HC110 dilutions NO STOCK, straight...with Tri-X@EI1600

[shawngibson]

I've been shooting roll after roll of 120 Tri-X (TX) at 1600 in a Rollei lately, exposed at EI1600. I am definitely going to use HC110 to develop (no question there), but I am not going to mix a stock solution. I want the sharpest negs possible, so could someone give me a straight '1:x' to work with...Bob A.? I am thinking 1:50 will be a good starting place, for 15 minutes at 75deg.

 

<p>

 

No stock solutions, please. I want fresh, fresh, fresh...thanks everyone. shawn

[james___]

1:31 is dilution B. 1:47 is dilution F. These are at 68*f. Calibrate.

James

[shawngibson]

<i>poifekt</i>, james. thanks. I'll start at 1:50 (sloppy "F", I

guess). I have plenty of rolls to calibrate with :-)

[shawngibson]

...actually, before I go off prematurely, has anyone used HC110 at

1:100? I'm not worried about grain size (6x6 neg), but if things get

wierd there, I'll avoid it...

[shawngibson]

ps as usual, I mean 'acutance', not 'sharpness' (otherwise I wouldn't

be using Tri-X...)

[conrad_hoffman]

There's nothing wrong with directly diluting HC-110 and lots of

people do it. I just want to add that the rational of making the

stock solution first is that it's hard to accurately measure small

volumes of the thick concentrate. Since you're doing lots of film,

making up the stock solution seems a wiser path. If you go direct,

use a very small graduate and rinse it back into the solution you're

making. Try to estimate the potential errors at the quantities you're

dealing with and if it could be 5% or so, maybe reconsider why you're

doing it this way.

[shawngibson]

Thanks Conrad, good advice as usual. I use a syrnge (a needle, since

I can't spell syrnge I think!), and can go down to a 10th of a cc

with it. I have always assumed when using around a litre of solution,

that a small syrnge is getting me pretty close each time. Do you

agree that it should?

[conrad_hoffman]

Yup, good method. I used to use HC-110 most of the time and was quite

happy with it. My current favorite is Ilford FP4+ and XTOL 1:3, but

XTOL isn't reported to be the greatest thing for Tri-X. For that, I'd

still use HC-110.

[bobatkins]

I've been using HC-110 at 1:47 from concentrate for Tri-X, HP5+ and

APX25 with no unusual results. I haven't tried 1:100, mainly because I

use a small tank and you have to be sure to have enough developer in

the solution for the film. I think you need at least 7.5ml of the

concentrate per 36exp 35 or 120 roll (check the data sheet), so you'd

need at least 757.5ml of working solution at 1:100.

 

<p>

 

I think Adams discusses the use of very dilute HC-110 in "The

Negative", using it as a compensating developer to reduce highlight

density.

 

<p>

 

I've never tried pushing Tri-X to 1600 in HC-110. I find my EI is

around 200, so I'd expect to lose a lot of shadow detail at EI 1600.

Your milage may vary of course.

[shawngibson]

Thanks Bob. I use, wierdly, 800mL per roll of 35/120, so the 1:100

shouldn't be a problem. I'm used to it from Rodinal at 1:100, and PMK

at 1:2:100.

 

<p>

 

I expect to see <i>nada</i> in the low zones, but I was more

concerned with getting the atmosphere/emotion with these recent

shots, many of which were done in a poorly lit bathroom in one of the

libraries at my old university.

[shawngibson]

UPDATE: I did just what I said, but at 1:50, for one roll (grabbed

one, any one...). Agitated sparingly (1 quick ag./min) and I am

<i>for the first time ever</i> impressed with my "Tri-X results"!!!

 

<p>

 

I haven't printed anything, but I have plenty of density, normal

contrast (13 minutes of dev't.)and, considering every shot was at

1/15 sec handheld + 2 beer on that roll, I am very impressed with the

Rollei as well.

 

<p>

 

I don't understand how I can see shadow detail (for example, I can

see the strands of my--Asian--model's hair) when I shot at 1600--

normally I shoot this stuff at 250-ish, though I've always had

terrible results. Pushed. Detail. Wierd.

 

<p>

 

Hummm...maybe HC110 is th sh#t...I can't wait to print.

 

<p>

 

Thanks all for the advice.

 

<p>

 

I see a "public restroom' portfolio coming up. Oh, how unfortunate!

[n_dhananjay3]

I've used HC110 at pretty high dilutions. The compensating effects

show up if agitation is reduced. I dilute at about 1:21 or 1:28 from

stock (approx 1:100 or thereabouts). The only changes I saw in the

characteristic curve was when agitation was minimal (1 min initially

and once every 3 mins or so thereafter). Otherwise, it basically seems

to act as a contrated development i.e., lower gamma but no distinct

change in curve shape. Cheers, DJ.

[harleyman7]

Bruce Barnbaum has some interesting HC110 dilutions and agitation

methods including a two bath HC110 in his book, The Art of

Photography. I havn't tried any of his methods as I personally don't

use HC110.