Runny white HC-110

[scyg]

"New Formula"? Why mess with a good thing? Is this the New Coke of film developers? Any experiences, good, bad or neutral?

 

[BradS]

Old news....
https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/hc-110-new-formula.172782/
https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/hc-110-new-formula.172782/

https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/new-hc-110-developer-not-the-same.176138/

summary: looks different, works the same, unknown whether it lasts as long.

 

[scyg]

Old news....

Not for me. My last bottle, from around August last year, was still the good ol' syrupy stuff.

summary: looks different, works the same, unknown whether it lasts as long.

Thanks. I guess we'll see.

 

[John Bragg]

I still have 3/4 of a litre of the original stuff and when that is done, I will be seamlessly transitioning on to Ilford Ilfotec HC. This is probably the end of Kodak products for me, as I no longer use their film, preferring HP5+ in most respects. Well done Alaris, you changed the one remaining thing left in my inventory and your film is 1 1/2 times more expensive than Ilford so it is beyond my pocket.

 

[SchwinnParamount]

I still have 3/4 of a litre of the original stuff and when that is done, I will be seamlessly transitioning on to Ilford Ilfotec HC. This is probably the end of Kodak products for me, as I no longer use their film, preferring HP5+ in most respects. Well done Alaris, you changed the one remaining thing left in my inventory and your film is 1 1/2 times more expensive than Ilford so it is beyond my pocket.

I'm sort of going in the opposite direction. I've used all of the films in question over the years and I've decided I like the TMax films the best. My arriving at that conclusion is coincidentally on the same spot in the timeline as the draw down of my 2nd to last bottle of original HC 110. I've decided that since extensive testing of the new HC 110 indicates it is essentially the same stuff as the old - despite being runnier, means that I stay with it. I am in love with the TMax 400/HC 110 (E) combo and have enough experience with the other choices to feel like I know what I like. I don't give any kind of shit whose name is on the label of the bottle as long as the stuff inside is the stuff I want.

 

[mike c]

The old HC110 I have is just about gone, if the new stuff works as well I will be happy and the fact that it is a thinner viscosity make it easier to handle, an improvement in my opinion.

 

[john_s]

"New Formula"? Why mess with a good thing? .....

They had to find another contractor to make it, and it was apparently cheaper and easier to make it with a water base than the more difficult water-free original.

 

[mgb74]

They had to find another contractor to make it, and it was apparently cheaper and easier to make it with a water base than the more difficult water-free original.

At the loss of it's legendary shelf life.

But compare the price of HC-110 to Ilfotec HC.

 

[John Bragg]

At the loss of it's legendary shelf life.

But compare the price of HC-110 to Ilfotec HC.

HC-110 is over £36 per litre
Ilford Ilfotec HC is £25 (best price).

 

[grat]

HC-110 is over £36 per litre
Ilford Ilfotec HC is £25 (best price).

Freestyle:
Kodak HC-110 1L: $34.99
Ilford HC 1L: $64.99

 

[Finn lyle]

Even the new batches that suffer from salt precipitation work just fine, going on a year. I’m almost through my first liter of it and the quality of images hasn’t changed at all. As long as it doesn’t I see no reason to change to Ilfotec now lest Kodak cut HC-110 entirely.

 

[pentaxuser]

Freestyle:
Kodak HC-110 1L: $34.99
Ilford HC 1L: $64.99

So suddenly the difference is almost totally reversed. Which tells you a lot about pricing policy and nothing about real cost differences. I am amazed that Ilford sells any of its HC in the U.S. with this kind of a difference but the Freestyle price may bear almost no relationship to Ilford's price to the "landed at the U.S. docks price"

pentaxuser

 

[john_s]

Freestyle:
Kodak HC-110 1L: $34.99
Ilford HC 1L: $64.99

It's interesting how marketing works. I often read that someone has chosen a particular first tier maker's film based on local price and I find that the price differential is entirely reversed in my country. It seems to happen elsewhere too!

 

[NB23]

I'm sort of going in the opposite direction. I've used all of the films in question over the years and I've decided I like the TMax films the best. My arriving at that conclusion is coincidentally on the same spot in the timeline as the draw down of my 2nd to last bottle of original HC 110. I've decided that since extensive testing of the new HC 110 indicates it is essentially the same stuff as the old - despite being runnier, means that I stay with it. I am in love with the TMax 400/HC 110 (E) combo and have enough experience with the other choices to feel like I know what I like. I don't give any kind of shit whose name is on the label of the bottle as long as the stuff inside is the stuff I want.

Now honestly, would you be able to differentiate it from Tmax developer?

Many people can’t tell the difference between tmax developer vs new hc-110 vs D76.

Me, I want the syrup. I don’t care if the new is the same as the old, I just want it to be syrup. No syrup? No money.

