D-76 to HC-100 - Anyone regret making the change?

[Autonerd]

Thinking of going from D-76 to HC-110 purely for convenience and reduced storage space (mixing up batch-by-batch vs. preparing a gallon at a time). I shoot primarily HP5 and am looking for a lower-speed film to fall in love with.

Everything I've read is that the differences between the two developers are pretty slight. I'm wondering if anyone has made the change and regretted it.

Thanks!
Aaron

 

[Tom Kershaw]

I've used the ILFORD version of HC-110 in the past. It works well with HP5+ but not sure of any real advantage beyond convenience.

 

[Cholentpot]

Thinking of going from D-76 to HC-110 purely for convenience and reduced storage space (mixing up batch-by-batch vs. preparing a gallon at a time). I shoot primarily HP5 and am looking for a lower-speed film to fall in love with.

Everything I've read is that the differences between the two developers are pretty slight. I'm wondering if anyone has made the change and regretted it.

Thanks!
Aaron

I never made the change, I just use both.

HC-110 is great for some things, and not for others. Same goes for D-76.

I use HC-110 for testing, expired film and when I need a push. It's also is stable so I always have some on hand. I use D-76 for my nicer rolls of film, slower films and when I'm going for a smoother look. D-76 in my opinion and for my vision is a better developer. If I had my way that would be all I use. However, some situations call for different things. It's always nice to have options.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

I know I'm being boring but XTOL is also a great general purpose developer, assuming one doesn't mind mixing up 5 litres at a time.

 

[NB23]

Yes. HC110 is a match made in heaven for hp5.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

What is to regret about developer choices? If the new one doesn’t work, you learn something and go back to the old one. Most chemistry, except for gold toner, isn’t too expensive, so there’s no great risk in trying new things.

 

[Cholentpot]

I know I'm being boring but XTOL is also a great general purpose developer, assuming one doesn't mind mixing up 5 litres at a time.

Not available locally for me. Don't feel like buying it online...

 

[koraks]

Not available locally for me. Don't feel like buying it online...

An xtol clone can be quite easily made; Google for instant mytol. I use it all the time and generally make only what I need and use one shot. A very dependable developer and it has become my favorite over the past few months due to the magnificent tonality and very fine grain without speed loss. It's as close to the silver bullet as I've come so far.

 

[BradS]

I switched to HC-110 years ago and love it for roll films. It can give results very similar to D76 (I think this was one of the design objectives). The only place I do not like HC-110 is with continuous rotary agitation. For that, I use D76 or D23.

 

[Cholentpot]

An xtol clone can be quite easily made; Google for instant mytol. I use it all the time and generally make only what I need and use one shot. A very dependable developer and it has become my favorite over the past few months due to the magnificent tonality and very fine grain without speed loss. It's as close to the silver bullet as I've come so far.

Can you give me the recipe you use? Google brings up lots of arguing about everything under the sun.

 

[Tony-S]

Can you give me the recipe you use? Google brings up lots of arguing about everything under the sun.

Have a look here: http://www.photosensitive.ca/wp/easy-film-developers

 

[DREW WILEY]

HC-110 is more versatile in terms of dilution, gamma options, and long-term storage in concentrate. You can get a better straight line at times, depending on the dilution, degree of development, and specific film. Or you can make it behave a lot like 76 if you wish. The syrup is harder to mix than powder until you're used to it. I'm more of a long-term pyro guy, but not exclusively. The biggest flaw with D76 is that you either have to standardize on it just mixed, or wait about a week until the pH balances out and plateaus for awhile, or you'll get inconsistent results. Formulary sells a buffered version of it that doesn't have that issue.

 

[Wallendo]

I switched from D76 1+1 to HC-110 dilution B for convenience and haven't looked back. The only real issue I have is that Foma lists HC-110 1+31 as a not recommended developer for Fomapan 100. I'm sure there are weaker dilutions that could be used. I keep a bottle of Rodinal on hand when I shoot Foma 100 in 120 format.

 

[Cholentpot]

Have a look here: http://www.photosensitive.ca/wp/easy-film-developers

Great, thanks. Now to find some of this stuff...

 

[eli griggs]

D76 is surprisingly easy to compound yourself, and it does no contain any preservative for long life on store shelves/warehouses.

The Chemistry is inexpensive, a gunpowder scale, mixing jug, stir and hot water pot is all you need kit-wise,
though a homemade beer makers magnetic stir, and plastic encased magnate or iron stir means you can keep your arm, really helps.

Worried about kids or pets in the house, mix it outside or in the shed or garage, just make sure the scale is no subjected to winds and is leveled square.

I use a RCBS scale, but even a cheap Lee powder scale will do.

IMO.

Either way, you will have to make repeated measures, of one chemical to get the correct weight.

With the option of fresh, original D76, you can keep both, in your bag o'tricks, because no developer gives great results across the entire world of photographic films, if one did, there would be little profit in many companies making what they believe is a better solution (pun here) for developers they manufacture.

IMO

 

[bernard_L]

or wait about a week until the pH balances out and plateaus for awhile

What is your statement based upon? Alerted by mentions of this on the interweb (the most widespread version mentions a 24-hr stabilization period, e.g. https://www.photrio.com/forum/threa...closest-to-packaged-d-76.140348/#post-1834217) I measured the pH of a new batch of D-76 over several days with any changes within what I think is the error margin of my cheap pH meter (say, 0.05 relative, not absolute). Unless my cheapo pH meter conspired with the D-76 to display a null result. I did note that on the long term (months) the pH rises to 9 and more, but then the stock solution is kaput.

