Kentmere 100 : which developer

[Jerevan]

If I remember correctly now, I think I compared the K100 negatives with some other film when I wrote there was grain. Surely it prints fine.

 

[marcmarc]

Those are some great examples Jon. What iso did you expose at? I'm also trying to hammer down a developing time dilution H for Kentmere 100 but I'm exposing at iso 50 and my developing times are awfully short; in the 5-6 minute range and even so I'm still getting some pretty dense highlights. I'm also using the same temp as you and I'm agitating for the first 30 seconds but I also agitate a few inversions every 30 seconds. I've gotten so set in my ways that deviating from agitating for the usual 5 seconds every 30 or 10 seconds every minute terrifies me! Maybe it's just me but I find that HC-110 can really build up highlights fast if one is not careful, regardless of the film. I'll try your time with a throw away roll and see if I get any improvement. Thanks.

 

[JW PHOTO]

Those are some great examples Jon. What iso did you expose at? I'm also trying to hammer down a developing time dilution H for Kentmere 100 but I'm exposing at iso 50 and my developing times are awfully short; in the 5-6 minute range and even so I'm still getting some pretty dense highlights. I'm also using the same temp as you and I'm agitating for the first 30 seconds but I also agitate a few inversions every 30 seconds. I've gotten so set in my ways that deviating from agitating for the usual 5 seconds every 30 or 10 seconds every minute terrifies me! Maybe it's just me but I find that HC-110 can really build up highlights fast if one is not careful, regardless of the film. I'll try your time with a throw away roll and see if I get any improvement. Thanks.

Many years ago I took a college photography/Zone System 101 course and were issued HC110, Tri-X and Ilfobrom + Dektol. We were using dilution B and our times were short too, but the instructor said that combo gave us a system that was easily(sometimes to easily) tweaked for the Zone System. It worked, but sure separated the men from the boys as it wasn't very forgiving. We either didn't know about diluting further or were told not to, I can't remember. But when it worked, it worked nice. But when it didn't work..........? I haven't used HC110 since the 1980's, but won't say I won't. I just shot a roll, from bulk, of Ultrafine Xtreme 100 (this is suppose to be the same as Kentmere 100) while testing a Contax G1 I bought sometime back. I thought I'd try a developer I had never tried before as the subject matter shot wasn't important. The developer was 510 pyro semi-stand and I'm very impressed. This is from a person that uses other pyro developers and loves Pyrocat-MC. So simple - so perfect! 32 minutes @ 75F and presto! The negatives are now dry and I'll try and scan later. Is it better than what you'll get with HC110? Don't know, but I do know it is a whole lot easier and these negatives look outstanding. So many boats...............so many ways to float them. Find what floats yours best. Good luck, John W

 

[juan]

FX-2
Juan

 

[marcmarc]

I'm anxious to see your results John W. I've heard many great things about the pyro developers but I'm pressed for time usually (who isn't these days?) so I've been using one shot developers for their ease of use. I used to use Rodinal for most everything but I just can't get good shadow detail even when I down rate my film to half speed. My camera shutters check out OK so I decided to try HC-110. Now I'm getting slightly better shadow detail but my highlights are getting a bit too dense. I'm afraid if I cut back on HC-110 development to keep the highlights in check I might not give enough time for the shadows to fully develop. I did recently try some Rodinal 1+50 rather then my usual 1+100 and that seemed to help the shadows somewhat. So who knows, I may stick with Rodinal or go with HC-110. I use HC-110 for Tri-X anyway so I'll always have it on hand.

 

[JW PHOTO]

I'm anxious to see your results John W. I've heard many great things about the pyro developers but I'm pressed for time usually (who isn't these days?) so I've been using one shot developers for their ease of use. I used to use Rodinal for most everything but I just can't get good shadow detail even when I down rate my film to half speed. My camera shutters check out OK so I decided to try HC-110. Now I'm getting slightly better shadow detail but my highlights are getting a bit too dense. I'm afraid if I cut back on HC-110 development to keep the highlights in check I might not give enough time for the shadows to fully develop. I did recently try some Rodinal 1+50 rather then my usual 1+100 and that seemed to help the shadows somewhat. So who knows, I may stick with Rodinal or go with HC-110. I use HC-110 for Tri-X anyway so I'll always have it on hand.

I'll try to get those up tonight, but like you, I have sixteen irons in the fire at the same time and don't know which one to grab first. The nice thing about 510-P is that it's one single solution like Rodinal and used at usually 1+100 for normal development one-shot or highly diluted up to 1 + 500 for stand and semi-stand at one-shot. Nothing fancy at all. I keep mine in a brown glass eye-dropper bottle with the eyedropper marked at 1ml. A syringe won't work since this stuff is thick like maple syrup. The eyedropper bottle is perfect, fast and easy. Well, back to work..............lator gator.

 

[JW PHOTO]

Well, I tried to scan last night and it seems my old Niko LS8000 wants to act up. I don't know if it's Windows 10, the scanner or driver, but it's giving me fits. I somehow got one straight scan out of it. This is with no tweaking at all in the scanner. The tones seem just fine for adding no curves. I'm going to be using this combo for some more experiments. Ultrafine Xtreme 100(bulk) @ ISO 100 developed in 510 pyro 1+500 @ 75F 32 minutes with 4 minute presoak, 45 sec. agitation then one light one at 15 min. Water stop bath and TF2 fixer.

 

[Jon Buffington]

Those are some great examples Jon. What iso did you expose at? I'm also trying to hammer down a developing time dilution H for Kentmere 100 but I'm exposing at iso 50 and my developing times are awfully short; in the 5-6 minute range and even so I'm still getting some pretty dense highlights. I'm also using the same temp as you and I'm agitating for the first 30 seconds but I also agitate a few inversions every 30 seconds. I've gotten so set in my ways that deviating from agitating for the usual 5 seconds every 30 or 10 seconds every minute terrifies me! Maybe it's just me but I find that HC-110 can really build up highlights fast if one is not careful, regardless of the film. I'll try your time with a throw away roll and see if I get any improvement. Thanks.

I expose at iso 100. I find kentmere 100 to blow highlights a little easier than say fp4+ or plus x. I also use the light agitation every 2 minute method so as to preserve the highlights with hc110. I find when I agitate more, the highlights build quicker in hc110 (to quick for my taste). I have also use the 1:50 dilution for other films but now have settled on this method for dil h.

Recently just developed 2 rolls with Rodinal 1:50 for 15min, light agitation every minute. Here are a few examples. Scanned so take it with a grain of salt.

Tools used, Nikon FM, series e 50 and 28 w/ yellow filter.

And now a recent k100 using a leica m5, canon serenar 50/1.8 w/ light yellow filter. This is hc110 dil h, light agitation first 30 seconds and then light every 2 minutes thereafter.

 

[JW PHOTO]

I expose at iso 100. I find kentmere 100 to blow highlights a little easier than say fp4+ or plus x. I also use the light agitation every 2 minute method so as to preserve the highlights with hc110. I find when I agitate more, the highlights build quicker in hc110 (to quick for my taste). I have also use the 1:50 dilution for other films but now have settled on this method for dil h.

Recently just developed 2 rolls with Rodinal 1:50 for 15min, light agitation every minute. Here are a few examples. Scanned so take it with a grain of salt.

Tools used, Nikon FM, series e 50 and 28 w/ yellow filter.

And now a recent k100 using a leica m5, canon serenar 50/1.8 w/ light yellow filter. This is hc110 dil h, light agitation first 30 seconds and then light every 2 minutes thereafter.

Jon,
Very nice! Those scans are what mine should look like. I'm going to be really upset if my Nikon LS8000 has croaked, but I do mostly wet printing anyway. I think your agitation method seems to work pretty well. Well, back to trying to figure out this scanner problem.

 

[Nodda Duma]

I'm a big fan of HC-110 Dil B, 8:30 dev, 30s agitation with gentle agitation every minute thereafter. The resulting contrast is always very nice, and let's me print usually on grade 2 paper.

Jon's pictures above have me nodding my head going yep, that looks like Kentmere 100 in HC-110. Beautiful pictures!

 

[Ricardo Miranda]

Ultrafine Xtreme 100 (this is suppose to be the same as Kentmere 100)

The Web is full of supposition and rumour.
Did Ultrafine stated they are just repackaging Kentmere?

 

[James in GA]

PF 1027
I think PE help in making it. The FPP are nuts about it.

 

[idamia]

I've applied Adonal 1:100 stand development with Kentmere100.
Here are some results:

 

[marcmarc]

Great examples by everyone; lots to choose from. I generally have to down rate my film a stop due to the contrasty CA light and yes I also find HC-110 really can get carried away with the highlights, more so then with Rodinal. I shot a large quantity of Kentmere 100 recently so I'm using these rolls to try out different dilutions. Yesterday I developed two rolls in a 1000ml tank in HC-110 1+50 for 5 minutes with standard agitation. Highlights looked better, at least by the very scientific method of measuring density by placing the negs on a white page with black type so that I can just see the lettering. By the way, using a 1000ml tank is great if one wants to get twice as much developed in half as much time, but of course this increases the activity of agitation. In a 500ml tank there isn't as much air space so I have a hunch one can get better control of the highlights in a smaller tank with one roll.

 

[emjo]

I use HC-110 for all B/W nowadays and have settled for a dilution of 1+60. Kentmere 100 exposed at 50 developed for 7 minutes seems to be all right by me. Here is a scanned print.

There is more on and around https://www.flickr.com/photos/65931037@N03/23957657374/ with Kentmere 100 @ 50 and HC-110.

 

[Dennis S]

To me Kentmere 100 is just what it is. Budget film. No matter how you push/pull it develop it in exotic developers it still ends up the same. Printing it for me does not result in the high end prints I am hoping for. Scanning is so/so. I use the film quite a bit but have never found I use the film for my paying customers who expect "magic". Ilford film is one of the best I have ever used (except for FP 4) so I am confident when I use their products but I do not expect to find a queen when I am looking @ budget girls.

 

[JW PHOTO]

To me Kentmere 100 is just what it is. Budget film. No matter how you push/pull it develop it in exotic developers it still ends up the same. Printing it for me does not result in the high end prints I am hoping for. Scanning is so/so. I use the film quite a bit but have never found I use the film for my paying customers who expect "magic". Ilford film is one of the best I have ever used (except for FP 4) so I am confident when I use their products but I do not expect to find a queen when I am looking @ budget girls.

What "don't" you like about FP4+????