Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 76,369   Posts: 1,682,943   Online: 653
      
Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Lower Earth
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,994
    Blog Entries
    2
    Images
    45

    Freestyle Legacy Pro L110 Times and Temps

    I'm trying to find out if the Freestyle Legacy Pro L110 developer is the same as Kodak's HC110 in order to get some ballpark figures for times and temps. I have run a couple of rolls through the Freestyle version and am not very happy w/ what I have, but it may be my developing protocol. Some people say it's the same as the Kodak version, others say it's a generic Fuji product, while others say it's "previously sold as Kentmere L110". Anyone using this? I'm looking to develop some Shanghai Pan GP3 100 film in it, but also have some Arista EDU Ultra 100 and 200 as well.

    I did call Freestyle, and they said that it was the "equivalent" of HC110. My trouble is that I have never used the Kodak version, so I'm not sure what I should be expecting. Gerald here said it's not even close to HC110 judging by the MSD sheets. If I can't get some better info on this developer, I am going to pitch it and get the Kodak version, which is unfortunate because it's a big bottle. If I don't like it I'm stuck w/ a lot of developer.
    Last edited by momus; 03-23-2015 at 04:54 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    "Insert pithy philosophic statement of your choice here".

  2. #2
    M Carter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    648
    I've been testing the legacy 110 and liking it a lot. I've been using it for my grainier films instead of Rodinal, 400 and 3200, so can't help with your specifics as I don't shoot those films.

    That said, I'd say test yourself - you can find some baseline times on the massive dev chart.

    My testing for 35mm film (I always do this since a roll of 35 gives me a lot of data that will translate - to some extent - to MF or sheet film):

    Find a baseline suggested time - for HP5+, if it was, say, 7 mins. dilution B at box speed (can't recall specifics) -

    I'd shoot a 4-shot bracket of a test still life with highlight detail (styrofoam packing chunk), a gray card, shadowy stuff (dark fabric with a print) and a constant light source. Meter for shadows, and expose at 200, 250, 320, and 400 -

    Advance one frame, open the camera back in the dark, stick a tiny tab of blue tape on the current frame, close the back, advance one frame...

    Do this three more times for 4 sets of 4 brackets;

    In the dark, take the film out, cut at each tape tab (there will be a blank frame there so precision isn't needed), store 3 of these sets in film vials, develop one at my best-guess time (4 frames is enough to hold still in a reel);

    Do two more of those strips at times that seem interesting or proper based on how the negs look... if my first time was 7 minutes, maybe I'd do a 5 and a 12? Sort of depends on how the 1st strips come out. I'm very into shadow detail, so that's what I look for, and check highlight density.

    Sleeve the film and label which strip got what time/dilution. Do a contact sheet with filter #2 and inspect the images for an idea of dev. times for specific speeds.

    Maybe use the last snip to fine tune. Usually enough film left for another bracket or two, I usually test pushing to say 800 and 1600 and see how the film pushes.

    And finally, do a few prints at filter #2 and see which combo gives you the best prints, "best" being up to you, but generally ease of getting the blacks, highlights, tonal gradations, detail, whatever you're looking for, without a fight and split filters or anything like that. You're looking for the "best" iso for your style (vs. box speed) and the best time for that speed.

    There's a million ways to skin this cat, but everyone will tell you a different time. It's good to just find your own, you can do it for one roll and a couple hours work. And you'll feel all scientific.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Daventry, Northamptonshire, England
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    7,690
    Quote Originally Posted by momus View Post
    while others say it's "previously sold as Kentmere L110".
    Who marketed it as Kentmere L110? Doesn't the Kentmere name belong to Ilford?

    pentaxuser

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Southern USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,910
    When Kodak decided to formulate a new developer for commercial film processers, for reasons that are not completely clear, they chose a waterless formulation. In the concentrate glycols and amines replace water as the solvent. In a conventional developer a preservative such as sodium sulfite and a restrainer such as potassium bromide can be used. However in a waterless concentrate these two chemicals are not soluble. To solve these problems Kodak used addition products (adducts) of sulfur dioxide and hydrogen bromide with diethanolamine. When dissolved in water these two chemicals provide sulfite and bromide ions. Neither of these two chemicals was commercially available at the time and were manufactured by Kodak itself. Both sulfur dioxide and hydrogen bromide are dangerous gases and the reaction between them and ethanolamine is an exothermic one which can be dangerous to control. The result is that other potential manufacturers are discouraged from producing an HC-110 clone.

    Now it is possible to create a water based developer which contains a balanced mix of developing agents that can reproduce negatives equivalent to those of HC-110. This is what Legacy has done. However HC-110 and L-110 are very different. Therefore they can be differences in times, temperatures and dilutions between the two developers. Ilford Ilfotec HC comes closer to HC-110 in formulation than L-110.

    My advice is that if you like the results from HC-110 then buy HC-110
    Last edited by Gerald C Koch; 03-23-2015 at 07:01 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral.

    ~Antoine de Saint-Exupery

  5. #5
    fotch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    SE WI- USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,643
    "equivalent" of HC110 is sort of like an apple is the "equivalent" of an orange, JMHO
    Items for sale or trade at www.Camera35.com

  6. #6
    M Carter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    648
    Quote Originally Posted by Gerald C Koch View Post
    When Kodak decided to formulate a new developer for commercial film processers... Now it is possible to create a water based developer which contains a balanced mix of developing agents that can reproduce negatives equivalent to those of HC-110. This is what Legacy has done. However HC-110 and L-110 are very different. Therefore they can be differences in times, temperatures and dilutions between the two developers. Ilford Ilfotec HC comes closer to HC-110 in formulation than L-110.

    My advice is that if you like the results from HC-110 then buy HC-110
    Developer's not really that pricey and lasts a long time. If there's some reason that the Legacy version is appealing (availability, price, etc). give it a try.

    So far, I've found I like it for how I shoot Delta 3200, which is pretty contrasty. I get a nice sort of sense of "glow" on skin and the grain is just right. YMMV, but - seems to be a good developer. I'll experiment with it for Litho film masks at some point.

  7. #7
    cmacd123's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Stittsville, Ontario
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,328
    Only advantage of the Legacy Pro developer is that it flows much better than HC-110 which has the consistency of Corn Syrup. so the Freestyle product is easier to mix. Yes it was sold for a while using the Kentmere name under licence, but shows no sign of having anything else to do with Harmon Technology. At the time it came out Freestyle was selling a private label version of Fuji B&W film under the legacy Pro brand.

    The easier pour is a give away that the formula is quite a bot different. Many people do find the results are fairly close. YMMV
    Charles MacDonald
    aa508@ncf.ca
    I still live just beyond the fringe in Stittsville



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin