That is a fairly small amount of concentrate - it strikes me that it wouldn't take much to contaminate it.We make use of the minimum method, so 1ml syrup per 4x5" sheet and we keep it slowly rolling for an hour. Love it!
I understand very well but you dont. You clearly have not read what I have written.
It is certainly possible that a contaminant might have increased the activity of the developer, resulting in overall fog.
the developer was good. What else is there to know?
Are you shooting imaginary film Donald, or did you just give us something close to the thickness of the emulsion, not the entire package?
So I did a test today and the 15 year old Ilfotec HC worked perfectly at 1+49 dilution in a Jobo processing a single roll of Plus-X at 50 E.I. I've attached an image showing the colour of the concentrate. I should point out that I did have to spend a while cleaning the top of the developer container as a significant amount of "gunk" had accumulated.
That Ilfotec developer is nowhere near as dark as HC-110 would be if it were 15 years old. I've seen this developer get very dark and bright red. I plan on switching to Ilfotec HC when I need to restock some developer. No more HC-110 for me.
Thank you for your post.
Since in my limited testing, the Legacy L110 worked just the same, if push comes to shove, I'll switch to it.
If the new HC-110 will continue to work well over something like a two year period when the concentrate is stored in a half empty original container, the loss of legendary longevity will be sad, but not of much consequence to people who actually buy and use the stuff.
If the longevity is reduced to something like a couple of months when half empty, it will be much less desirable.
Fair enough. But how about “new” Tri-X? AFAIK in nearly forty years of using Kodak and Ilford I cannot help but notice Ilford products are more or less the same until the name on the package changes. HP5 is HP5 until they added the “Plus”? Kodak leaves me wondering what I’m getting this time around provided I get something at all. Plus-x? Polymax paper developer? FP4 and then FP4 plus always await me at B&H and so does PQ Universal and MG. Has not prepacked D-76 changed without notice as well as pre Tetenal HC-110 as has been mentioned in every edition of the Film Developing Cookbook? Kodak just has bad luck with their supply chain? Every Ilford product I grew up with is still with me now or in a new clearly defined form. What is their secret to success? But really all I want to know is if I just wasted 30 bucks...
.....
I've briefly read the first two or three pages of this thread, skipped the majority of the middle arguments about world wars, pollution, political concerns, and bulk negativity, and picked up on the last two or three pages. If we take all these away, to include personal opinions, does the fact remain that HC-110 is still a good, competent, capable developer that can produce the excellent results that it's been known for?
If we take all these away, to include personal opinions, does the fact remain that HC-110 is still a good, competent, capable developer that can produce the excellent results that it's been known for?
Actually I think Bill Troop's comments are probably more germane to Christopher's question.Probably the most significant and useful comments in this thread came from user "Photo Engineer" (RIP). Much of the rest can be safely passed over.
I'm somewhat late to this thread ... but is there any chance your friend gave you C-41 film? Your description descibes what I see when developing C-41 (and Kodachrome) film as B&W.I know of lightleaks, nothing I haven't seen before, but this turn the whole negative was just veeery dark. You see a picture was there, so it was developed but something in the developer truly screwed up the film. We made another two test shots with fresh developer and they were fine.
Seems to me that just about any developer can produce good results. HC-110 went from being something special to now being just another mundane developer. If I want a developer that has 1-2 year shelf life my options are vast.
Do we have any evidence that new HC-110 has a limited shelf life? Or is this all just unfounded speculation based on armchair chemistry?
How would you suggest they do that - prove a negative?Given that there has been a very significant change to the HC-110 formulation, it is up to Kodak to provide the evidence that there has been no change to the performance.
Proving a positive is what is required, not a negative. The drastic change in formula, in my opinion, requires a lot more than just slapping the old name on the bottle. I also would say the same about the new Acros from Fuji. The label may be the same, but the fact that a different manufacturer makes the film tells me this product is substantially different than the original one.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?