HC110, what am i doing wrong

[Cerebum]

I bought euroHC from Bellini as an alternative to ID-11. I love the results of stock id-11 but didn't like how it died. The euroHC was great. When I ran out I bought some of the thick, yellow Kodak HC110. I have never managed to get decent results but persevered because it is so well loved. Today I dropped it in the bin following another disappointing dev. I fished it out again but its on its last chance. I always shake the bottle before use, use the Kodak agitation scheme of three every thirty seconds and have tried adding 10% to dev times, but still the negatives are thin. Is it possible my bottle is bad? Also, has anyone tried the new Adox version? The negatives below were UN54, 1:63 8:15 (which is +10%)

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

Assuming you are getting acceptable negatives with ID-11 - proving the film was exposed correctly - then there should be no reason that negatives would be thin with HC-110. Quite the opposite - it can produce negatives that are as thick as the syrup.

I would leave the HC-110 in the bin. Kodak stopped making the stuff some time ago and it may have failed due to age. My 20+ year old HC-110 works as well as it ever did. I confess it is not my favorite developer and so I have low expectations for it's results; I use it for scrap rolls used to verify I fixed the shutter/aperture/film advance...

 

[Cerebum]

Assuming you are getting acceptable negatives with ID-11 - proving the film was exposed correctly - then there should be no reason that negatives would be thin with HC-110. Quite the opposite - it can produce negatives that are as thick as the syrup.

I would leave the HC-110 in the bin. Kodak stopped making the stuff some time ago and it may have failed due to age. My 20+ year old HC-110 works as well as it ever did. I confess it is not my favorite developer and so I have low expectations for it's results; I use it for scrap rolls used to verify I fixed the shutter/aperture/film advance...

I have FX-39 & 510Pyro, to fill the gap that HC failed to fill, I also have Rodinal and caffenol so I really don't need it. I agree, bin time. I just hate being beaten

 

[Rick A]

Is it possible you under exposed the film? You should be getting decent negatived with dilution H (1+63) even at box speed. One thing I see you mentioned is shaking the bottle before use, this could possibly the issue as it causes the developer to oxidize and weaken it.

Kodak HC-110 Developer - Unofficial Resource Page

 

[Chuck_P]

I bought euroHC from Bellini as an alternative to ID-11. I love the results of stock id-11 but didn't like how it died. The euroHC was great. When I ran out I bought some of the thick, yellow Kodak HC110. I have never managed to get decent results but persevered because it is so well loved. Today I dropped it in the bin following another disappointing dev. I fished it out again but its on its last chance. I always shake the bottle before use, use the Kodak agitation scheme of three every thirty seconds and have tried adding 10% to dev times, but still the negatives are thin. Is it possible my bottle is bad? Also, has anyone tried the new Adox version? The negatives below were UN54, 1:63 8:15 (which is +10%)

It doesn't look like your negatives made it into your post. I used to HC-110 diluted 1:63 from concentrate and it worked just fine with TMX 4x5. You did not mention but I assume you diluted to 1:63 from concentrate, just wondering.

 

[Cerebum]

Is it possible you under exposed the film? You should be getting decent negatived with dilution H (1+63) even at box speed. One thing I see you mentioned is shaking the bottle before use, this could possibly the issue as it causes the developer to oxidize and weaken it.

Kodak HC-110 Developer - Unofficial Resource Page

I don't think I am under exposing. The last roll was shot using a Yashica Electro and that exposes well. The header was thin too, I use that as a guide to dev times. I never knew you could weaken a dev by shaking it. I don't shake per se, I tend to rotate it like I would when developing. Is said oxidisation reversible?

 

[Cerebum]

I forgot to upload an image of the negatives. This is how they came out

 

[Cerebum]

It doesn't look like your negatives made it into your post. I used to HC-110 diluted 1:63 from concentrate and it worked just fine with TMX 4x5. You did not mention but I assume you diluted to 1:63 from concentrate, just wondering.

Yeah. I made 450ml which had 7ml of jollop. I always stick to 6ml min per roll

 

[DWThomas]

Process temperature consistent? Here in my area we've recently had significant indications that summer is over!

I can't add much to the discussion at this point because I'm still working from the remaining 100+ mL of many year old goopy stuff.

 

[Cerebum]

Process temperature consistent? Here in my area we've recently had significant indications that summer is over!

I can't add much to the discussion at this point because I'm still working from the remaining 100+ mL of many year old goopy stuff.

Yep, dev, wash, fix and rinse all at 20° give or take half a degree.

 

[logan2z]

FWIW, I've never had this issue with HC-110 and a 1:63 dilution - either the original yellow syrup or the L110 that I'm currently starting to use as a replacement. I still have a bit of the original formula left that was purchased > 5 years ago and it still seems to be going strong. I also agitate 3 times every 30 seconds after 30 seconds of initial constant agitation.

Are you sure there's no chance you're underexposing? I can't think of any other reason for thin negatives given how you've described using the developer.

Edit: Could it be that your development time is too short? I don't have any experience with the film you're using, but I shoot HP5+ at box speed and develop for 10m 30s, which is quite a bit longer than your time of 8m 15s.

 

[Cerebum]

FWIW, I've never had this issue with HC-110 and a 1:63 dilution - either the original yellow syrup or the L110 that I'm currently starting to use as a replacement. I still have a bit of the original formula left that was purchased > 5 years ago and it still seems to be going strong. I also agitate 3 times every 30 seconds after 30 seconds of initial constant agitation.

Are you sure there's no chance you're underexposing? I can't think of any other reason for thin negatives given how you've described using the developer.

Edit: Could it be that your development time is too short? I don't have any experience with the film you're using, but I shoot HP5+ at box speed and develop for 10m 30s, which is quite a bit longer than your time of 8m 15s.

Under development is a possibility I guess. The time on MDC for this film and dilution is 7:30 to which I added 10% but the figure on MDC could be wrong. Its also always possible that the film doesn't play well with HC. I do suspect though that I may have a duff bottle as the results have never been great

 

[loccdor]

I've used both old thick and new thin Kodak versions of HC-110 as my main developer more than 10 years for black and white. They've given me identical good results as far as I can tell.

Where are you getting your dev times?

For example I need to develop 1+31 at 9 minutes to get 100 speed from Shanghai GP3. It's several minutes longer than the time given on massive dev chart or on the film's box.

 

[Cerebum]

I've used both old thick and new thin Kodak versions of HC-110 as my main developer more than 10 years for black and white. They've given me identical good results as far as I can tell.

Where are you getting your dev times?

For example I need to develop 1+31 at 9 minutes to get 100 speed from Shanghai GP3. It's several minutes longer than the time given on massive dev chart or on the film's box.

That's interesting. I use steel tanks and would use 1:31 or 1:39 but the dev times are often so short! I have some expired plus-x which is nasty enough to use as test film. I think i will shoot a roll and go a bit nuts with the dev time. My former daily driver was foma200 and I was looking at 3:30. I take times off data sheets but generally that is just a starting point. I also get quite a few from MDC
I shot a roll of Shanghai GP3, it is really nice isn't it

 

[loccdor]

That's interesting. I use steel tanks and would use 1:31 or 1:39 but the dev times are often so short! I have some expired plus-x which is nasty enough to use as test film. I think i will shoot a roll and go a bit nuts with the dev time. My former daily driver was foma200 and I was looking at 3:30. I take times off data sheets but generally that is just a starting point. I also get quite a few from MDC
I shot a roll of Shanghai GP3, it is really nice isn't it

Well, using expired film to test development times introduces another variable, the loss of film speed from expiration. Fresh is better for that. GP3 has a nice tonality once you dial it in through testing.

 

[Cerebum]

I've used both old thick and new thin Kodak versions of HC-110 as my main developer more than 10 years for black and white. They've given me identical good results as far as I can tell.

Where are you getting your dev times?

For example I need to develop 1+31 at 9 minutes to get 100 speed from Shanghai GP3. It's several minutes longer than the time given on massive dev chart or on the film's box.

I just checked MDC against the datasheet for Plus-x. MDC 3:30, datasheet 5mins!

 

[Cerebum]

Well, using expired film to test development times introduces another variable, the loss of film speed from expiration. Fresh is better for that. GP3 has a nice tonality once you dial it in through testing.

I tested the film first and get decent results shooting it +1 @64iso. It was 50ft that came with a bulk loader for £20 and I do love a bargain

 

[DeletedAcct1]

I forgot to upload an image of the negatives. This is how they came out

I see underexposure AND developer failure.
Leave Hc-110 in the dustbin, it was never a developer tailored for 35mm anyway. To me there are far better developers for the smaller format, depending of what you want to achieve.
Speaking of mr. Bellini, which I know personally, I can recommend Hydrofen or the new Ornano gradual st-20.
In general Bellini products are all wonderful and I as Italian I consider myself very lucky to have access to their chemistry easily.

