I can use for testing purposes and I'm planning on one more roll through that camera. I'll also be picking up some HC-110 on my trip to the shop this weekend (if I can spend the money)...so let the testing begin!
 
Bobbo said:
so... if the time for Tri-X and "B" is off, what is it really then?
Click to expand...

from Covington (http://www.covingtoninnovations.com/hc110/):

Note about Kodak Tri-X Pan and Plus-X Pan: Kodak's published time for the new 400TX film in dilution B is 3 3/4 minutes at 68 F. That is too short to be practical, and I think they have made a serious mistake; it looks to me like the time for dilution A. I think they used the wrong dilution in their testing for both 400TX and 125PX.
Numerous photographers tell me that the correct time for 400TX is only a few percent shorter than for the old TX. Even Kodak told me the same thing – though they insist that they didn't mix up the dilutions.
However, it's generally agreed that Kodak's published time of 7.5 minutes for TX in dilution B was a bit long. Most photographers recommend about 6 to 7 minutes.
I want to thank Dick Dickerson and Silvia Zawadzki (retired from Kodak, part of the team that invented Xtol) for correspondence about this. They, too, think the wrong dilution was used in Kodak's tests. It will be interesting to see if the published time changes in future Kodak publications.

After further thought, I suspect that there really isn't much difference between 3.5 minutes and 5 minutes. The reason? This is almost entirely within the induction time (the time taken to start development). Results with development times this short are notoriously irreproducible and I recommend higher dilutions.
Click to expand...

While the Massive Dev Chart (http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.html) recommends 4.5-5 minutes @ 20degC.

However, just about all who have an opinion seem to agree that Kodak's time is a mistake.
 
Trius said:
No, 4 minutes is not a typo. It is meant for commercial processing in a machine where consistency can be maintained and speed of processing is the goal. Stay away from shorter times (as Kodak advises) for home processing unless you have a rotary processor and very good temperature control.
Click to expand...

Trius, the alleged typo is not that 4 minutes (actually 3.75 min) is recommended for machine processing, but that 3.75 min is recommended for manual small tank processing. See for yourself: http://www.kodak.com/global/en/prof...f4017/f4017.jhtml?id=0.1.22.14.23.16.14&lc=en

This contradicts not only Kodak's general advice against short processing times for manual development, but the fact that generally automated processors require shorter times than manual tanks, all other factors being equal.
 
I'm curious where This Guy got 9 1/2 minutes in dilution B at 75F while Kodak says 2 1/2 at that temp and dilution. Am I the only person who notices the discrepancy?

This is making my head hurt. I think I'll just try it at Dilution B, 68F, and 5 minutes to start with and if it sucks, I'll try again...

Thank you for all your help...this is confusing to me for some reason.

Have a nice day,
Bob Clark
 
Well, I've been pushing trix to 1600 in dilution B, for 12 minutes,
68F, and my negatives are not too contrasty. This makes me
think that normal developement should be around 6 minutes.
Kodak information is probably wrong.

But now I've made my mind, and I will do some serious test
(see http://www.zone2tone.co.uk/testingm.htm ). It is the
only way to ensure consistency.
 
Bobbo said:
I'm curious where This Guy got 9 1/2 minutes in dilution B at 75F while Kodak says 2 1/2 at that temp and dilution. Am I the only person who notices the discrepancy?
Click to expand...

He says that he uses dilution H (1+63) in his text... Just above the table in which he shows his times he says that he uses twice the dilution B time as a starting point "for use with dilution H" (the text between quotes is how I interpreted this). Of course, I can't speak for him, this is just my interpretation

dirk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom