Can HC-110 do everything or should I try a new dev?

[markbau]

I'd say, if you like what you get from HC110 and your favourite films stick with it but if you like to experiment for a wider tonal range, try one of your favourite films in ID11 or D76, realising that you will lose some graininess.

I'd like to know what you mean by a "wider tonal range" that D76 would achieve compared to HC-110.

 

[Saganich]

I found HC110 contrast a little too much and I did experiment with dilutions and agitation. I liked the convenience of the concentrate (like Rodinal). I never tried TriX at 800 with Hc110 I can see how that would be OK.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Thanks for the advice all. I've decided to take it, and double down on what I know and try to master it before anything else. Tri-x and HC-110. I bought 15 rolls of 120 (thanks ebay guy selling his film freezer!) and a new jug of the yellow stuff. Any advice for efficiently (i.e. one roll of film) determining what speed I should shoot at and development time? I tend to flail around a bit and get something I like more often than not, but have never done it scientifically.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I recommend using Kodak XTOL and replenished. One $10 makes 5 liters. I recommend storing in 1 liter bottles.

 

[markbau]

Thanks for the advice all. I've decided to take it, and double down on what I know and try to master it before anything else. Tri-x and HC-110. I bought 15 rolls of 120 (thanks ebay guy selling his film freezer!) and a new jug of the yellow stuff. Any advice for efficiently (i.e. one roll of film) determining what speed I should shoot at and development time? I tend to flail around a bit and get something I like more often than not, but have never done it scientifically.

You are a wise man, getting to know one film/developer combo really well is the way to go!
Regarding film testing, for some people film testing is a hobby in and of itself. I've found that most people that do all of the tests usually end up with results that equate to rating the film at about 2/3 stops less than box speed (TriX at 250) and develop for about 20% less than the manufacturer says. David Vestal has a great explanation of why this is so in one of his books. Personal preference is important here too. I've had people say that film X can be rated at box speed and when I've tried it the shadows were awful. I've been using some ACROS recently and there is no way its a ISO 100 film for me but other people might love the results rating it at 100.

 

[StepheKoontz]

You are a wise man, getting to know one film/developer combo really well is the way to go!
Regarding film testing, for some people film testing is a hobby in and of itself. I've found that most people that do all of the tests usually end up with results that equate to rating the film at about 2/3 stops less than box speed (TriX at 250) and develop for about 20% less than the manufacturer says.

I general shoot most B&W films 1 stop over and agitate 3-4 rotating inversions every minute instead of 30 seconds and develop the full time. It seems to work well for me using D-76.

 

[David Allen]

Thanks for the advice all. I've decided to take it, and double down on what I know and try to master it before anything else. Tri-x and HC-110. I bought 15 rolls of 120 (thanks ebay guy selling his film freezer!) and a new jug of the yellow stuff. Any advice for efficiently (i.e. one roll of film) determining what speed I should shoot at and development time? I tend to flail around a bit and get something I like more often than not, but have never done it scientifically.

I firmly believe in doing what I term 'real world' tests. By this I mean using your equipment, your way of metering, your way of developing and your enlarger.

Here is the testing system that I have taught for many years that fixes both the Exposure Index that suits your equipment and way of working plus it also nails the correct development time once you have established your EI.

Now the key to achieving consistently good negatives is the correct placement of your shadows when exposing the film and ascertaining the correct development time for achieving good separation without losing the highlights. A simple and relatively quick way to way to pin all this down for the future is to do the following (WARNING: reading these instructions is more time consuming and a lot more laborious than actually doing it!!):

1. Find a scene with with a good range of tones
2. Using the box speed, meter the darkest area in which you wish to retain shadow detail
3. Move the camera so that you are only photographing this shadow area
4. From the meter's reading close down the aperture by 2 stops or increase the shutter speed by two stops and then expose 6 frames at: the given exposure then +1 stop, +2 stops, -1 stop, -2 stops and -3 stops less than the meter has indicated

5. Process the film

6. Using the frame that was exposed at -3 stops less than the meter indicated (which should be practically clear but will have received lens flair and fogging - i.e a real world maximum black rather than an exposed piece of film that has processing fog)and do a test strip to find out what is the minimum exposure to achieve maximum black - Print must be fully dry before assessing this
7. Do another test strip with the first exposure being what you have selected for achieving maximum black minus your dry-down compensation then plus 1 second, 2 seconds, etc
8. The time that achieves full black inclusive of compensation for dry-down is you minimum exposure to achieve maximum black for all future printing sessions - print must be fully dry before assessing
9 You now know the minimum time to achieve full black inclusive of exposure reduction to accommodate dry-down
10. Using this minimum exposure to achieve maximum black exposure time, expose all of the other test frames.
11. The test print that has good shadow detail indicates which exposure will render good shadow detail and achieve maximum black and provides you with your personal EI for the tested film/developer combination

12 If the negative exposed at the meter reading gives good shadows, your EI is (when metering shadows where you wish to retain good detail) the box speed (i.e. for 400 film you need to set your meter at 400)
13. If the negative exposed at +1 stop more than the meter reading gives good shadows, your EI is (when metering shadows where you wish to retain good detail) 1/2 the box speed (i.e. for 400 film you need to set your meter at 200)
14. If the negative exposed at +2 stops more than the meter reading gives good shadows, you EI is (when metering shadows where you wish to retain good detail) 1/4 box speed (i.e. for 400 film you need to set your meter at 100)
15. If the negative exposed at -1 stop less than the meter reading gives good shadows, you EI is (when metering shadows where you wish to retain good detail) double the box speed (i.e. for 400 film you need to set your meter at 800)
16. If the negative exposed at -2 stop less than the meter reading gives good shadows, you EI is (when metering shadows where you wish to retain good detail) 4x the box speed (i.e. for 400 film you need to set your meter at 1600)

You have now fixed your personal EI but there is one more testing stage to go.

1. Find a scene with with a good range of tones
2. Using your EI, meter the brightest area in which you wish to retain highlight detail (but not the sky)
3. Move the camera so that you are only photographing this highlight area
4. From the meter's reading open up the aperture by 3 stops or decrease the shutter speed by three stops
5. Expose the whole roll at this setting
6. In the darkroom, process one third of the film for recommended development time

7. When dry put negative in the enlarger and make a three section test strip exposing for half the minimum black time established earlier, for the established minimum black time and for double the minimum black time.
8. Process print and dry it.
9. If the section of the test strip exposed for 1/2 the minimum black time gives bright highlights with a trace of detail then the film requires 20% more development
10. If the section of the test strip exposed for the minimum black time gives bright highlights with a trace of detail then the film is correctly developed
11. If the section of the test strip exposed for double the minimum black time gives bright highlights with a trace of detail then the film requires 20% less development
12. You can use the rest of the exposed highlight test film to fine tune the development time.

YES - it is VERY boring but . . .for the investment of minimal materials and a few of hours you will have pinned down so many variables that it is really worth doing.

Now back in the real world, all you ever need to do in future is meter the shadows that you wish to retain good detail with meter set at your EI and then stop down the aperture 2 stops or increase the shutter speed by 2 stops. In the darkroom start your first test print with the minimum exposure to achieve maximum black (inclusive of dry-down compensation) and go from there.

Best,

David
www.dsallen.de

 

[RalphLambrecht]

I'd like to know what you mean by a "wider tonal range" that D76 would achieve compared to HC-110.

I should have said 'smoother tones' instead.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

You are a wise man, getting to know one film/developer combo really well is the way to go!
Regarding film testing, for some people film testing is a hobby in and of itself. I've found that most people that do all of the tests usually end up with results that equate to rating the film at about 2/3 stops less than box speed (TriX at 250) and develop for about 20% less than the manufacturer says. David Vestal has a great explanation of why this is so in one of his books. Personal preference is important here too. I've had people say that film X can be rated at box speed and when I've tried it the shadows were awful. I've been using some ACROS recently and there is no way its a ISO 100 film for me but other people might love the results rating it at 100.

Indeed; every time I tested a film, it benefitted from using it at 2/3 stop less than box speed and 10-20% less dev time than recommended; final contrast adjustment done with MG papers!

