I've not done anything that fancy yet but, the ideas are starting to get crowded in the back of my mind. I once came across a page on the 'net that described how a guy have built a robot completely out of Legos that solved Rubik's cube! A full blown Lego-lift would be relatively simple by comparison.
Originally Posted by Lee L
Quick bump in hopes that someone will have an idea about my initial question.
Sorry for the "Lego Interlude".
I haven't done HC110 for a long time and never with Jobo which is my main dev processor.
You should check and try different dilutions. Do you use the same dilution with other films that are working fine ?
Try a different speed, it's maybe too fast ( contrast )
I did some test with Classic 400 with Rodinal and WD2D+ and it was good.
Not much an help sorry.
Classic Pan 400 or 200 is Forte film.
I am using 200 in 5x4 and the grain is large for the speed, but it has a fantastic tonal range.
That is the structure of these films. Some people call it "older technology".
HC-110 and rotary process would not help.
All the best.
This isn't really helpful either except to me but I can only detect grain in the thumbnail on the right. The left one looks totally different in terms of grain - much smoother. To my probably untrained eye there is a real difference between the two thumbnails in terms of grain.
Originally Posted by Paul Sorensen
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Hi Paul, could it be reticulation? I know you use a water bath during processing but how about the wash temps. This film may be more sensitive to temperature changes than others..just a thought.
From the looks of the scan the grain is excessive and not typical of this film. However, I find it difficult to compare scan results to the real thing.
I've never gotten really good results with HC-110 and the Forte films. Developers like Microphen, D-76, A-49 and the various pyro formulations all seem to give better results in my experience. The limited testing I've done with HC-110 and this film was in 35mm format and it's difficult to compare to your results. My recollection was that it was grainy but good looking grain.
I would also look at the temps as a possible cause.
Thanks to everyone for their replies. I will try D76 and see how that works out. I will also try to be more gentle in my agitation, since I suspect I was kind of rough. Hopefully that will work better.
Well, I seem to have solved the problem. This time I developed in D76 and was very gentle with the agitation. Basically, I agitated about as gently as I could while maintaining constant motion. I am very happy with the results. I am attaching scans of the image that I took today, a still life of a light from our studio, and the one from the original problem negative. They are very different subjects, but I wasn't about to drive an hour to take a test shot, so I just found something. The difference is quite dramatic. I might try HC110 with gentle agitation just to see if it was mostly the difference in agitation or developer, but one of the two changes sure made a world of difference.
FYI, both of these prints were made today with the same paper to exactly the same magnification. I basically moved my enlarger up as far as it would go and printed an 8X10 crop of the resulting image, so this is a pretty large degree of magnification, equivalent to a print larger than 20X24.
Thanks again to everyone who posted replies.
A while back I pulled out some of my old supper-xx negs that were tray developed in HC110 Dillution B With the grain focuser I thought I was looking at a boulder field. I didn't remember them being that grainy back then. Try some rodinal then you will be happy with the grain you got now. Speaking of which, I want a developer that will give me the delicious flaver of rodinal and the grain of my pyrocat. That would be better than sex, well almost.