N development for TRI-X in HC110

[ZoneIII]

I don't use Tri-X that much but I did test the new version when it came out. I was planning to shoot some Tri-X sheet film this weekend and, when looking over my test results, I see that my N development time in HC110-B is a bit too short for my taste (4 min). I will test it to find the N time for HC110 1:15 but, for now, does anyone have a rule-of-thumb based on your own tests or experience to give me an approximate factor to multiply my HC110-B time to get to the proper time for HC110 1:15? In other words, should I increase development time by 50%, 75%, 100% or whatever to get the same results I would get in HC110?

Thanks much!

 

[mike c]

I use trix 320 in 120 size with HC110 but a 1:50 dilution about 10min 69deg. F. 4 mins is to short if you double the dilution try a test sheet at twice the time 8min.

 

[Bruce Watson]

I don't use Tri-X that much but I did test the new version when it came out. I was planning to shoot some Tri-X sheet film this weekend and, when looking over my test results, I see that my N development time in HC110-B is a bit too short for my taste (4 min). I will test it to find the N time for HC110 1:15 but, for now, does anyone have a rule-of-thumb based on your own tests or experience to give me an approximate factor to multiply my HC110-B time to get to the proper time for HC110 1:15? In other words, should I increase development time by 50%, 75%, 100% or whatever to get the same results I would get in HC110?

Thanks much!

Depends on agitation.

In general, for continuous agitation you multiply development time by the square root of dilution. So if you double the dilution, you multiply by sqrt(2), or 1.4.

For small tanks and intermittent inversion agitation, the rule of thumb is that you multiply development time by the dilution. So if you double dilution you double development time.

For very intermittent development, like semi-stand or stand, all bets are off. You'll just have to test and see.

Hopefully this will at least give you a place to start. Of course to nail it down you'll have to do your own testing.

I personally liked very much Tri-X in HC-110H (aka "twice B"). You might want to give something like that a try. The danger with dilutions is that you risk not having enough active developer in the mix and the developer then exhausts prematurely. So whatever dilution you pick just make sure there's enough stock developer in the tank so it doesn't exhaust prematurely and you should be fine.

 

[ZoneIII]

I think I may have found my own answer but I would still like to hear from anyone who uses this combination. Extrapolating from some other tests I did when the new version of Tri-X came out, it appears that my N development time will be about 7 min for HC110 1:15.

 

[ZoneIII]

Bruce.

Thanks! Your recommendations are pretty close to what I came up with by extrapolating other tests I did when the new film came out. I process in trays with the traditional 30 second cyle through the stack. The 7 minutes that I extrapolated is between your suggested intermittent and continuous factors which makes sense.

I have used the combination before but I just haven't used it with the new Tri-X. Previously, I only had to use it for N- development but the new film develops substantially faster, as you know. I am also aware of the need to have enough active developer when diluting.


Thanks Again
Tom Johnston

 

[ZoneIII]

Bruce.

Thanks! Your recommendations are pretty close to what I came up with by extrapolating other tests I did when the new film came out. I process in trays with the traditional 30 second cyle through the stack. The 7 minutes that I extrapolated is between your suggested intermittent and continuous factors which makes sense.

I have used the combination before but I just haven't used it with the new Tri-X. Previously, I only had to use it for N- development but the new film develops substantially faster, as you know. I am also aware of the need to have enough active developer when diluting.


Thanks Again! Your reply was very helpful.
Tom Johnston

 

[BradS]

1:15 takes longer than dilution B (which is 1:31) ????

Must be talking about dilution from the stock solution (as opposed to dilution from the concentrate)?

 

[mike c]

1:15 takes longer than dilution B (which is 1:31) ????

Must be talking about dilution from the stock solution (as opposed to dilution from the concentrate)?

For got to mention that' I use from concentrate.:rolleyes:

 

[BradS]

For got to mention that' I use from concentrate.:rolleyes:

but...

from concentrate, dilution B is 1:31....

I do not understand...

if your testing shows that time is 4 minutes in dilution B (1:31) then how can it possibly take 7 minutes in 1:15?

that's why I thought you must be mixing from the stock solution...in that case, I think dilution B is 1:7 (?) and then it would make sense for 1:15 (from the stock solution) to take about twice as long as dilution B.

 

[mike c]

Brad,I'm not going by Kodak s recommended dilutions but by diluting the concentrate to a 1:50 which give's me a longer developing time which makes it easier to do a -1to normal development. I use 120 in a tank.

Mike

 

[BradS]

Brad,I'm not going by Kodak s recommended dilutions but by diluting the concentrate to a 1:50 which give's me a longer developing time which makes it easier to do a -1to normal development. I use 120 in a tank.

Mike

ah, 1:50. Yes that makes sense....more dilute than 1:31 so it takes longer.

but the original post said 1:15...big difference!

 

[mike c]

Yes it is Brads, but it works for me so far. Since the stock solution is already deluded I don't know the equivalent ratio to the concentrate .