HC110 compared with D76 1+1

[BetterSense]

My D76 is almost gone. I like it; I generally shoot triX at 200 developing in 1+1 D76 for about 8 minutes. I also have a good bit of Neopan 400 and Arista EDU.Ultra 400 (which is foma) and some APX100. I guess I don't really have a problem with D76, but you have to mix it up and it isn't terribly cheap when used one-shot. If my friend can get us chemcals, I'm looking at transitioning to replenished D23. But HC110 sure looks convenient being a superconcentrate, and it seems like it's just about the cheapest of all developers. I hear a lot of people say that HC110 is very comparable to D76. Has anyone switched from D76 to HC110, and if so, what differences did you notice?

It seems like D76 is really forgiving and always seems to give printable results, and that's important to me. I expose at 1250 and use Diafine for when I need more speed.

[Thomas Bertilsson]

I'm not expert on HC-110, as I've only used a bottle or two. D76 can be used diluted 1+3 as single shot, and that makes it more affordable.
If you can get the chemicals for D23 and replenish it, bulk chemistry is cheap, and replenished developer (which I've been doing for six months now) is a wonderful way to work. My choice is Edwal 12, and I use 100ml replenisher per 35mm/120 or equivalent film area. For me that comes out to about $1 per roll, and it would be a lot less if I bought bulk chemistry. D23 has nothing in it that's exotic, and you should be able to develop film for pennies a roll. Fixer and water would cost more than the developer...

- Thomas

[mike c]

I've used HC110 for such a long time , I have used a condenser enlarger until now. HC110 contols the contrast better for me with the condenser enllarger,now I have a cold lite I'm thinking of switching back to D76 for more contrast.HC110 is far easier to use ,cheaper,last longer and is pretty versatile. So it looks like were at opposite ends of the stick. I say try it,it can be stored for a long time .I hope this helps you a little,It can be a very subjective choice.

mike c.

[Anscojohn]

My D76 is almost gone. I like it; I generally shoot triX at 200 developing in 1+1 D76 for about 8 minutes. I also have a good bit of Neopan 400 and Arista EDU.Ultra 400 (which is foma) and some APX100. I guess I don't really have a problem with D76, but you have to mix it up and it isn't terribly cheap when used one-shot. If my friend can get us chemcals, I'm looking at transitioning to replenished D23. But HC110 sure looks convenient being a superconcentrate, and it seems like it's just about the cheapest of all developers. I hear a lot of people say that HC110 is very comparable to D76. Has anyone switched from D76 to HC110, and if so, what differences did you notice?

It seems like D76 is really forgiving and always seems to give printable results, and that's important to me. I expose at 1250 and use Diafine for when I need more speed.

*******
I cut my darkroom teeth on D-76. I guess we all did, in ye oldene dayz. Sometime in the late 1960s, I went to HC110, which soon suited my needs completely, for FP-4 and an occsional roll of Tri-X, although it was then that I found the usefulness of giving more exposure than box speed. In limited space, in bathroom darkrooms, having a bottle of concentrate was very handy. I did try replenishment, but found it went south too quickly for me. However, for pushing film, an old Bill Pierce trick of using HC110 Replenisher in lieu of HC110 itself sometimes paid off.

I prefer the "gutsy" look of a D23 negative nowadays; but HC110 has a lot going for it.

[jmcd]

With FP4+ and D-76, I always got "good" negatives, but not negatives I was crazy about. With HC-110 and the same film, I love the way the negatives print. I am so glad I finally gave it a try for myself, because what one likes is as personal as it gets.

HC-110 works great with Foma 400 (I rate it at 200), but I like this film even more in Xtol (film rated at 320).

After you get some opinions on what works well for others, try it yourself to see what pleases you.

[2F/2F]

I switched from D-76/ID-11 to HC-110, and now Ilfotec HC.

IMO, if you are really looking at prints that you would make, and not under a microscope, there is no difference in image quality as far as grain and sharpness, other than that which is due to the slight difference in contrast (or "curve shape", more specifically), with HC giving a more "punchy" look; very slight, however. I also find HC more consistent, as it keeps better due to its high concentration. I also like the infinite variability of HC, and its usefulness on GA film.

[BetterSense]

What is GA film?

[2F/2F]

What is GA film?

GA = graphic arts. It is printing industry film, AKA "litho film".

[eworkman]

I used HC 110 with Tri X, mostly because I hated mixing D76 from powder. But After a while I noticed the difference in the results- close, but to coin a cop-out, the D-76 produced more "brilliant" negatives and the HC-110 more "gritty" negs. Xtol gets me D-76 results I prefer and the mixing is less hassle, plus I have more time to do it. "One shot" applies to all the above.

[rternbach]

If I may interject a newbie question from someone who has only done a little bit of film processing and just with D-76. I would like to know which film+developer combination will yield the narrowest d-max range wjth the most continuous tone negatives. Is it lith film and HC-110? Does using a more dilute solution and a longer time in the developer yield lower contrast more continuous tone? Or am I way off the mark here?