HC-110 Dilution H, 1+62 ?

Discussion in 'B&W: Film, Paper, Chemistry' started by Felinik, Sep 23, 2012.

  1. Felinik

    Felinik Member

    Messages:
    428
    Joined:
    May 13, 2012
    Shooter:
    35mm
    So being pretty new on this (started shooting analog and souping in March this year) I am now on my way to develop using HC-110 for the first time. I have two rolls (35mm) of Rollei Retro 80s, shot @160, following a recipe using HC-110 dilution H.

    Reading up on it I find that dilution H (as all of you most probably already know here) is double the water of dilution B. Looking at the HC-110 liter bottle it says dilution B is 1+31, which then means dilution H is 1+62 ..!!

    This is just fantastic, using my Paterson tank with 2 reels the total amount of fluid is 580 cc, 580/63 = 9,2 cc, meaning that my liter bottle of HC-110 will last for ages (108x2 rolls!!).


    I'm just amazed, is this really correct?


    Thanks!


    /J.F. Felinik
     
  2. Gerald C Koch

    Gerald C Koch Member

    Messages:
    6,326
    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2010
    Location:
    Southern USA
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Not that it makes much difference but H is 1+63.

    Please note that you must always make sure that there is enough concentrate available to develop the rolls. Kodak recommends a minimum of 6 ml of the syrup per roll of 35mm or 120 film. Sometimes this means using more dilute developer than is needed to just cover the film. So using 9.2 ml for two rolls will not work.

    Read this www.covingtoninnovations.com/hc110 which has lots of information.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 23, 2012
  3. masimix

    masimix Member

    Messages:
    67
    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2006
    Location:
    Oslo, Norway
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Yes, I use it 1+60, for the simplicity of it. 10 ml of HC-110 syrup and 600ml of water to develop two 120 films. I use a syringe to extract only 10 ml from the bottle. This way you can develop 200 rolls of 120 on a liter bottle of HC-110!
     
  4. drpsilver

    drpsilver Member

    Messages:
    423
    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2005
    Location:
    Los Altos, CA
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    23 Sept 2012

    J.F.:

    You are correct. 9.2 ml of HC110 concentrate and water to make 580 ml. I have used HC110 (my dil. H is 1+60) with good results in 4x5. I am curious to see how this dilute a developer works for 35mm film. Yes HC110 is a very "fast working" developer, but is also exhausts quickly at high dilutions (added development time give very little added negative density). I would make sure you have enough developer in 580 ml (at 1+62) to properly develop two rolls of film.

    Best wished in your adventures with HC110.

    Regards,
    Darwin
     
  5. Felinik

    Felinik Member

    Messages:
    428
    Joined:
    May 13, 2012
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Lovely!

    And according to the bottle the syrup can be stored for 2 years!!!
     
  6. Felinik

    Felinik Member

    Messages:
    428
    Joined:
    May 13, 2012
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Thanks for the heads up guys!!

    Regarding "enough developer for two films", anyone who knows if the 9,2cc will be enough then?

    EDIT: Ok, I've read people using from 3-6 cc per roll, so I guess if I go with 10 cc for two rolls (simplifies the diluting), then I should probably do ok, right?
     
  7. Gerald C Koch

    Gerald C Koch Member

    Messages:
    6,326
    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2010
    Location:
    Southern USA
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Please read the Covington site mentioned thoroughly your questions will hopefully be answered.
     
  8. Felinik

    Felinik Member

    Messages:
    428
    Joined:
    May 13, 2012
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Thanks buddy, I've done that now, interesting reading indeed. I've also found a bunch of people using it 5cc per roll, and it seems to work just fine. I'll give it a shot tomorrow and we'll see how that turns out..

    :smile:
     
  9. Photo-gear

    Photo-gear Member

    Messages:
    355
    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2009
    Location:
    Montréal (Qu
    Shooter:
    35mm
    I did read about the 6cc per roll, recommandation by Kodak, although I feel like Kodak plays it very safe. I am not surprised that 5cc does the work as well.
     
  10. Gerald C Koch

    Gerald C Koch Member

    Messages:
    6,326
    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2010
    Location:
    Southern USA
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Kodak wants people to succeed using their developer and may be a bit conservative. I use HC-110 1+49 with excellent results. That's 5 ml per roll. My only question was dropping down further to 9.2/2 per roll.
     
  11. Lee L

    Lee L Member

    Messages:
    3,247
    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2004
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    The 'oddball' US packaged HC-110 dilutions from syrup.

    Dilution A: 1 oz + 15 oz = 16 oz = 1 pint (2 rolls 35mm in stainless steel tank)
    Dilution B: 1 oz + 31 oz = 32 oz = 1 quart (4 rolls 35mm in stainless steel tank)
    Dilution E: 1 oz + 47 oz = 48 oz = 1.5 quarts
    Dilution H: 1 oz + 63 oz = 64 oz = 2 quarts = 1/2 gallon

    Convenient for using older common measuring cups in the US.

    Other US stock dilutions yield totals of 20, 40, 80, and 120 parts.

    Lee
     
  12. newtorf

    newtorf Member

    Messages:
    78
    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2011
    Location:
    SF bay
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    I started with 12.5 ml for 2 rolls 35mm 36 exp, then down to 10 ml for 2 rolls, and recently 7.5 ml for 2 rolls. No problem so far.
     
  13. georg16nik

    georg16nik Member

    Messages:
    1,044
    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2010
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Back when I used HC-110 there were 2 versions in Europe. The version for EU was less concentrated. The other one was full strength and most dilutions written all over the books were useful.
     
  14. Sponsored Ad
  15. MattKing

    MattKing Subscriber

    Messages:
    17,038
    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2005
    Location:
    Delta, BC, Canada
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Don't forget that the capacity of a developer is at least partially determined by the exposures on the negatives themselves - high key subjects with lots of light and whites will exhaust a developer more quickly than low key subjects with lots of shadows.

    For that reason, it may be best to be as conservative as Kodak suggests.
     
  16. Felinik

    Felinik Member

    Messages:
    428
    Joined:
    May 13, 2012
    Shooter:
    35mm
    The one I got is the 1 liter bottle with "full" concentrate (from macodirect).

    KHC11_350.jpg
     
  17. John Bragg

    John Bragg Member

    Messages:
    632
    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Location:
    Penwithick,
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    19217F.jpg Delta 400 @Ei 200 in HC-110 H 12 mins @20c minimal agitation. . I really like the results.
     
  18. Felinik

    Felinik Member

    Messages:
    428
    Joined:
    May 13, 2012
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Looks nice John!

    I'm gonna go with


    5cc + ~300cc/Roll (Adapted "H")
    @24° C
    11 minutes
    30 secs inital agitation
    5 sec. / 30 sec.


    For my two rolls of Rollei Retro 80s (@ EI160), and we'll see how that turns out.
     
  19. John Bragg

    John Bragg Member

    Messages:
    632
    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Location:
    Penwithick,
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    This is a handy link too. It taught me a lot. http://www.mironchuk.com/hc-110.html
     
  20. scheimfluger_77

    scheimfluger_77 Subscriber

    Messages:
    507
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2006
    Location:
    mid-Missouri
    Shooter:
    Pinhole
    John that is indeed a nice looking result.

    Does anyone know what kind of results happen when using a Jobo processor?

    Steve
     
  21. Felinik

    Felinik Member

    Messages:
    428
    Joined:
    May 13, 2012
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Thanks! Per coincidence I actually did find and read that page the other day here during my googling..


    Development was just done here (ended up with 1+59, 600cc in total) and I'm waiting for the negs to dry, looks pretty darn nice, will be interesting to take a closer look at these! (I think it's the first film I've seen with a completely transparent/clear base...).

    :smile:
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 24, 2012
  22. John Bragg

    John Bragg Member

    Messages:
    632
    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Location:
    Penwithick,
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    I use a Jobo tank by hand. HC-110 can be very firey if over shaken. I do 5 initial inversions and then only 2 inversions at 4 minutes and 2 at 8 minutes and pour out at 12 minutes. Continuous agitation would loose some of the advantages of the minimal agitation approach. ie regular grain, boosted shadows and tamed highlights.
     
  23. ColColt

    ColColt Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,795
    Joined:
    May 26, 2015
    Location:
    TN
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Where did the Dilution H come from, Kodak only shows up to Dilution F?
     
  24. DWThomas

    DWThomas Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,916
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2006
    Location:
    SE Pennsylvania
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    It is "unofficial," that is, not from Kodak -- I think an outgrowth of the information at the Covington website. I use it all the time as a one-shot process.
     
  25. nwilkins

    nwilkins Member

    Messages:
    384
    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2012
    Location:
    Nova Scotia,
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
  26. ColColt

    ColColt Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,795
    Joined:
    May 26, 2015
    Location:
    TN
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I've never tried it as a concentrate"straight from the bottle". I've always went by mixing a stock solution 1:3 and drawing my working solution from there, in most cases that's been Dilution B. Developing times are short-about 5 1/2 minutes. Much more and they come out too contrasty or at least they use to. Using a scanner instead of the sane way to make prints is a little different I've discovered. For one thing the quality just doesn't look the same as when I made prints from Tri-X.

    After looking at my best attempt to get these negatives flat and try another scan they still don't look as good and sharp as my old 20-30 year old Trix-X negatives.