Ilford FP4+ in HC110 tested. From way to contrasty to normal.

[pentaxuser]

In my experience FP4 developing time in Hc110 is: 5 min (1+31). Time reporter by Ilford (9 min) is troppo long and lead to a overdeveloped negative with a bad grain.

Now that the OP has re-tested his first experiment and found that his results were correct, might it be that the Ilford time is too long? It appears that Ilford has admitted that its time for HC110 was not tested so maybe whatever system it used for determining the time was in this case wrong by an appreciable margin?

We have seen the negative produced by the OP at his time and it looks good to me. What I haven't seen is examples of negatives in HC110 at 9 mins

So can anyone show us a negative at 9mins in HC110 and better still a print from that negative so we may try to compare the differences or is this not a good way to progress this thread in order to try and reach a conclusion?

pentaxuser

 

[npl]

I did shoot FP4+ a few week before OP's threads and coincidentally used HC-110 (b) with Ilford time and agitation. To my eyes the negatives were denser than expected, and I also got bigger grain than anticipated, like HP5+ grain. Turned out the added contrast and grain kind of fitted the mood of some shots captured on a misty morning, so I'm not unhappy.

I'll try tonight but posting "realistic" pictures of negatives that are similar to what our eyes see is a tricky thing really, and it can lead to biased impressions and conclusions. I'll see what I can do. No darkroom prints yet.

 

[pentaxuser]

I did shoot FP4+ a few week before OP's threads and coincidentally used HC-110 (b) with Ilford time and agitation. To my eyes the negatives were denser than expected, and I also got bigger grain than anticipated, like HP5+ grain. Turned out the added contrast and grain kind of fitted the mood of some shots captured on a misty morning, so I'm not unhappy.

I'll try tonight but posting "realistic" pictures of negatives that are similar to what our eyes see is a tricky thing really, and it can lead to biased impressions and conclusions. I'll see what I can do. No darkroom prints yet.

Thanks, npl

pentaxuser

 

[npl]

I did shoot FP4+ a few week before OP's threads and coincidentally used HC-110 (b) with Ilford time and agitation. To my eyes the negatives were denser than expected, and I also got bigger grain than anticipated, like HP5+ grain. Turned out the added contrast and grain kind of fitted the mood of some shots captured on a misty morning, so I'm not unhappy.

I'll try tonight but posting "realistic" pictures of negatives that are similar to what our eyes see is a tricky thing really, and it can lead to biased impressions and conclusions. I'll see what I can do. No darkroom prints yet.

Here are the negatives against the white screen of a tablet computer with full brightness. Look good but as expected the phone photos sucks. Anyway, it should give an idea of the density.
The church was shot on a sunny afternoon, the tree on an overcast morning.

9min in HC-110 (b) at 20°c, Ilford agitation as described in the datasheet ("[...] invert the tank four times during the first 10 seconds, then invert the tank four times again during the first 10 seconds of each further minute.")

Scans in small size just to give an idea of what the positives could look like. Mirroless camera with an old Helios lens and an extension tube. Inversion and post-processing in snapseed.

 

[Lachlan Young]

Here's a bit of data from the older FP4+ data sheet (1990s)

Ilfotech HC, 1+31, 20oC

EI 50: 4.5mins

EI 125: 6 mins

EI 200: 8.5mins


Kodak HC-110, 1+31, 20oC

EI 50: 4 mins

EI 125: 5 mins

EI 200: 8 mins




The nature of the 35mm developing tank used and the accuracy of the thermometer (and the temp in/ temp out of the developer) are all areas that need to be checked for sources of error.

 

[pentaxuser]

Here's a bit of data from the older FP4+ data sheet (1990s)

Ilfotech HC, 1+31, 20oC

EI 50: 4.5mins

EI 125: 6 mins

EI 200: 8.5mins


Kodak HC-110, 1+31, 20oC

EI 50: 4 mins

EI 125: 5 mins

EI 200: 8 mins




The nature of the 35mm developing tank used and the accuracy of the thermometer (and the temp in/ temp out of the developer) are all areas that need to be checked for sources of error.

Thanks Lachlan. It looks as if this older date sheet quotes dev times much closer to what our OP found by testing In fact the time for 125 is exactly what our OP gave us

I wonder why Ilford changed the times? Simply a typo?

pentaxuser

 

[reneboehmer]

Well, this is Fp4 in D76 1+1. These results provide good Ci values at the recommended 11-min dev time at 125.

All this leads me to the conclusion that HC110 is just not good for Fp4 and the Ilford datasheet is not good advice. The Fp4 in Hc110 is better with 4x5 but not really usable with 135 film, as the contrast is very hard to control with reasonable dilutions without the expense of mayor testing.

 

[reneboehmer]

Here's a bit of data from the older FP4+ data sheet (1990s)

Ilfotech HC, 1+31, 20oC

EI 50: 4.5mins

EI 125: 6 mins

EI 200: 8.5mins


Kodak HC-110, 1+31, 20oC

EI 50: 4 mins

EI 125: 5 mins

EI 200: 8 mins




The nature of the 35mm developing tank used and the accuracy of the thermometer (and the temp in/ temp out of the developer) are all areas that need to be checked for sources of error.

Thanks,

the temp in and out was documented properly with a calibrated lab grade thermometer. +/- 0.3 C. I even measured fluid density to ensure proper dilution of the developer. I also documented PH.
As mentioned before my Ci or Gamma values are slightly to high (about 0.05) because of me using a green light and the gamma lambda effect coming into effect.

 

[reneboehmer]

Here's a bit of data from the older FP4+ data sheet (1990s)

Ilfotech HC, 1+31, 20oC

EI 50: 4.5mins

EI 125: 6 mins

EI 200: 8.5mins


Kodak HC-110, 1+31, 20oC

EI 50: 4 mins

EI 125: 5 mins

EI 200: 8 mins

Insightful thank for this!

 

[Lachlan Young]

I wonder why Ilford changed the times? Simply a typo?

Transcription error, or everything got shifted over a column at some point.

By the time it happened, things like HC/ HC-110 were falling out of industrial use for various reasons.