Film development times with HC-110? Advice please.

[mikejk]

For the past few years have worked with Kodak's TMAX100 120 roll film ... developing in the manufacturer's TMAX developer. On a recent trip to Laos, have shot my first batch of Tri-X 400 35mm roll film (rated at the box speed of EI400), with a view to developing in Kodak's HC-110 developer.

Kodak's technical information sheet (F-4017) for the film indicates a development time of just 3.43sec @ 20C for Dilution B. This seems extremely short.

In a search on this forum I see some are suggesting a development time of 6.30sec for Dilution B.

I'm confused! I'd be grateful for some pointers on a safe & sensible starting point.

 

[Mats_A]

That is NOT correct. A typo or you misread. Maybe it sayed minutes and you read seconds? 3.4 minutes could be correct with dilution B.
Look at http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.php for your info.

r

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

It depends on how you exposed your film and what you need when you print.

I would go by Kodak's recommendations first. Shoot a test roll or two at EI400. If either of the test rolls came out too thin, or with too much or too little contrast, adjust as needed.

Digital Truth is pretty neat, but those are findings that are not substantiated by method and a controlled environment. It's just one person's opinion of how a particular film should be processed. Kodak provides testing from a highly controlled environment that is much more reliable than any other source, (except your own testing, of course, because that is directed to exactly what you need).

Publication J-24 from www.kodak.com

7 minutes at dilution B, agitation every 30s. That's a good starting point.

- Thomas

 

[zenrhino]

Thomas is right on. I use 7:00 in a Jobo, 7:15 or 7:30 in a small tank with 5 ag to start, 1 ag every :30.

 

[PhotoJim]

Rule 1: Don't use a new film and developer combination for important photos.

Rule 2: If you already broke Rule 1, don't process your film yet. Shoot new film on unimportant subjects and run your tests on those rolls. If and only if the results meet your expectations, develop your important film.

 

[mikejk]

Thanks Thomas ... for what its worth the film exposures were a mix of using the camera's (Leica M6) own metering system for some frames and the use of a Pentax digital spotmeter to establish shadow detail for others. I've about 15 rolls in all to process ... so perhaps would be sensible to take your recommendation as a starting point ... and take it from there.

 

[mikejk]

Rule 1: Don't use a new film and developer combination for important photos.

Rule 2: If you already broke Rule 1, don't process your film yet. Shoot new film on unimportant subjects and run your tests on those rolls. If and only if the results meet your expectations, develop your important film.

Well ... they're important to me ... can't easily go back and re-shoot them!

I have used TX400 a little before but developed them in Kodak's TMAX developer.

 

[hspluta]

If I may suggest, I really like the look of TRI-X in HC110, but the B dilution is too short to be able to be repeatable. I have been using dilution H ( 1/2 the strength dilution B ) and processing as a modified stand method. That is, I give two inversions a minute for the first three minutes, then let it stand for the rest of the time. I am using an out of date batch of film ( very out of date ), and have found 15 minutes to be about right at 400 asa.

I am still fine tuning the process, but so far the negatives are coming out very nice. Stand development allows the HC110 to work as a compensating developer and will tame the highlights while still giving nice shadow detail. Since you are limiting the activity of the developer the acutance, hence the apparent sharpness is highter. In addition the longer development time allows you to be more consistant in reproducing the effect each time.

As others have recommended, try it on a "test" roll first, then go after your good shots. Oh I should mention that I am working in 120, I would think that my times would be good starting place for 35mm.

Best,
Harry

 

[ann]

oh goodness , here we go again, I can't tell you how many times this has come up in the past few months.

several years ago when Kodak moved a plant they had to change some things about trix, at that time, they also released those numbers about the short development times. There was a lot of teeth graining beating of the head against the wall and phone calls to Kodak. The results, people continued to use their previous times as they knew and at times even a tec from kodak would indicate there had been a typo or a mistake with the less than 5 minute development times.

we have tested this several times in our lab and continue to use the previous times of solution b at 68 degrees for 6 to 6.5mintues (depending on the camera) with fine results. I might add that the times for the "old" version with this combination was 7.5 which for our environment and equipment was way too long.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Which is why I recommended to shoot a couple of test rolls and adjust as needed before processing the important film.

Seven minutes isn't out of the ball park of getting a good starting point, which really is all that it is until you find what works for you and your printing process.

Shoot test rolls! Especially if Tri-X is new to you. Don't process the important film yet.

 

[PhotoJim]

Well ... they're important to me ... can't easily go back and re-shoot them!

I have used TX400 a little before but developed them in Kodak's TMAX developer.

See rule 2.

Shoot some more, of something unimportant. Test that film.

 

[2F/2F]

The answer is simple, though unfathomable. Simple to see what happened, and unfathomable to see why it has not been corrected for YEARS, and might never be.

The time you are talking about is 3:45, and it is a significant misprint that, for some INSANE reason, Kodak has never acknowledged or corrected. The 3:45 time is CORRECT FOR DILUTION A. The 3:45 time is DEAD WRONG FOR DILUTION B.

Use common sense: That 3:45 time is crazy. Don't even think about using it with dilution B unless you want to EXTREMELY flatten your negs (and if you do want to do this to such an extreme degree, you will generally need to overexpose your film to make sure there is enough meat in the lower tones, as you also lose quite a bit of speed by doing this).

Try 6 - 7 minutes for when you have normally exposed the film and want to normally process it.

If you don't believe me, look at developing charts for both HC-110 and Ilfotec HC (practically identical developers). Notice how close all the developing times for each film are between the two brands...except Tri-X 400 at dilution B, A.K.A. 1:31. Notice how far apart the times for Tri-X are. A good 40%, while most films are 5 to 10% different. Then, notice Ilford's recommended time for the 1:15 dilution (same dilution as Kodak's dilution A), and compare it to Kodak's 3:45 recommended time for dilution B.

The comparison of the 1:15 (dilution A) Ilfotec HC time to the dilution B (1:31) HC-110 time will be the "AHA! moment." It will be clear as day if you compare the charts from the two companies.

Was there a flaw in testing (wrong temp, wrong dilution, wrong exposure, etc.), or just a simple transposition error? Who knows. We likely never will, given Kodak's actions on the issue so far (i.e. NOTHING). However, practically speaking, we do not need to know how Kodak screwed up. We just need to know that they did, and that via common sense, deduction, and experience, 3:45 is DEAD WRONG for dilution B (and DEAD RIGHT for dilution A), by anybody's methods.

 

[Bijesh]

I use 6 min. 30s agitation initially and 4 inversions every minute. It has given me good negatives that are easy to scan and easy to print.

An example: