Kodak HC-110 vs Ilfotec HC

[Mark_S]

After a (too long) hiatus out of the darkroom, I am finishing construction on my new darkroom and will be back in the dark just in time for summer. I work mostly in 4x5, black and white. I used to use Plus-X and Tri-X, but when Plus-X was discontinued I shifted so that I now shoot all Ilford HP5 +, which I developed in HC-110. As I set up the darkroom again, I am thinking of changing to Ilfotec HC, and would be interested to know of any experiences of others who have switched from HC-110 to Ilfotec HC.

 

[NB23]

I'm curious as to why you are thinking to change to Ilfotec HC just for the sake of it.

To me, they are exactly the same thing even down to the very smell. But still, Ilford recommends different development times for some films in HC110 and Ilfotec HC, which is absurd. I believe it's more a thing of in-house testing their own products and sticking to Kodak times when it comes to HC110 so that explains the difference.

I treat both these developers as one with exact same results.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

While the two developers are similar they are not the same. A brief look at the two MSDS's shows this. Another give away is the different developing times for the same films.

 

[pstake]

After a (too long) hiatus out of the darkroom, I am finishing construction on my new darkroom and will be back in the dark just in time for summer. I work mostly in 4x5, black and white. I used to use Plus-X and Tri-X, but when Plus-X was discontinued I shifted so that I now shoot all Ilford HP5 +, which I developed in HC-110. As I set up the darkroom again, I am thinking of changing to Ilfotec HC, and would be interested to know of any experiences of others who have switched from HC-110 to Ilfotec HC.

I use Ilfotec-HC ... but am one of few B&W photogs who has never used HC-110. From what I've read, the two are similar but not exactly the same. I may well be wrong on that and NB23 probably has a better handle on it. I think that dilutions are a tad different but that may have something to do with the way you mix "stock." Ilfotec comes as thick goop. You have to mix it 1:3 with water to get stock. Then you dilute the stock to 1+31, 1+47 etc.

For what it's worth, the data sheet for Delta 100 film lists Ilfotec HC as producing the sharpest results with that film. Delta 100 is already a well-toned, hi-res film, and souped in Ilfotec-HC I can affirm that it produces very sharp, fine-grain results, especially if shot at ASA 50. I don't know about HP5.

 

[NB23]

I'm no chemist and All that, but the times are the same for many films except the ones on which kodak really messed up (tri-x and plus-x). Analyzing all the recommended times reveals some absurdities that leads me to conclude there's an error in te recommendations.
Besides, I've used the liter of Ilfotec I had with Ilford's recommended times and I'm using those same times for HC110 with 100% similar results. But my eyes are no densiometers either.

 

[Mark_S]

I'm curious as to why you are thinking to change to Ilfotec HC just for the sake of it.

I believe that Ilford has much more of a commitment to the future of B&W photography than does Kodak.

With the new darkroom, I plan on retesting film and processing- which is a relatively big task. I have more confidence in my being able to purchase Ilfotec HC over the long term than Kodak products, hence the plan to move to Ilford.