HC110 Agitation

[ColColt]

If I'm not mistaken D-76 contains a bit of Kodalk as well...something like a couple of grams. I don't think it's made anymore but is the same thing as Sodium Metaborate.

 

[ColColt]

I use to mix all sorts of chemicals back in the day when I was almost daily in the dark room. I've used Farmer's Reducer to salvage dense negatives, Potassium Dichromate and Sodium Permanganate for tray cleaning. You have to be careful and have knowledge of mixing powders as well as the liquids. Bleaches such as Potassium Ferricyanide to lighten up areas in a print can be hazardous.



"The most common reducer, Farmer's Reducer, contains potassium ferricyanide. Under normal conditions it is only slightly toxic. However, if it comes into contact with heat, acids or ultraviolet radiation, the extremely poisonous hydrogen cyanide gas can be released."

Dead Link Removed

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

Short answer based solely on my experience: all agitation methods work.

Most common being once every minute, once every 30 seconds, then the "agitate the first minute then again half way through/twice during development/x times during, etc" method". Just going to get slightly different results from each as you adjust times for the agitations given. They all work. Try them and decide which gives you the result you like. Too many other variables based on how you like to shoot (exposure, lighting, the meter you use (or not use), subject matter, your taste in contrast and sharpness, etc) to give straight advice on which agitation method works "best".

 

[John Bragg]

Raise or lower the frequency/duration of agitation until your highlights suit. The end.

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

Raise or lower the frequency/duration of agitation until your highlights suit. The end.

Perfect. And keeping as many of all other aspects as consistent as possible (which should be without need to say but....)

 

[bvy]

Raise or lower the frequency/duration of agitation until your highlights suit. The end.

This seems counter to Gerald's explanation earlier that agitation is limited by the rate of diffusion into the emulsion. By his explanation, it sounds like decreasing agitation from that which the manufacturer prescribes will have an effect on contrast and highlights, but increasing from that point will give diminishing returns.

 

[John Bragg]

This seems counter to Gerald's explanation earlier that agitation is limited by the rate of diffusion into the emulsion. By his explanation, it sounds like decreasing agitation from that which the manufacturer prescribes will have an effect on contrast and highlights, but increasing from that point will give diminishing returns.

That all depends on what you consider normal. I find the Kodak pattern of agitation too vigorous and tend to far less. More than my "normal" WOULD produce an increase.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

This seems counter to Gerald's explanation earlier that agitation is limited by the rate of diffusion into the emulsion. By his explanation, it sounds like decreasing agitation from that which the manufacturer prescribes will have an effect on contrast and highlights, but increasing from that point will give diminishing returns.

Not quite what I said. That was that increases in agitation do not increase development as much as people think. This is different from saying that increases in agitation have absolutely no effect. Think of this analogy. To save water you install a flow limiter on the shower head. Now when you turn the valve to increase the flow you no longer get the expected increase but something smaller. Diffusion works as the flow limiter.

The effects of agitation are very complex. Lots of variables to consider. But the main limiter of change is diffusion.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

The accepted way to control negative density and contrast is to vary the development time not by varying agitation. This is a more predictable method.

 

[bvy]

Not quite what I said. That was that increases in agitation do not increase development as much as people think. This is different from saying that increases in agitation have absolutely no effect. Think of this analogy. To save water you install a flow limiter on the shower head. Now when you turn the valve to increase the flow you no longer get the expected increase but something smaller. Diffusion works as the flow limiter.

The effects of agitation are very complex. Lots of variables to consider. But the main limiter of change is diffusion.

Right. That's what I understood to be the "diminishing returns" I mentioned. Thanks for clarifying.

 

[bvy]

I guess I was trying to understand how responsive HC-110 is to increased agitation. I inverted continuously for the first minute -- then for a few seconds at minutes 2, 4 and 6 of the nine minute development time. If I instead agitate every minute (adding four more inversions) will that likely have a considerable effect in bringing up the highlights?

Maybe I'm obsessing over this, but I'd still like to hear some good old fashioned speculation. Will agitating every minute give me noticeably denser highlights (blacker blacks on the negative) versus agitating every other minute and not at all for the last three minutes?

 

[ColColt]

My best advice is to try it and see. I'm into experimentation and can attest that for me at any rate, increased frequency of agitation will increase contrast and more dense highlights but that's primarily a function of exposure as well.

I think John is best suited to answer this, however, as he's worked a good bit with Dilution H.

 

[John Bragg]

Maybe I'm obsessing over this, but I'd still like to hear some good old fashioned speculation. Will agitating every minute give me noticeably denser highlights (blacker blacks on the negative) versus agitating every other minute and not at all for the last three minutes?

It will indeed. HC-110 is a highly active developer at standard dilution and even at Dilution H, it produces hot highlights with continuous or frequent cycles. When used diluted (as was favored by Ansel Adams) for its compensating effect, the shadows continue to develop during standing periods, whilst the highlights develop less as they exhaust the diluted developer in local contact with them quicker. More agitation defeats this effect and brings active developer into contact with those highlight areas and they do indeed continue to increase in density. At the end of the day, it is all about getting the right contrast for you and there is plenty of scope for experimentation here. Everyones taste varies, so I guess you need to try it and see if it works for your ideas of what you personally need.

 

[bvy]

It will indeed. HC-110 is a highly active developer at standard dilution and even at Dilution H, it produces hot highlights with continuous or frequent cycles. When used diluted (as was favored by Ansel Adams) for its compensating effect, the shadows continue to develop during standing periods, whilst the highlights develop less as they exhaust the diluted developer in local contact with them quicker. More agitation defeats this effect and brings active developer into contact with those highlight areas and they do indeed continue to increase in density. At the end of the day, it is all about getting the right contrast for you and there is plenty of scope for experimentation here. Everyones taste varies, so I guess you need to try it and see if it works for your ideas of what you personally need.

That's what I wanted to hear -- or at least what I strongly suspected. As I said, I like the density/contrast I'm getting in the shadows -- and more agitation should only affect the highlights, right?

 

[John Bragg]

That's what I wanted to hear -- or at least what I strongly suspected. As I said, I like the density/contrast I'm getting in the shadows -- and more agitation should only affect the highlights, right?

It will mostly affect the highlights yes. Although there may be an overall increase in density. Try an approach where any change is documented and note the effects. You will very soon get it dialled in to YOUR liking.

 

[ColColt]

There you go bvy. Not much more can be said. Agitation always affects the highlights and exposure the shadows. In the past, I've tried different developers, film, agitation methods and sooner or later I've hit on something that printed well or scanned good. I've only recently heard of Dilution H and still working with that. It's all fun and part of the game.

 

[bvy]

Yes, thank you both. I agree with the strategy of changing one variable at a time, and this line of questioning is about me deciding which variable to change. I have another roll, similarly exposed, that I'll try with dilution H and increased agitation. I'll report back.

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

The difference will be subtle but as you shoot and develop and more and dial in the nuances of your process and what you're after you'll start to get a workflow that most gets what you're after. But expect to see a very little noticeable difference the first time you increase agitation, assuming you stay consistent in most if not all other factors. The difference is really not that big.

 

[bvy]

Thanks. Significant and subtle are now tied.

 

[ColColt]

bvy-My suggestion to you is just do your own experimentation. You've been given enough information to get you well under way. John's water in the UK is NOT going to be the same as your source, I guarantee it. Water has chemicals in it-matters not the source. The chemicals in his water regardless if it's tap or distilled water will come from a different source than yours or mine. Chemicals react with each other and those chemicals in the water will react with the chemistry of a given developer to one degree or the other. That's why results vary from individual to individual.

Agitation done by one person, even though they agitate for the first fifteen seconds won't be the same by everyone. One person does it gently and gets 5 or 6 inversions in those 15 seconds and another gets 15 inversions. Agitation effects contrast. Again I can only say try your own methods with what you've been told and change if necessary accordingly to achieve what you're looking for.

 

[bvy]

Yes, you're right. At this point, I'm probably being pedantic if not tiring. I thought I'd get more of a consensus, but maybe not. I do appreciate everyone's feedback. I'll report back with results.

 

[MattKing]

Increasing agitation will generally have the same effect as increasing the developing time - this is independent of which developer you use.

Part of the confusion arises because some people like using HC-110 in unusually dilute versions.

If you use dilution B (1+31), with the developing times associated with that dilution, you are unlikely to encounter any of the behaviors associated with local exhaustion. So with dilution B, increasing the agitation will likely have exactly the same effect as increasing the development time a small amount.

If you use a more dilute version such as H (1 + 63), varying your agitation may affect whether or not you encounter any local exhaustion effects. Increasing the agitation may result in the same sort of increase in contrast (dense highlights) as increasing the development time, because it replaces the exhausted developer near the highlights before it is very exhausted. Decreasing the agitation allows the developer near the highlights to exhaust, thus reducing the density of the highlights compared to when regular agitation is used.

HC-110 is quite active, but that just means that you can use short developing times. The activity is the same whether or not you are dealing with shadows or highlights.

 

[bvy]

Thanks Matt. That makes sense to me, and might actually get to the heart of the matter. This was my first experience with dilution H; previously I had used dilution B and got very dense highlights with regular agitation.

 

[TareqPhoto]

I started with dilution H, but maybe i will give a try with dilution B, i used Dil H to save the developer, but i still feel confused about what kind of results i should look for, contrasty or flat or what? with all results i feel it is good, and i always happy with whatever results, and i really don't like to say it here but i only scan as i don't have a darkroom so i can't print, and by scan any results i get from film i scan perfectly or i can get good scans with tweaks easily, so should i keep developing whatever?

 

[Gerald C Koch]

I use HC-110 at 1+49 dilution because of the convenience in calculating volumes. My tanks use ~250 ml per roll of 35mmm film. This is very close to dilution E and I use those developing times without any problems.