HC-110 (B) times

[bruce_erickson1]

<p>In the Kodak publication for TX 400, one finds the development time 3.75 min for HC-110 (B) @ 20 deg. C. Then in a footnote it is stated that development times shorter than 5 min may produce unsatisfactory restults! So why is HC-110 even indicated as a developer? I suppose the reason for the footnote is that most amateurs, which I am, cannot time development accurately. This is true: I cannot time the development exactly as required, am probably off +/- 10 sec. It's the pouring part that invariably throws me off schedule. Hitherto this did not matter much because I use D-76 1:1 or T-Max 1:4: the times are longer and more tolerant of imprecise timing. Now I would like to try out the HC-110 soln. B. How can I get timings to within 1-sec. by hand, no machine? Or, how tolerant is TX400 + HC-110 (B) of +/- 10 sec. timing errors? Ditto: Plus X 125 + HC-110 (B)?</p>

[btmuir]

<p>Most use the "unofficial" dilution "H" which is dilution "B" diluted with one part water.</p>

<p>Go here<br>

http://www.covingtoninnovations.com/hc110/index.html</p>

<p>and read the entire page.</p>

[bruce_erickson1]

<p>Well, according to the unofficial discussion, one should then develop the new TX 400 (shot at iso 400) using solution H for 7.5 min? This is double the published time for solution B. However there seems to be some confusion about the published time for solution B. Is there any consensus out there about the development time for the new TX 400 using solution H ? I would rather not have to experiment if there is already plenty of experience.</p>

[btmuir]

<p>As always take published times as a starting point only and test to determine what is good for your metering style and personal ISO.</p>

<p>I'll let others give you their experiences with the newer Tri X and HC 110 as I've been experimenting with staining developers lately and it's been awhile for me with this combo.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>With both "new" and old Tri-X, 35mm and 120 at EI 400, I get good results at 9-10 minutes in Dil. H. For typical lighting scenarios and contrast range that's a good starting point. My photos shot on the same rolls have ranged from indoors by window light to sunlight to hazy and overcast and all looked good. Only the usual bit of yellow or magenta filtration in printing was needed. Scans well too.</p>

[bruce_erickson1]

<p>Lex: Is there any discernible difference between your results at 9 min vs. your restults at 10 min? (Your answer seems to imply not.) Anyway, 9-10 min. is a very comfortable time for me with my procedures. </p>

[bruce_erickson1]

<p>Dilution H is 1 part concentrate to 63 parts water. For a 240 ml volume of developer, the vol I normally use for 1 roll of 36 exposure 135 film in the standard small tank, it follows that one would use about 3.8 ml of concentrate. (This is from <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.covingtoninnovations.com/hc110/index.html" target="_blank">http://www.covingtoninnovations.com/hc110/index.html</a> ). But according to this reference, that is not supposed to be enough to completely develop the film! Is this correct? If so then perhaps HC-110 is more trouble than it's worth because one would have to pour out the contents of the tank after about 5 min. then refill with fresh dilution H and go another 5 mins. Is this what you do? Comments?</p>

[bernard_lazareff]

<p>240 ml is the <em>minimum </em> amount of developer required for your tank. In my case (Paterson) that amount is 300ml. The minimum amount of concentrated HC-110 is stated to be 6ml per 135/36 (or 120) film. So I prepare 6x64=384 ml (say 385) of developer. There is still free space to allow for agitation. You may need to check how this works with your tank.</p>

[rick_jones5]

<p>If you invest in a larger tank (mine is 32oz stainless steel) you can use more dilute developers without fear of exhaustion plus have the option to develop multiple rolls with less dilute developers. In an effort to control times more accurately I purchased a second tank for my stop bath. As time expires I pop the top of the dev tank (lights out!) and dump the reel(s) into the stop. This way dev times can be very precise (probably more so than necessary).</p>

[ann_clancy6]

<p>several years ago, in fact on this site there was a huge decision about the "new" times for trix with hc110 solution B.</p>

<p>the long and short was that Kodak had changed some things with t rix when they moved the factor and had made a typo with the times. They, meaning Kodak , would never come right out and say so, but the long time users continued to use their "old" times with great success.</p>

