HC-110 equivalent

[tbrennan13]

I am using up the last of my HC-110, and don't want to buy more. Can anybody advise me on which of the Ilford liquid concentrates most closely resemble HC-110 in its characterestics?

 

[Muihlinn]

Kodak-ILFORD Photo Equivalents charts.

 

[Gerald Koch]

I am using up the last of my HC-110, and don't want to buy more.

Just curious, why don't you want to purchase more?

 

[Keith Tapscott.]

I am using up the last of my HC-110, and don't want to buy more. Can anybody advise me on which of the Ilford liquid concentrates most closely resemble HC-110 in its characterestics?

Ilford Ilfotec HC is the nearest Ilford equivalent, also Tetenal Neopress HC.
These have a fine reputation, although I am curious why someone would wish to discontinue with HC-110 for a similar product.

 

[tbrennan13]

Thanks for the replies.

When Kodak decided to cease production of B&W paper, I decided to cease buying their products, and switch back to Ilford. If Ilford will continue to manufacture the products that photographers want to buy to continue traditional B&W photography, then I will give them all of my business.

Kodak manufactures (for the time being) fine B&W film and chemicals. I suspect that their continued manufacture is linked to other segments of their markets, such as aerial film manufacture, motion picture film manufacture, and, circuit board manufacture. I don't expect that manufacture of Kodak B&W film will continue forever, whereas Ilford has committed themselves to staying in production.

The management of Eastman Kodak made a business decision to discontinue manufacture of B&W paper. It was just that--a business decision. I understand their decision, and I respect it.

I, too, have made a business decision...and they will have to respect my decision. And please, don't anybody give me the, "if nobody buys Kodak's product, then they surely will discontinue manufacture of it" baloney. If they have bailed on B&W film, can the rest of their conventional products be very far behind?

BTW, I also own Kodak stock...which, when I get off my backside, I plan to sell, at market value.

 

[kb244]

Ilfotec may be what is 'equivilent' but I find that in 'usage' ilfosol-S was closest (was able to dilute from concentrate), except I Think you have to use more chemistry on most of ilford stuff than the concentrated HC-110. (1:9 vs 1:31 or even 1:119).

Also if I am not mistaken Kodak doesnt even make their own chemistry anymore, but rather this one specialty chemistry group operating a factory that Kodak once owned and just putting out product with kodak's name on it. So by boycotting you are not hurting kodak at all but rather a chemical company making both their own and some for kodak.

 

[kmack]

I, too, have made a business decision...and they will have to respect my decision. And please, don't anybody give me the, "if nobody buys Kodak's product, then they surely will discontinue manufacture of it" baloney. If they have bailed on B&W film, can the rest of their conventional products be very far behind?

I don't think you will get too many people who disagree with you.

I still have a lot of HC110 on my shelves and since I use it mostly diluted 1:100 it will be a while before I need more. I have been experimenting with Ilford and Clayton chemicals on and off for the last year. You got to keep your options open.

I would be very interested in how the Iford HC compares to the Kodak..

 

[skahde]

Ilfotec may be what is 'equivilent' but I find that in 'usage' ilfosol-S was closest (was able to dilute from concentrate), except I Think you have to use more chemistry on most of ilford stuff than the concentrated HC-110. (1:9 vs 1:31 or even 1:119).

This is only true for LC29 which is prediluted Ilfotec HC. With Ilfotec HC you use the same dilutions as with HC110. I have quite extensive experience with the former as well as the latter and couldn't find a big difference. If looking for a concentrate with lower viscosity than the sirups from Kodak and Ilford try Tetenal Neopress HC.

best

Stefan

 

[Gerald Koch]

When Kodak decided to cease production of B&W paper, I decided to cease buying their products.

Isn't this a classic example of cutting off one's nose to spite one's face.

If everyone stops buying Kodak then this will guarantee that Kodak will stop manufacturing photographic products period.

BTW, you have been partially successful, Kodak has ceased manufacturing their own chemicals and leased the operation to another company.

 

[rtuttle]

A smaller company like Ilford is better suited to keep us in B&W film and chemistry than a company like Kodak. Actually by keeping Ilford more solvent your more or less making sure we have these products longer. That's why Agfa spun Agfa Consumer off. It makes the stocks looks bad. They could have kept that division afloat for years. That's what Kodak will certainly do, if Ilford is given the business now, they will be there in the future. I certainly don't like loosing some of Kodaks products (I certainly didn't like losing Agfa, either) but you have to try and be there for the long haul, and at this point in time it looks like Ilford.

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

Isn't this a classic example of cutting off one's nose to spite one's face.

No. The OP stated that while he respected Kodak's freedom to decide which direction they wanted to take their business, he similarly reserved his right to do the same with his business. Seemed pretty reasonable to me.

If everyone stops buying Kodak then this will guarantee that Kodak will stop manufacturing photographic products period.

This is undoubtedly true, but a little disingenuous. A loyalty decision by me in favor of Kodak will not keep Kodak from continuing to cease the manufacture of products I wish to purchase from them. It will similarly not impact in any way their decision to steer their company away from the business direction that my continued loyalty to them would be based upon.

I have also stopped using Kodak products. Not because I wanted to, but rather because they forced my hand. I had always thought my personal "tipping point" would be the discontinuation of Kodachrome. Instead, like the OP, it also turned out to be the discontinuation of B&W photo paper. Why? In my case, because Kodak had just posted on their website that statement declaring their "ongoing commitment to black-and-white photography," or something to that effect. What happened next? The electrons weren't even dry in the ether before that commitment was broken.