Formulary sells a buffered version

I read in a few places that the D-76 sold under the Kodak brand in a yellow pouch is not the original formula given as D-76, but a buffered version "similar" to D-76d (8g borax + 8g boric acid). E.g.: http://jeffreysoper.com/node/110 "D-76d is a buffered version(...) Packaged D-76 products are considered to be much closer to this composition than original D-76 of 1927"
or: https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/classic-d-76-vs-d-76d-results-closest-to-packaged-d-76.140348/
Of course, the various "sources" are possibly not independent and cannot be said to confirm each other.

On the other hand, the net weight of the Kodak powder is shown as 109g, just the sum of ingredient weights of the "plain" D-76, while the ingredients of D-76d total 123g. What are we to believe?

 

[Arvee]

Ten years ago I preferred HC110 over D76 but when I ran out of the several bottles I bought, I went back to D76. Two years ago I picked up a bottle from Freestyle and found it wasn't the same soup that Kodak produced (this version was brewed by Tetenal in Germany). It was much paler in color and thinner in consistency than the orange syrup that Kodak made and I immediately had to add 25% to my previous developing time to get the densities close to what I had with the original. Even then, I still didn't get the 'snap' I was so used to with the original. Also, the 'keeping' qualities were much shorter than the original. I'm sure they changed the formula (economics, probably); Google and I'm sure you will find lots of threads citing disappointment (if you were a user of the original Kodak product). In the end, returned to D76 - old dependable!

 

[eli griggs]

Arvee, that is interesting to know. I have no bought a new bottle in some time, but the original hc-110 was my go to developer (H dilution) for Tri-X at 200 iso, and I am disappointing to hear it has been changed this much.

D76 gives very good results, but I always like options based on my own experiences, so I guess I'll have to relearn this 'New' version all over again.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Hi Bernard - my opinion about D76 shift is based upon precise personal densitometer testing, as well as confirmation by numerous other careful workers. My own pH meter is a high-quality one; but it's really the densitometer plotting that counts. But I'm not qualified to speak about any relatively recent changes in Kodak branded developers, including the very latest HC-110 redo. I'm still working with older HC-110; but I suspect the problem that Arvee complains about is due to a mere packaging volume change in relation to improper dilution. The new HC-110 tweak reached store shelves just last year and is openly labeled as an actual reformulation. I'll get around to testing it; but from what I've heard so far, it won't be a lot different functionally. Storage properties is what I worry about, since I only use HC-110 intermittently.

 

[Arvee]

Eli, I have to do the research but I think HC110 may be going through further changes as I have been hearing that Kodak developers are currently being revised/updated. Perhaps someone reading this thread can save me the trouble and update the current status of Kodak developing materials and what's being planned.

Drew, I recall that the change, in 2015 I believe, was advertised as simply a repackaging to a 1L container with assurances that it was the same product that should be used at Kodak's previous product's dilutions. From physical appearances and performance it clearly was not the same product, as observed by many users familiar with Kodak's origiinal product.

 

[BradS]

Fresh mixed D-76 needs time to "settle down". I've most often seen one day specified. I'm not sure that the pH changes so much during this time of rest. As I recall, that the time has to do with the chemical reactions approaching an equilibrium state. As Drew has already mentioned, the difference, in density of finished negatives, between fresh mixed and a day or two later is fairly dramatic.

 

[Prest_400]

Only done HC110 myself, aside of a roll or two developed in XTOL that we've shared amongst camera club members. Very convenient and a liter lasts for long, I tend to use Dil E and H for reasons of economy and perhaps get a very slight higher acutance and compensation (I have to deepen reading about dilutions). I am mainly shooting 120 and HP5 and the combination is well working for 120 shot at EI 320.
As you mentioned slower film, I have just shot a bit of Delta 100. Curiously shares the same 7:30 dev time for HC110E (1+47) and I did once develop D100 with HP5 in the same tank. All of this with Tetenal's HC110 and some of the experiences described here for the newer HC110 makes me wanna grab more of the syroupy tetenal HC110, even if expired from Macodirect... Word is that it acts similar but longevity is untested.

Haven't tried D76 but HC110 seems to be rather equivalend and XTOL is more enticing as a standard developer. In lieu of XTOL's rather massive 5L mixing requirements, I grabbed some Fomadon Excel which is to mix 1L and touted to be an equivalent of XTOL.

 

[koraks]

Can you give me the recipe you use? Google brings up lots of arguing about everything under the sun.

I'll dig the numbers up for you, but it's a version that consists of sodium sulfite, ascorbic acid, borax, phenidone and sodium carbonate, and I always add a few drops of a 10% NaOH to bring the pH of the stock to 8.20.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Thank you for that clarification about HC-110, Arvee. I'll never know myself because at some point I'll just have to skip from my reserve bottles of old tried and true syrup to the very latest version.

 

[Anon Ymous]

@bernard_L Yes, it is strange that the weight of the D76 packet is as much as the weight of the ingredients of plain D76, especially considering that a chelating agent must also be included in the mix. That said, if you search for D76 MSDS, you'll find some older versions listing the pentahydrate form of borax instead of decahydrate and boric anhydride, not boric acid. This could explain the weight discrepancy, especially considering some tweaking to the D76d formula.

Finally, this pH instability thing is IMHO a bit blown out of proportion. BW work isn't THAT critical and is tolerant of process variations. I was given borax instead of boric acid in the past and mixed D76d with 16g/l borax! The negatives were a bit overdeveloped, slightly coarser grained, but still perfectly usable. Not ideal, but not the end of the world.