 

[MattKing]

So suddenly the difference is almost totally reversed. Which tells you a lot about pricing policy and nothing about real cost differences. I am amazed that Ilford sells any of its HC in the U.S. with this kind of a difference but the Freestyle price may bear almost no relationship to Ilford's price to the "landed at the U.S. docks price"

pentaxuser

The US is Ilford's largest market. And they have a single, exclusive US distributor, unlike Kodak.

 

[mshchem]

I've got enough Tetenal made XTOL to last me for a long time. Having said that I am probably done with Kodak branded, unreliable chemistry. It's sad as growing up and for many years Kodak was my gold standard. There's plenty of suppliers that can fill the niche. Ilford has never let me down.

 

[grat]

So suddenly the difference is almost totally reversed. Which tells you a lot about pricing policy and nothing about real cost differences. I am amazed that Ilford sells any of its HC in the U.S. with this kind of a difference but the Freestyle price may bear almost no relationship to Ilford's price to the "landed at the U.S. docks price"

Adorama has a higher price, B&H has a lower price (but labels it "2019 version", which I find suspect).

Just as an FYI, Ilfosol 3 for the equivalent amount (enough concentrate for 32L) would be approximately $50.

 

[SchwinnParamount]

Now honestly, would you be able to differentiate it from Tmax developer?

Many people can’t tell the difference between tmax developer vs new hc-110 vs D76.

Me, I want the syrup. I don’t care if the new is the same as the old, I just want it to be syrup. No syrup? No money.

I don't know if I could, considering the fact that I've used TMax developer only once and that was 20 years ago.

 

[pentaxuser]

[QUOTE="NB23, post: 2383226, member: 34621"
Me, I want the syrup. I don’t care if the new is the same as the old, I just want it to be syrup. No syrup? No money.[/QUOTE]
This makes sense if we can be sure that the new stuff lacks enough longevity to last as long as you normally take to use up a whole bottle but that is still the unknown, isn't it and it may remain that way for some time to come?

Or is there something about a syrupy liquid that appeals enough to persuade you not to buy anything less syrupy?

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[NB23]

Hc110’s main argument was long lastingness. For such, it had to be syrup.

I have nothing agains the “new hc-110”, please don’t get me wrong. It’s just that it’s not hc110.
It’s hc-111, hc-109, hc-1100, ch-110, X-Tul, D-110, or whatever.

Changing the whole thing but giving it a legendary name was a very silly move.

 

[relistan]

I keep seeing the assertion that the new stuff is water based. Do we know that? What's the source of that information? I've never used the old stuff but the viscosity of the new stuff I have sure seems close to propylene glycol. If so, you should be able to expect quite a long life. Because of the vaping industry, PG is cheap and widely available now so that could explain the change.

 

[John Bragg]

Freestyle:
Kodak HC-110 1L: $34.99
Ilford HC 1L: $64.99

Total reversal. Makes no sense. It all comes, (came) from Tetenal anyhow. They used to make their own version called Neopress, but it vanished from the market about when Kodak went to Tetenal for manufacture of HC-110.

 

[MattKing]

The new HC-110 is manufactured in the USA by someone other than Tetenal. Kodak Alaris moved most of their production away from Tetenal when it went into bankruptcy, and then didn't move most of it back when the new, reformulated Tetenal started up.
I'm not sure that it is correct that the new HC-110 is made using water. What does seem to be the case is that the new version is not made using the still secret and proprietary (and likely expensive) method that entirely excluded water.
The old HC-110 would not develop anything in syrup form. It is only when water is added to the (old) syrup that any development takes place.
I wonder how the new HC-110 behaves if you try that.

 

[relistan]

Looking at the MSDS, there is more that changed other than the solvent base, probably because the solvent was also part of the accelerator.

Old MSDS: (2016)

New MSDS: (2019)

Most of what makes up the solvent in the new version is not listed. My guess is propylene glycol, which I'm pretty certain doesn't need to be listed in an MSDS. I don't know enough to know if all those other items are able to dissolve in it, though. My guess is that the viscosity change is mostly due to the move away from a large amount of diethanolamine (a little is retained), which is also an alkali, necessitating the replacement with other alkali (potassium hydroxide, sodium tetraborate, potassium sulfite). Maybe that little bit of diethanolamine is there to allow one of the other ingredients to dissolve in the new solvent. I don't quite know what the effect of removing sulfur dioxide is. Is it a silver solvent? If so it looks like the potassium sulfite replaced it. New formula has no bromide, or so little that it's not listed.

EDIT: added dates for the MSDS I referenced

 

[relistan]

There seem to have been many MSDSs throughout its history, and the formula appears to been tweaked, adjusted etc. over time. For example, the “old” MSDS you posted looks different than older versions I recall seeing.

Yeah this is from the 2016 version, so the last version that people seem to have liked as the "old" HC-110. The "new" MSDS is from 2019.

Diethanolamine/sulfur dioxide addition product was the source of sulfite.

Ah, so I was on the right track anyway. Thanks!