 

[Cerebum]

I see underexposure AND developer failure.
Leave Hc-110 in the dustbin, it was never a developer tailored for 35mm anyway. To me there are far better developers for the smaller format, depending of what you want to achieve.
Speaking of mr. Bellini, which I know personally, I can recommend Hydrofen or the new Ornano gradual st-20.
In general Bellini products are all wonderful and I as Italian I consider myself very lucky to have access to their chemistry easily.

I have to agree about Bellini chemicals. I like ones with a long shelf life so I swerved the Hydrophen. The EuroHC and ecofixer are great, and I absolutely LOVE the C41 chemicals

 

[MattKing]

I'd do a development ring-a-round with the HC-110 and some well exposed, current film to get an idea of what development time works best, and then go from there.
But that is me, and I have previous positive experience with lots of HC-110.

 

[DeletedAcct1]

I have to agree about Bellini chemicals. I like ones with a long shelf life so I swerved the Hydrophen. The EuroHC and ecofixer are great, and I absolutely LOVE the C41 chemicals

Wanna know a thing about hydrofen?
I have the 100ml bottle, bought some 3 years ago. I opened it once to develop Fomapan 100 as a negative (I mainly develop fims as a positive). Then I forgot I had the bottle.
Just recently I finished my last Foma reversal kit (bought incidentally in 2019) and didn't know if the first developer was active anymore I did a clip test. It was still active. So I proceed to develop another Fomapan 100 roll (expired in 2016) but this time using the Bellini Hydrofen as a second developer.
Well, I got the best lookng slides I had in a while.
After being "opened" 3 years ago, the Hydrofen was still alive and kicking.

 

[Cerebum]

This

I'd do a development ring-a-round with the HC-110 and some well exposed, current film to get an idea of what development time works best, and then go from there.
But that is me, and I have previous positive experience with lots of HC-110.

That is why I didn't want to give up. My bottle is probably two years old, but I bought it because I believed it to last a long, long time. It is hugely popular so must work, but I don't want to keep wasting good film. My budget is very much a shoestring. Part of me wants to bin it and stick with developers I trust, but another part doesn't want to waste £10 worth of developer. Is my process correct? Should I swirl it before use? Should I agitate every 30secs? Should I approach the MDC with a degree of scepticism? What does ring-a-round mean?

 

[Cerebum]

Wanna know a thing about hydrofen?
I have the 100ml bottle, bought some 3 years ago. I opened it once to develop Fomapan 100 as a negative (I mainly develop fims as a positive). Then I forgot I had the bottle.
Just recently I finished my last Foma reversal kit (bought incidentally in 2019) and didn't know if the first developer was active anymore I did a clip test. It was still active. So I proceed to develop another Fomapan 100 roll (expired in 2016) but this time using the Bellini Hydrofen as a second developer.
Well, I got the best lookng slides I had in a while.
After being "opened" 3 years ago, the Hydrofen was still alive and kicking.

That's interesting I think a lot of times are short to be on the safe side

 

[MattKing]

This

That is why I didn't want to give up. My bottle is probably two years old, but I bought it because I believed it to last a long, long time. It is hugely popular so must work, but I don't want to keep wasting good film. My budget is very much a shoestring. Part of me wants to bin it and stick with developers I trust, but another part doesn't want to waste £10 worth of developer. Is my process correct? Should I swirl it before use? Should I agitate every 30secs? Should I approach the MDC with a degree of scepticism? What does ring-a-round mean?

Ring-a-round refers to developing a bunch of film at different times, and then picking the time that results in negatives that match your needs.
Small tanks, lots of small lengths of film, and lots of patience and time are necessary.
It is a term that makes a bit more sense in the context of printing times, but it still works.
This site dealing with Assessing Negatives shows a very detailed ring-a-round: https://www.ephotozine.com/article/assessing-negatives-4682
From that site:

You just need to attach development data to each box.
Short bulk loads of film - say 6 frames each - or a 135-36 roll cut into 5-6 strips of properly exposed identical frames. To make for good tests the subject should have a wide range of tones and be illuminated by diffused but directional light that results in clear shadows and distinct highlights.

And you should absolutely approach the MDC with skepticism - it is a useful resource, but erratic in reliability.

 

[MattKing]

And with respect to the bottle, where does it say it was made? If in the USA, the HC-110 probably won't exhibit the legendary longevity of the old HC-110. There are other threads though that indicate that they are getting reasonable longevity.
I wouldn't swirl beforehand. But I also wouldn't change your agitation.
By the way, my experience with various dilutions of HC-110, used both one-shot and with the no longer made replenisher, is that it isn't a full speed developer. If you normally expose your film at the ISO speed, give it 1/3 a stop more instead.