<p>It would appear that information from Kodak hasn't changed.</p>

<p>In our lab with my students we use the following times , 6 to 6.5 minutes, as the orginal time was 7.5 minutes which in our environment was too long. This was based on running test and reading out the densities with a densitometer.<br>

Just my 2 cents</p>

[btmuir]

<p>Bruce,<br>

I think you'll discover that HC 110 will be well worth any <em>trouble </em>encountered while getting to know it.<br>

It is quite versatile, has amazing keeping properties and also gives low base fog in case you have film that in't the freshest.</p>

<p>I still have half a bottle of 4-5 year old goop that has turned a bit brown and it still works fine.</p>

<p>Another thing to consider regarding the times for it.<br>

How will you be printing? Condensor, diffusion or scanning?<br>

Are you shooting 35mm? Alot of people have discovered that the Arista Premium 400 is rebadged Tri X or at least behaves just like it, and at just over 2 dollar usd a roll for 135/36 it seems it wouldn't be too expensive to dial in this film exactly to your processes.</p>

[bruce_erickson1]

<p>I shoot mostly 35mm and have a condensor enlarger. Suppose I use HC-110 dilution D. That has exactly 6 mL of concentrate in 240 mL of solution. I suppose there is now no estimate of times for tri-X and I'll have to experiment. What would be a reasonable starting point for times and how do I know that I have reached the optimal time? I do not want to buy a densitometer or something like that. What would you recommend I should photograph for the tests -- a gray card in daylight or with flash? (Obviously I have never done this before.)</p>

[bruce_erickson1]

<p>Well now I am confused. I just now checked the Kodak chart<br /><a href="http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/j24/j24.pdf">http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/j24/j24.pdf</a><br />On page 4 I find for Tri-X pan (TX) to develop for 7.5 min using dilution B at 20 deg. C. In the Kodak chart for the film Tri-X (TX) I find the development time 3.75 min. The latter table is more recent. I think I will use 6.5 min, to start, solution B, and Tri-X. I guess the longer time is for the old Tri-X as mentioned earlier</p>

[bruce_erickson1]

<p> I just now checked the Kodak chart<br /><a href="http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/j24/j24.pdf">http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/j24/j24.pdf</a><br />On page 4 I find for Tri-X pan (TX) to develop for 7.5 min using dilution B at 20 deg. C. In the Kodak chart for the film Tri-X (TX) I find the development time 3.75 min. The latter table is more recent. I think I will use 7 min, to start, solution B, and Tri-X.</p>

[bruce_erickson1]

<p>The double post -- not my fault. I tried to delete/edit one of them and failed.</p>

[amy_burchenal]

<p>A teacher at ICP had us using HC-110 Dil B for for Trix-400. 70 degrees for 5 minutes... consistently good results. </p>

[thirteenthumbs]

<p>Bruce e,<br>

Referencing the Kodak publication you listed:<br>

Tri X pan, TX, ISO 400, developed in a small tank (1 to 2 reels) 30 second agitation at 20 ⁰ C<br>

<strong>Dilution A</strong> 3 3/4 minutes, <strong>Dilution B</strong> 7 1/2 minutes.<br>

Tri X pan professional, TXP, ISO 320, <strong>Dilution A </strong>not recommended, and <strong>Dilution B</strong> 5 1/2 minutes.<br>

The dilution breaks are easy to miss.<br>

Your starting time of 7 minutes is -6% and should give good results. If you need to adjust your developing times adjust by 10% increments until you achieve the desired results.<em><em><em></em></em></em></p>

[henry_alive]

<p>

<p > </p>

<p >These are the results that I have found for this combo:<br /> Film: TX400, 35 mm.<br /> EI 200<br /> Pre-washed: Water, during 1 minute of constant agitation.<br /> Developer: HC110 (E- 1:47)<br /> Developed two rolls of film, continuous agitation during the first 30 seconds, and then 5 times each 30 seconds. <br /> Time of developing: 6 minutes.<br /> Temperature: 20ªC.<br /> Stop bath: Kodak Max Stop, 1:15, and 1 minute with constant agitation.<br /> Fixer bath: Tetenal, 1:9, 5 minutes. The first minute with continue agitation, and then 5 times each 30 seconds.<br /> Results:<br /> After having taken pictures of a Kodak grey card, I have found the following relative densities:</p>