If I catch someone lying to me about something, in the future that person will cease to have any credibility with me. I don't get angry with him. Nor would I go about cutting off my - or anyone else's - noses over it. I simply stop believing what he says and quietly find someone else with whom to converse. Seems pretty reasonable to me.

BTW, you have been partially successful, Kodak has ceased manufacturing their own chemicals and leased the operation to another company.

No. Again in my case, the facts are that despite my continued loyalty in the purchasing of my B&W supplies from Kodak, they chose to ignore that loyalty and discontinue all of their B&W photo papers, followed shortly after by the leasing out of their chemistry operation to another company...

(Do you see the real problem here?)

Ken

 

[david b]

I switched from Kodak products because I got the impression that they could shut down ALL of their b&w product lines at any moment.

OTOH, Ilford has made me feel "secure", in that they have made the commitment to the b&w world and they will be around for a long time.

I read that Kodak will be introducing organic screen flat panel TV's right around christmas time. Yippee!!!

 

[Tom Hoskinson]

With Phenidone/Hydroquinone chemistry (like HC-110 and Ilfotec) it's easy to mix your own. The same is true for Phenidone/Ascorbate chemistry.

 

[raucousimages]

By this line of thinking if Chrysler stops making Jeeps I better stop buying Dodge trucks.

Kodak stoped making B&W paper because no one was buying it. It was bad paper and most of us knew it. So what sense is there in trying to punish them for stoping production of a product that was loosing money by not purchasing their fine line of chemicals?

 

[Zathras]

By this line of thinking if Chrysler stops making Jeeps I better stop buying Dodge trucks.

Real Jeeps were made by Willys between 1940 and 1945

Kodak stoped making B&W paper because no one was buying it. It was bad paper and most of us knew it. So what sense is there in trying to punish them for stoping production of a product that was loosing money by not purchasing their fine line of chemicals?

I generally agree that Kodak didn't have the greatest papers, IMHO, but I think that Polymax Fine Art was a sweet paper, and Polyprint was a decent RC paper that did not have a developer incoporated emulsion. I wish those two papers were still available, but I still have a small stash of Polymax left in 8x10 and 11x14. And I really wish that Brovira was still being made.

As long as Tri-X remains available, I will happily feed it to my cameras, and I will continue to buy those Kodak chemicals that I normally use, including HC-110. Might as well enjoy them while they're still here.

Mike Sullivan

 

[Gerald Koch]

Ilford has made me feel "secure", in that they have made the commitment to the b&w world and they will be around for a long time.

Really, I hate to mention this, but Ilford has already gone out of business once and been revived. So are they really more dependable than Kodak?

 

[david b]

Yes they are more dependable then Kodak.

They've introduced two NEW paper developers. They brought back Perceptol and post card paper.

I am sure I am missing a few other things.

What has Kodak done for this community in the last 5 years?

 

[Gerald Koch]

What has Kodak done for this community in the last 5 years?

They have brought out improved versions of their B&W films manufactured in a new emulsion coating facility.

 

[Simon R Galley]

Dear Gerald,

You are quite correct to mention that we went out of business in August 2004
we went out of business because we too were trying to transition to being a digital business, and one of the key reasons we failed was that we forgot about our true monochrome customer base, and did not listen to our customers and end users.

I am 100% convinced we will not make that mistake again, the new business is a truly new business, HARMAN technology Limited, we are a lot smaller, we have no shareholders except the 6 owners, none of whom were on the board of the old company ( but were senior managers within it ) all of whom work 100% of the time in the new business, yes we have challenges for the future, all photo companies do, but we are profitable and have benefitted from the sad demise of AGFA Photo and KODAK exiting the mono paper business.

But we are committed to monochrome 100% as are our 395 employees, yes we will diversify our business, but monochrome, is, and will remain our first love.

And if I am honest I guess a lot of people feel the same who work for KODAK or KENTMERE or FOMA or FORTE or BERGGER and half a hundred others in companies related to analog monochrome photography.

Simon : ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited

 

[david b]

thank you Simon !

 

[Andy Durazo]

Kodak has discontinued HC-110 replenisher. I need a replacement. Any ideas on how to use regular HC-110 and mix it to replenishment strength? We are using dilution "B".

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

Here's a substitute.
http://www.freestylephoto.biz/10190-LegacyPro-L110-BandW-Liquid-Film-Developer-to-Make-2-Gallons

Substitute for replenisher.

http://www.freestylephoto.biz/10191...W-Liquid-Film-Developer-Replenisher-to-Make-1

I use HC-110 also. It was Ansel's favorite. To tell you the true, I've never tried these products, but I will have to if Kodak discontinues HC-110.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

Kodak has discontinued HC-110 replenisher. I need a replacement. Any ideas on how to use regular HC-110 and mix it to replenishment strength? We are using dilution "B".

I think that Kodak recommended self replenishing when they stopped making the replenisher. You would discard some of the old developer and add enough fresh to restore the volume. Check with Kodak's website for specifics or their customer service.

BTW, they deiscontinued the replenisher because nobody was buying it.

 

[holmburgers]

Wow, I love reading a thread and then getting to the end, only to realize that it began 4 years ago.

Well, I guess HC-110 is still around!

 

[MattKing]

Wow, I love reading a thread and then getting to the end, only to realize that it began 4 years ago.

Well, I guess HC-110 is still around!

HC-110 is still around, but HC-110 replenisher is not!

Although I do have a bottle which I purchased in error (the labelling was very similar to HC-110 itself)