 

[bernard_L]

@ David Allen
Kudos to you for providing here (and on previous similar occasions) detailed and informed advice.
Let me, however, submit some remarks intended for clarification (sometimes the writer misses what is self-obvious to him/her)

Step 2. "meter the darkest area in which you wish to retain shadow detail" maybe a cautionary note lest the reader is over-enthusiastic about the "darkest area". I once (1982) took a photography class, and the instructor explained that, lacking a spotmeter, one could meter shadows using a hand-held box, with small hole for the meter to peek into the inside, lined with black felt; after hearing that, I quit the course.

Step 4. "From the meter's reading close down the aperture by 2 stops or increase the shutter speed by two stops and then expose 6 frames at: the given exposure then +1 stop, +2 stops, -1 stop, -2 stops and -3 stops less than the meter has indicated" It would maybe help to call "shadows metered minus two stops" something like base exposure, or whatever else you fancy. Because further down, at step 12, when you state: "If the negative exposed at the meter reading..." I believe that in your mind, this includes the initial two stop close-down, but this might not be clear for a naive reader.

Step 7. "Do another test strip with the first exposure being what you have selected for achieving maximum black minus your dry-down compensation then plus 1 second, 2 seconds, etc". Maybe the time increase should be stated in percentage, like +10%, +20%, because +1second is not the same if the base exposure is 5s or 30s.

And, below, separate from clarifications, what is more a matter of opinion or personal preference. The stuff of which controversies are made on this forum...

• Step 11 "...which exposure will render good shadow detail and achieve maximum black and provides you with your personal EI". I'm not convinced that the best negative (minimum camera exposure for good shadow details) is to be printed such that base+fog+flare just print at maximum black. Because of the degraded contrast in the film's toe region, good shadow separation may require to "place" film exposure above the toe region, and therefore require more paper exposure than just to reach maximum black for base+fog+flare. So, I would not impose to keep the initial exposure for maximum black, but at each tentative film speed, make the best print with whatever paper exposure that requires. User speed is when shadow separation does not improve any more.
  
• Second series (dev time). Step 5. No need to waste an entire roll. Might shoot 9 frames, open camera back in dark, cut and retrieve already shot film, and cut (starting from last shot frame) three pieces each 3 frames approx 110mm, ensuring at least one full frame. But your procedure has the advantage of being simple.
  
• You say nothing about paper grade. Looks like a strict discipline to print on fixed-grade (#2??) paper. Just what I may need to use my old Galerie!
  
• In the same spirit that you use natural scenes, and not Stouffer step tablets, why not recognize that what you have in mind in your whole procedure is the typical sunny-outdoors-with-some-open-shadows scene? Using such a scene, you could shoot a whole roll rotating through base, base+1 and base+2 exposure (meaning rating a box, 1/2, and 1/4 box speed) and snip 160mm lengths (ensuring 3 full frames) for all tests (dev time, enlarger exposure, etc). It seems to me a safe bet that the user speed will be no faster than box and no slower than 1/4 box.
  
• Going back to my first point concerning which shadow: In a mixed sun-and-shadows scene, I do an incident light measurement from the point of view of the open shadows, and close one stop; no head-scratching about which dark tone to meter.

 

[David Allen]

Firstly, yes it can be difficult to get everything down in a text - especially when it is so much easier just to show someone.

Step 2. "meter the darkest area in which you wish to retain shadow detail" by this I mean where does the photographer wish to retain detail? - when you are reasonably close to, say, a tree it would generally be the shade side of the trunk but if you were photographing a broader scene then this area may not be very important to the overall image.

You say nothing about paper grade. Looks like a strict discipline to print on fixed-grade (#2??) paper. Just what I may need to use my old Galerie!

Here I am working on #2 for condenser enlargers and #3 for diffuser enlargers irrespective of whether they are fixed grade or multigrade.

Step 7. "Do another test strip with the first exposure being what you have selected for achieving maximum black minus your dry-down compensation then plus 1 second, 2 seconds, etc". Maybe the time increase should be stated in percentage, like +10%, +20%, because +1second is not the same if the base exposure is 5s or 30s.

Yes percentages here would be more appropriate - this reflects the influence of the very bright light in my Ilford Multigrade 500 head.

It seems to me a safe bet that the user speed will be no faster than box and no slower than 1/4 box.

Though this is often the case, it has not been my experience in all cases. For a simple example, when I used to teach at my Dad's Zone VIII workshops, it was not uncommon to find that one student with an Olympus OM1 with a ZUIKO prime lens got an EI of 80 for FP4 and another, also with an Olympus OM1 with a ZUIKO prime lens, got an EI of 160 for FP4. The answer maybe a combination of each persons's equipment's variables (manufacturing tolerances?) and, to some extent, even their variable ways of ascertaining exposure with a hand-held meter.

As a second example, one of my students worked with me to test his Rolleiflex and we determined an effective EI of 400 for Tri-X 400. He later started also using his (untested) Nikon and got seriously underexposed negatives and could not understand why. When we tested the Nikon we determined (using the method I have previously outlined) that, for the Nikon, he required an EI of 160 for Tri-X 400. Why?? - well first of all the Rolleiflex had a lens with much less lens coating (meaning more flare) as the Nikon. Secondly, we will never know, but perhaps the Rolleiflex's speeds were, despite having been overhauled by a respected camera technician, not that accurate and the Nikon's were more correct.

The fact is, 'real world', testing reveals this straight away in a manner that laboratory ISO testing or densitometer testing will never do.

Bests,

David.
www.dsallen.de

 

[bernard_L]

@ David Allen
Your examples of equipment variables are (to me) disconcerting, but they are the facts. I shoot more than one camera... So even if I'm disciplined and stick to one developer and one (two?) films, I'd have to re-test with each camera!? Maybe I'll start by checking the shutter speeds.

 

[silveror0]

...Maybe I'll start by checking the shutter speeds.

Bernard, I only use sheet film, but before I do any zone system tests for film speed, the first thing I do is test for shutter accuracy. AA suggested that most shutters have the best accuracy at 1/25 second, so I test mine to be certain it's correct at that speed. Then I tape a 21-step Stouffer diagonally to the film in-camera and expose it to Zone X with blue floods (representing daylight - my usual shooting conditions outdoors) illuminating a white board. Camera focused on infinity. Then develop it per manufacturer recommendations; densitometer readings of the negative steps gives me a characteristic curve that shows how close Zone I comes to 0.1 density above film base + fog. From that result I can see the EI needed to ensure that happens (usually 2/3-1 stop). I found that in order to be certain of getting the true fb+f density, I had to tape a small piece of aluminum foil to the film beside the Stouffer (as recommended by Howard Bond). I use that EI when testing for N+ and N- development times.

 

[John51]

I shoot more than one camera... So even if I'm disciplined and stick to one developer and one (two?) films, I'd have to re-test with each camera!? Maybe I'll start by checking the shutter speeds.

Same here. I don't currently shoot enough film to remember what settings I used with that camera last time out and taking notes destroys the fun of winging it. If I'm going to take notes, might as well be methodical about it.

I've been thinking of ways to get the info needed from a single test roll. Not sure how yet but I think it's doable with 6x6/645. It's going to be a stretch with my 6x9 cameras.

 

[Paul Howell]

I agree with most, if it not broken don't fix it, but then if you don't experiment you don't know if it's broken or not, meaning there might another developer and film combo you like even better. With HC 110 as a bench mark I would try another developer, as recommended D76 is still around a 100 years later for good reason, great balance of grain, speed and shadow detail. Foma sells a 1 lt of their version of Xtol, then there the more exotic developers. I really like MCM 100, great tones, but somewhat expensive around $20 a quart, then then there compensating developers, and high definition developers or high contrast like Edwal 12. What you dont want to do is get bogged down with testing one film developer combo after another, unless it's what you like to to.

 

[MattKing]

If you use a number of different cameras and shutters, and use them reasonably frequently, you soon realize if any of them are seriously "outliers" when it comes to exposure.
For close technical work and demanding transparency materials, careful shutter testing is in order. For high quality negatives, knowing which of them need to have the exposure bumped either way by 2/3 of a stop is probably enough.