<p >Zone VIII: 1,25<br /> Zone V: 0,68<br /> Zone I: 0,10<br /> These densities have been measured with my RH Designs Analyzer Pro.</p>

<p >Theoretically, if you work with a condenser enlarger, like my case, a good exposed and developed film should has the following relative densities: ZI: 0.08 - 0.11 / ZV: 0.60 - 0.70 / ZVIII: 1.15 - 1.25.<br /> My conclusions:<br /> For my working system I can say that TX400 (EI200) and HC110 (E), 6 minutes developing time, are perfect.</p>

<p >I hope this information could help you.</p>

<p >Henry.</p>

</p>

[dave_wilson1]

<p>I don't have them in front of me but I've been using various dilutions from Ansel Adam's Negative book for a very long time (20 years at least) and I never have any problems. The times I worked out by testing, I think about 7 minutes is my start at about 68 deg F. I'm not really adding anything profound here, just saying that Adam's has this just fine if you have the book.</p>

[ric_johnson1]

<p>"It's the pouring part that invariably throws me off schedule." 1) Pour the developer into a tank as quickly as possible, if it takes you 5 seconds or 15 seconds it really doesn't matter. 2) Start your timer. I don't know anyone that starts their timers before they filled the tanks. 3) The manufacturers directions doesn't include pouring time. 4) "It's the pouring part that invariably throws me off schedule" should not.</p>

 

[bruce_erickson1]

<p>I begin timing at the end of the pour. It takes about 7 to 13 seconds to complete the pour-in. I begin pouring out the solution 10 sec. before the end of the set time on the timer. One would think this would be an accurate method. Wrong. There is still the time between end of pour-out of developer and the pour-in of stop bath during which time the residual devloper clinging to the film continues to work. (Never mind that the developer and later the stop bath begin working first on the lower part of the film. If one were truly consistent one would still have correct time for all parts of the film.) I am only consistent to within about 5 to 10 + secs. (if I don't get distracted). In one book I read that one should begin timing 5 secs. into the pour. I can only suppose the author uses his foot on the timer because I need both hands for the pour (I need to angle the tank) and it would seem to be poor practice to stop pouring, put down the tank, start the timer, then restart the pour. These inconsistencies are why most of us like long development times.</p>

[thirteenthumbs]

<p>The shorter the developing time the more critical the pour in/out times are. Consistency is the most important, make that critical aspect of developing. <br>

I position the timer, developing tank, and developer so that I push the timer start button and pick up the developer and tank and start pouring resulting in a 1 to 1 1/2 second time lapse. (2 reel 35mm stainless steel tank).<br>

When pouring in the film on the bottom gets wet with developer first but when pouring out the developer the film on the bottom will be out of the developer first so it equals out. The residual developer remaining in the film will exhaust in the highlights first and shadows last and won't be of any significance unless you wait several minutes between developer and stop or rinse.<br>

I'm now doing 120 mm and 4x5 sheet film in Jobo 2500 series tanks on a manual roller base with continuous agitation and do not include the pour in-pour out times as I am using the minimum amount of chemicals, not filling the tank completely.<br>

Eliminate the distractions and get the pour in - pour out times consistent then adjust your total developing time according to your results. Pour in time does not have to be the same as pour out time but each pour in and each pour out should be.</p>

 

[dave_wilson1]

<p>Well, for what it's worth, I used to load my rolls and keep them in a light tight giant color print tank, then when I was ready I would transfer the reels in the dark to the dev tanks and put the covers on. Sometimes I would just use a spare tank and hold the two rolls in there until ready. Now I do neither and just pour the juice in. In the end, unless the times are real short like already mentioned, I'm not sure if I can substantiate any difference. I do sometimes pre-wet the film in the first tank and then transfer the reels. Then sometimes I just do a presoak in the actual tank. Does it all matter? Again, I'm not sure, and I've run a lot of film over the years, now only a few rolls. Whatever works is the answer. </p>