ron110n Posted February 5, 2007 Share #1 Posted February 5, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) I'm curious after reading over the web that there is a way around Kodak HC110 without diluting to stock solution, to lengthen storage life. Yes I am aware that the HC110 is in the thick syrup state. Kodak HC-110 Developer - Unofficial Resource Page HC-110 Developer Information The film to be processed is a Tmax 400 Pro. Is there a way around Kodak Tmax Developer since it is in the liquid form? Has anyone had success to dilute a mini one shot solution coming from the undiluted Tmax plastic bottle? If yes, would you please share your formula... I am aware how picky Tmax films are with developers and time / temperature accuracy, and I learned that the hard way. -Ron The Beautiful Eyes Of Leica Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 5, 2007 Posted February 5, 2007 Hi ron110n, Take a look here Tmax Developer is there a way around it?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Jean-Michel Komarnicki Posted February 5, 2007 Share #2 Posted February 5, 2007 If you do not process film frequently enough to use up the developer, you could buy just the smaller bottle of T-Max developer. Each time you want to process a roll or two, simply dilute the required amount for for your developping tank, and store the rest. The concentrate has a two year shelf life in a full, capped bottle; so either transfer it into one of those collapsible bottles, or get a buch of small bottles into which you can store the concentrate. Better yet: shoot more film! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ron110n Posted February 6, 2007 Author Share #3 Posted February 6, 2007 Good idea Jean! I once found small bottle containers at a 99 cents store. Perhaps some marbles on the diluted mini stock solution will help to minimize the air space between the material and the cap. Thanks, I'll make an R&D on that. Yes you're right, shoot a lot of films. I bought a hundred foot roll of Tmax 400 last weekend. I should have plenty to test... 5 frames at a time eh! Cheers! -Ron The Beautiful Eyes Of Leica Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob_x2004 Posted February 7, 2007 Share #4 Posted February 7, 2007 Ron, can I ask why you are using HC and not just using D76? Is it a cost or batching convenience thing? What differences do you notice in the negs? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ron110n Posted February 8, 2007 Author Share #5 Posted February 8, 2007 Ron, can I ask why you are using HC and not just using D76? Is it a cost or batching convenience thing? What differences do you notice in the negs? Hi Rob, No problem about the cost and besides, developers are very cheap on my side on the pond. "They're mostly water after dilution". I bought some HC110 last weekend but that is intended for my Delta 400 and I'm yet to findout about the result. Others who used the HC110 claimed that it has a fast developing time. Good for push processing one or two stops since it increase the contrast and the grain characteristics pull down by half a stop. I thought that belongs to Rodinal, Acufine, and Microphene We'll see. Kodak D76 is a very good developer and to be honest I don't have that. It has a very similar characteristic to Ilford ID11. I use ID11 for the reason that most of my films are Ilfords. But I would agree that it's a wrong reasoning. Same manufacturer of film and developer doesn't necessarily mean that you get the sweet spot. But at least somewhere close to it. Cheers, -Ron Creature of Habbits or the Caveman within Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob_x2004 Posted February 8, 2007 Share #6 Posted February 8, 2007 I guess what I like about 76 is that it seems pretty bullet proof. Measure once and you have the stuff in the right concentration and you dont have to muck round much. Measuring out 5.6mls of Rodinal for its one shot use gets to be a bit of a chore. Even with syringes it is only as precise as your eye sight on the night. I cant really pick much between any of them, and there seems to be such an overlap of qualities depending on concentration say stock or 1+1 or 1+2 and changed base developing times, and the contrast on the day. I might go back to 76 after I have finished the next couple of bottles of R. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted February 8, 2007 Share #7 Posted February 8, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) .. still brewing your own Rob?... sigh Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ron110n Posted February 8, 2007 Author Share #8 Posted February 8, 2007 Rob, My favorite combo so far is HP5+ 400 and Ilford ID11 stock solution. My negatives are very contrasty even at night snaps. But that is only for HP5+. I found this by accident or by laziness. I usually dilute ID11 @ 1:1 then one day I only have a little over 300 ml left in the bottle. Then I dumped all in my beaker and look over the book and see the time adjustment. After processing, my jaw just dropped after I squigee the negative. Maybe there are better combos for HP5+, but this is close to a sweet spot. M3, Noct @ f/4.0, HP5+ 400 I like this lens better closed than open. Creature of Habbits or the Caveman within Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob_x2004 Posted February 8, 2007 Share #9 Posted February 8, 2007 Yea still homebrew:o. Been giving it a bit of a rough cut lemon grass lately, that no one seems to like, but I cheat and use Corel flavouring so the RAW files are still intact in little plastic sleeves. Ron, am still mainly using APX, seems to give me better ends than ilford. Maybe it is related to environments. I should imagine English or European days arent quite so contrasty. I suppose if I looked at those development curves for the film, not sure what they are called, I would get my answer. I see people talking about 'toe' and 'gradient' and stuff. I should look it up. Robably quite interesting. Anyway for those mid day shots when it is screaming sunlight and a hundred and something in the shade, or indoors and so light poor lit it is two second exposures then the APX seems to work for me. I should get some 25. The times I have to shoot thousandth feight or sixteen over summmer. It is like an auto setting who needs an M7:( . Actually at sixteen I probably dont need to bother with focus a lot of the time:rolleyes:. Ohh well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ron110n Posted February 10, 2007 Author Share #10 Posted February 10, 2007 Hi Rob, I have 2 rolls of APX 100 here. Haven't loaded it yet and still in the freezer. I'm waiting for the right moment to use this film since it is now hard to find. Yes you are right about how films and exposures affect different envirorments and "humidity". I did snaps in the Philippine country sides last 92' on an F3HP and the result just isn't the same as I get here in this dry California weather. It seem that their light is more intense being close to the equator. I'm sure your result being down under has it's own characteristics. My result with Spain is very much like California. When I was in Alaska, that is another story. Oh hey... what developer is your favorite for your APX? -Ron Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.