HC-110 stand development expirement

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Which is one of the main benefits of stand development - extremely compensating. You will run out of developer 'steam' in the highlights quickly, while you keep developing the low values. Even Rodinal seems 'speedy' used in this manner. I'm sure HC-110 works in a similar manner, even though I've never heard of anyone calling it compensating. I have a bottle of HC-110 that I'll try using at dilution 1:100 for stand development. Compensating or not, at some point it will exhaust.

- Thomas

This is the reason I was considering a higher-dilution/longer time combination to get some 'compensating' effect... I should own up that I'm relatively new to all of this, I set up my darkroom only about 2.5 years ago, and I'm still reading, and still learning!

 

[Uhner]

"Although some developers are designed for compensating effect, I have found the use of highly dilute HC-110 quite satisfactory as a compensating formula (Adams, The Negative 2002:226)."

 

[namke]

"Although some developers are designed for compensating effect, I have found the use of highly dilute HC-110 quite satisfactory as a compensating formula (Adams, The Negative 2002:226)."

Thanks for the reference. I'm now home, and have looked at my copy of 'The Negative' (fourth printing, 1983) and Adams refers to Tri-X (professional) developed in HC-110 stock solution diluted 1:30, with development times between 18 to 20 minutes; agitation of 15 seconds every 3 or 4 minutes. He also says that a pre-soak of at least 30 seconds should be used along with constant agitation for the first minute.

My first question is that of equivalence - nearly everything I read about HC110 speaks of a 'US' and a 'European' concentrate - which of these might be equivalent to HC? And also, these HC-110 dilutions (A,B,G,H etc.) are just plain confusing! I know I should just read more, but phew there's a lot of information out there

So, Ansel's 1:30 dilution of stock solution... what proportion of concentrate/syrup is that to water???

Thanks!

 

[Lee L]

My first question is that of equivalence - nearly everything I read about HC110 speaks of a 'US' and a 'European' concentrate - which of these might be equivalent to HC? And also, these HC-110 dilutions (A,B,G,H etc.) are just plain confusing! I know I should just read more, but phew there's a lot of information out there

So, Ansel's 1:30 dilution of stock solution... what proportion of concentrate/syrup is that to water???

Thanks!

http://www.covingtoninnovations.com/hc110/ should answer your questions

Lee

 

[namke]

Hm Ok, so Ansel's 1:30 is probably 1:90 syrup:water (1:3 then 1:30) which is basically 'Dilution B' (1:31 from stock solution). According to the link above 'old TriX Prof' would normally take 5.5 minutes at Dil.B. 5.5 minutes ->18 to 20 minutes ! Quite an increase (approx four times, with approx four times between agitations).

So, it seems like (in this case) the number of agitations remains constant(ish), just the time between agitations. Interesting

 

[ricksplace]

Thanks for the reference. I'm now home, and have looked at my copy of 'The Negative' (fourth printing, 1983) and Adams refers to Tri-X (professional) developed in HC-110 stock solution diluted 1:30, with development times between 18 to 20 minutes; agitation of 15 seconds every 3 or 4 minutes. He also says that a pre-soak of at least 30 seconds should be used along with constant agitation for the first minute.

My first question is that of equivalence - nearly everything I read about HC110 speaks of a 'US' and a 'European' concentrate - which of these might be equivalent to HC? And also, these HC-110 dilutions (A,B,G,H etc.) are just plain confusing! I know I should just read more, but phew there's a lot of information out there

So, Ansel's 1:30 dilution of stock solution... what proportion of concentrate/syrup is that to water???

Thanks!

Fascinating! I have been using HC110 as a semi-stand for a few years now. I use 5ml goo +500ml water. I agitate continuously for the first minute (slow inversions), then one inversion only at 3,6,9,12,15 for a total of 18 minutes. I have been using this with Foma 100 with great results. I haven't done any presoak. I don't get any streaking.

 

[Steve Sherman]

You ran out of activity at such a high dilution. Your highlights quickly developed and sucked up a lot of the developer during your first agitation, and there was little left to develop the shadows and midtones as your film stood. You need at least 3mL of concentrate per roll of 135/120, regardless of dilution. This means 1:79 maximum dilution for a roll of 135 in a Nikkor tank. If you use more solution than is required just to cover the film, you can dilute more.

I would also agitate more initially.

As we have recently discussed here, it is not the dilution that compensates. It is a lower agitation:time ratio that does so. Higher dilutions just give you a longer time so the development is not so sensitive to minor inconsistencies.

Unfortunately there is quite a bit of erroneous information being passed along here.

Reduced Agitation Development, (Semi-Stand and Stand also) are a direct result of dilution and reduced agitation and length of development in concert. While chemistry type does have some impact on the ultimate success of technique the magic bullet is surely the aforementioned technique.

No amount of compensation or increased adjacency effect takes place until the developer has exhausted. Therefore, if one insisted on summing up the process in one phrase it would be “developer exhaustion”

See articles I wrote for View Camera issue March / April 2005 to learn about Semi-Stand development techniques both to increase and decrease negative contrast. A second article came out in July / August 2005 detailing a HC 110 compensating technique I used prior to discovering the Semi-Stand development technique. The HC 110 is an improved version of Ansel Adams technique I learned from Ray McSavany 25 years ago.

Cheers

 

[2F/2F]

Unfortunately there is quite a bit of erroneous information being passed along here.

Reduced Agitation Development, (Semi-Stand and Stand also) are a direct result of dilution and reduced agitation and length of development in concert. While chemistry type does have some impact on the ultimate success of technique the magic bullet is surely the aforementioned technique.

No amount of compensation or increased adjacency effect takes place until the developer has exhausted. Therefore, if one insisted on summing up the process in one phrase it would be “developer exhaustion”

See articles I wrote for View Camera issue March / April 2005 to learn about Semi-Stand development techniques both to increase and decrease negative contrast. A second article came out in July / August 2005 detailing a HC 110 compensating technique I used prior to discovering the Semi-Stand development technique. The HC 110 is an improved version of Ansel Adams technique I learned from Ray McSavany 25 years ago.

Cheers

Hi, Steve.

I agree that I made it sound a bit like dilution is irrelevant when it is not. I was trying to say that the stand is what allows the compensation to occur, not simply diluting the developer. If you were to use double the dilution, but keep the time:agitation ratio the same, the highlights would develop fairly similarly (assuming total exhaustion of the developer does not occur in either case). Therefore, the ratio of agitation to total development time is what you are tweaking by performing stand development. Diluting the developer is what is letting you perform the stand by allowing exhaustion to occur more quickly and lengthening development time, but it is not what is actually causing the compensation. You are, of course, right that dilution is a necessary component in stand development. I was just trying to make the point that it is the ratio of agitation to development that you are really using to make your tweaks to contrast. Basically, that stand development theoretically would have some effect regardless of dilution (there is still localized exhaustion at any dilution), but at lower dilutions, your development times would be so short that you wouldn't really be able to tweak the amount of agitation in relation to total development time.

I made the statement in the first paragraph thinking that the OP had used a 1:125 dilution of HC-110 concentrate to develop one roll of 35mm in a single roll (250mL) tank, which would have been 2mL of concentrate; not enough to "completely" develop a roll, especially one shot in contrasty daylight. I have had similar results as the OP when using old developer on accident. Relatively dense highlights, but no shadows whatsoever. I figure whatever developer was left just got sucked up by the most heavily exposed areas, leaving them developed, and nothing else.

 

[namke]

Hmf. I was all set this evening to do an experiment with minimal agitation and my Ilfotec HC at high dilution, thinking that the Ilfotec HC was an equivalent to HC-110, however I am now in a state of confusion since the dilutions of syrup are completely different for the same films*! So, I'm not sure what constitutes a 1:99 HC-110 dilution...

For my purposes, I'd hate to pull my film out of the dev and find it completely blank... but I fear that's what'll happen if I don't use enough developer - however if I use too much dev and stand the film, I may end up with completely _black_ film instead! (Forgive me - I'm a relative newb to all this, but trying to learn!!).

*(Example: for Tri-X @ 400: dilute HC 1+31 and develop for 6'30", or dilute HC110 1:47 and develop for 6'30")

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Just try it. Once you reach good results with stand development and one film / developer combo, you'll find that it works the same with most films. I started with Plus-X and Rodinal. Then I did Tri-X and Rodinal at the same dilution / time / temp model. Then Fuji Neopan Acros. It all yielded negs of good density and contrast. Dilution 1+200 at 70*F, 1 hour stand. Initial agitation 90 seconds. 500ml solution per roll of 35mm or 120. 200ml solution per 4x5 neg (technically only 125ml should be necessary as it's about 1/4 the surface area of a 120 roll and 500ml / 4 = 125ml, but I couldn't get the whole neg soaked at 125ml).

- Thomas

 

[Andrew Moxom]

I'm watching this thread closely as I am curious about stand development on sheet film (Arista Edu Ultra 100 aka FOMA!) using HC110. I've been using dilution H that is great, but as I do continuous agitation for 7.5 minutes, the negs can come out somewhat dense due mainly to the fact I am using a fixed F2.5 Large format petzval, and a packard shutter on the front and ND filters to lower exposure values. Stand development might be useful in controlling blocking in the highlights. This might be someting for me to try!

 

[namke]

Just try it.

Ok, I will

I have a roll of (135-36) HP5+ exposed at 800 in the fridge at the moment...

I'll start with 5ml Ilfotec HC made up to 500ml (1+99 / 1:100). 1st minute continuous agitation, then stand for an hour. Let's see what happens... I should get something right? :confused:

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

You should get something, for sure.

- Thomas

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Andy,

I have found that the Foma films require shorter development times than most other films out there. Not sure why that is.
If you're looking for a starting point, I'd try sheets at 1+200 for 30 minutes stand development. I use 200ml per sheet, as that is the least amount of chemistry I can use and keep the sheet submerged.

- Thomas

I'm watching this thread closely as I am curious about stand development on sheet film (Arista Edu Ultra 100 aka FOMA!) using HC110. I've been using dilution H that is great, but as I do continuous agitation for 7.5 minutes, the negs can come out somewhat dense due mainly to the fact I am using a fixed F2.5 Large format petzval, and a packard shutter on the front and ND filters to lower exposure values. Stand development might be useful in controlling blocking in the highlights. This might be someting for me to try!

 

[kodachrome64]

Hm Ok, so Ansel's 1:30 is probably 1:90 syrup:water (1:3 then 1:30) which is basically 'Dilution B' (1:31 from stock solution). According to the link above 'old TriX Prof' would normally take 5.5 minutes at Dil.B. 5.5 minutes ->18 to 20 minutes ! Quite an increase (approx four times, with approx four times between agitations).

So, it seems like (in this case) the number of agitations remains constant(ish), just the time between agitations. Interesting

Actually Ansel's solution is quite different from dilution B. As you yourself state, he diluted 1:30 from the stock solution (1:3) so we do end up at 1:90 (I think, although I'm not too good at dilution math!). Dilution B is 1:31 from concentrate, not stock solution. It is 1:7 dilution from stock solution. So that's why we are looking at the different times: in Ansel's terms (dilution from stock), he used 1:30 for compensating development versus the standard 1:7 dilution B. I don't have my copy of The Negative in front of me but I remember he referred to his dilutions from the stock solution and not from concentrate. Fortunately Kodak gives us data for both methods of dilution in Tech Pub J-24 (http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/j24/j24.pdf).

I intend to experiment with this because HC-110 should be able to do this just as Rodinal does, but perhaps with finer grain...IDK. I love HC-110 and Rodinal and tend to favor them much more than D-76 and XTOL because of the ease of use and keeping properties.

 

[namke]

Actually Ansel's solution is quite different from dilution B. As you yourself state, he diluted 1:30 from the stock solution (1:3) so we do end up at 1:90 (I think, although I'm not too good at dilution math!). Dilution B is 1:31 from concentrate, not stock solution.

You're right It's just that with all of these HC-110 dilutions, I'm getting confused...!

Anyway, film is now in the developer - blimey, 5ml is a very small amount isn't it?!

 

[kodachrome64]

All that being said about the dilutions, I highly recommend as previously mentioned to come up with times for whatever dilution is easiest for you. There is no need to use those wacky Kodak dilutions of A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J and K. No one is confused about how to mix Rodinal. So, as suggested by JBrunner in his article "HC-110 Made Simple" here, my standard dilution for HC-110 is 1+50 (or 1+49...it doesn't really matter at that point). With Tri-X and Plus-X, I get pretty much the same times that I use with Rodinal at 1+50. It makes it much easier to keep everything straight and is more economical than dilution B. This also gets around the problem of the sub-5 minute times sometimes needed with dilution B, without having to use really long times of some of the really dilute mixes. But, hey, if you want to use 1+40, 1+45, 1+60, etc. you can do that! There is no special rhyme or reason to the Kodak dilutions, and they are especially inconvenient for those few people in the world who use metric instead of US units.

 

[kodachrome64]

You're right It's just that with all of these HC-110 dilutions, I'm getting confused...!

Anyway, film is now in the developer - blimey, 5ml is a very small amount isn't it?!

HC-110 dilutions are very confusing; you would do well to use standard 1+50 or 1+100 dilutions as we all do with Rodinal.

It seems to be the general consensus that you need at least 3mL of syrup per 80 sq. in. of film (e.g. one roll of 135-36). Some say 6mL, but many of us use less than that all the time and it works fine. Use a dosing syringe and you will easily be able to be consistent.

 

[namke]

Yep, I used a syringe to measure the 5ml, and then topped it up in a measuring jug to 500ml. That's how I do all my measuring (Rodinal included), except for DD-X or Multigrade developers which are 1+4 or 1+9 - those are simply done straight in the jug

Thanks for the web reference Jason - much appreciated

35 minutes to go...

john..

 

[eddym]

Hmf. I was all set this evening to do an experiment with minimal agitation and my Ilfotec HC at high dilution, thinking that the Ilfotec HC was an equivalent to HC-110, however I am now in a state of confusion since the dilutions of syrup are completely different for the same films*!
*(Example: for Tri-X @ 400: dilute HC 1+31 and develop for 6'30", or dilute HC110 1:47 and develop for 6'30")

Dunno where you're getting that information, but for what it's worth, I develop the same films in HC110 and Ilfotec HC for exactly the same times and dilutions and get exactly the same results.

 

[namke]

... and they're done. On first look (at the wet negs hanging up to dry) is that they're all pretty nicely developed - it turns out that this film had all sorts of different shots on it (it was, after all from my carry-around-everywhere XA2), but there appears to be detail throughout the negative which is good of course.

There's not really any way of knowing whether these would have been done 'better' using Ilford standard dilutions, but this way is a damn sight more economical I think...

I'll see how some of them print up later in the week.

 

[eddym]

Geez, I must be a math genius! I've been using HC110 for 30 years now and have never been "confused" about the dilutions. It's just fractions, people. Get over it.

 

[namke]

Dunno where you're getting that information, but for what it's worth, I develop the same films in HC110 and Ilfotec HC for exactly the same times and dilutions and get exactly the same results.

The information was from the 'HC110 resource page' and the Ilford developing times from a bottle of HC

(and no, I've never been confused by ratios either )

 

[MattKing]

Actually Ansel's solution is quite different from dilution B. As you yourself state, he diluted 1:30 from the stock solution (1:3) so we do end up at 1:90 (I think, although I'm not too good at dilution math!).

This is one of those times where how you express the dilutions can lead to confusion.

To make the HC110 stock, you add 3 parts water to one part syrup, resulting in 4 parts stock.

Then, if I understand Ansel's info correctly, you need to dilute the stock so as to end up with 1 part stock added to 29 parts water, resulting in 30 parts Ansel's "brew".

I think that in that case the "1:3" diluted further to "1:30" means that you end up with 1:120 (1 part syrup in 120 parts final solution) rather than 1:90.

As dilution B is in effect 1:32, that means Ansel's solution is about 4 times more dilute.

Matt

 

[Lee L]

HC-110 dilutions from stock are mostly aimed at so called "english" unit quantities. In ounces 1:15 yields 16 oz, or two cups (1/2 quart), 1:31 = 32 oz, or one quart, 1:47 yields 3 quarts, 1:63 yields a 64 oz gallon, etc. So you could use a graduate for oz and top off to standard larger volumes.

The other dilutions lead to total unit volumes of 20, 40, 80, and 120. Not as strange or arbitrary as some might assume.

Lee