These Photos Were Processed In Kodak’s New HC110 In Spite of The Product’s Single Flaw

In early 2019, the film community was pretty stressed out, and with good reason. The nearly two century old chemical manufacturer, Tetenal appeared close to shutting down. Many photographers have probably never even heard of this company, but Tetenal has been “the man behind the curtain” for many of Kodak’s products for decades.

The product that Tetenal made that is close to the heart of my work was Kodak HC110, a classic, flexible b&w film developer that is ideal for producing high acutance negatives and push processing while retaining detail.

The possibility of running out of HC110 and having to adopt a new go-to developer was a scary proposition with paid photography work lined up for 2019. Though I’m not a fan of panic-buying, I decided to stock up on Catalog #501-0541 HC110 to get in front of any shortages.

I breathed a sigh of relief when, before the end of 2019, Kodak released a new HC110 formula to address the Tetenal supply interruption and probably other economic reasons.

But how would this new HC110 differ from the old one?

I bought three or four bottles of the new HC110 formula Catalog #105-8692 from Film Photography Project shortly after reading Leslie Lazenby’s confidence-instilling article regarding her preliminary testing. While I encourage everyone to read her detailed report, for the purposes of this article, spoiler alert, Leslie concluded that there was no practical difference in the formulae. This new HC110 can be used at precisely the same times and temperatures at the old HC110.

Left to Right: A spent bottle of NEW HC110, My last bottle of OLD HC110 and an unopened bottle of NEW HC110 | © 2021 Johnny Martyr

The old HC110 Catalog #501-0541 has been being made in Germany, in a translucent squared off 1 liter bottle for about as long as Kodak Alaris has been in charge. This formula so far as I know, had been the same for decades. Film shooters recognize it for having a pronounced yellow color and maple syrupy viscosity.

The new Catalog #105-8692 HC110 is made in the United States and is not syrupy at all – it’s pretty watery. And it’s color is also not bright yellow. The new HC110 presents like an untrustworthy direct replacement because it looks and pours very differently. But, I trusted Leslie’s findings and Kodak’s commitment to the film community!

Leica M6 TTL 0.85 | Leitz 90mm Summicron Pre-ASPH | Kodak TMAX 100 | NEW Kodak HC110b | © 2021 Johnny Martyr

During the COVID lockdowns of 2020, with slower business, I took the opportunity to finally crack open this mysterious new HC110 and be sure that it rang true for my particular workflow.

I use HC110 Dilution B primarily with Kodak TMAX 100, Tri-X 400 at both 400 and 1600, and TMAX P3200 at 6400. So the goal was to try the new HC110 with all these and make no changes in how I normally process. Below are my usual times and temps, which I applied to use with the new HC110.

Kodak TMAX 100 – Kodak HC110 Dilution B at 68°F for 7 minutes

Kodak Tri-X 400 – Kodak HC110 Dilution B at 68°F for 7.5 minutes

Kodak Tri-X 400 at EL 1600 – Kodak HC110 Dilution B at 68°F for 16 minutes

Kodak TMAX P3200 at EL 6400 – Kodak HC110 Dilution B at 68°F for 11.5 minutes

Now, I didn’t go to the trouble of processing side-by-side sample images in both the old and new developer but I am confident that after nearly two decades of use, I understand how HC110 performs to notice an appreciable difference.

Leica M6 TTL 0.85 | Leitz 90mm Summicron Pre-ASPH | Kodak TMAX 100 | NEW Kodak HC110b | © 2021 Johnny Martyr

I can happily say that, like Leslie, I saw absolutely zero differences in my results with this watery new American HC110. There are, however, a few differences in use that I’d like to discuss.

The first thing, of course, is the viscosity. Those of us who spent years using HC110 might have an odd emotional attachment to the syrup, but in all reality, the new HC110 pours and mixes faster and probably more thoroughly. There is no more up-ending the bottle and waiting tediously for the very last drops to fall into the graduate. Working with the new HC110 is more like working with liquid Kodafix or Stop in regards to its viscosity. This isn’t a big deal but it’s a small advantage in my eyes.

Leica M6 TTL 0.85 | Leitz 90mm Summicron Pre-ASPH | Kodak TMAX 100 | NEW Kodak HC110b | © 2021 Johnny Martyr
1930 Leica III | Leitz 5cm f2 Summar | Kodak Tri-X 400 | NEW Kodak HC110b | © 2021 Johnny Martyr

The other difference that I found is a bit of a concern.

I burned through a couple bottles of the new HC110 during the spring and summer of 2020 as I churned through some backlog and new personal images, continuing to do client work in old HC110. Everything went smoothly.

I opened a bottle of the new Catalog #105-8692 HC110 on February 13th, 2021. I used it for a few sessions that continued to go smoothly. But then, on May 4th, 2021, about three cold/cool months since I opened this bottle (manufactured 08/10/2020 with an expiration date of 08/2022, Batch #11697), I first noticed something odd.

I picked up the bottle of new HC110 and heard a light clinking in the bottom of the bottle that sounded like ice cubes in a drink. I looked and could see some white/yellow/brown chunks of crystal settled in the bottle.

I was careful not to pour the crystals into my graduate, allowing them to collect at the neck area of the bottle without actually coming out. This method worked fine and the film that I processed came out just as it should.

Leica M6 TTL 0.85 | Leitz 90mm Summicron Pre-ASPH | Kodak Tri-X 400 | NEW Kodak HC110b | © 2021 Johnny Martyr

I did a little reading and found that some other folks have had this issue and others have not. In fact, Leslie’s original article didn’t mention them. I reached out to her to see if she had these elusive, mysterious HC110 crystals by now also.

“Yes I have them. I warmed the bottle and much of it dissolved back into the solution, but not all. I suspect they will come back as it sits and cools. I usually give the bottle one gentle inversion before use and they immediately went to the bottom and since I draw my chemistry from the top [using a syringe] it is not a bother. Rather than filter them out I would leave them there.”

Nikon FM2n | Nikkor 55mm 2.8 AIS | Kodak Tri-X 400 rated at & processed for 1600 | NEW Kodak HC110b | © 2021 Johnny Martyr

Elsewhere I read that the Kodak Alaris customer support told inquiring folks that the crystals are comprised of potassium salt and are not a problem so long as they do not leave the bottle. I decided to reach out to Michael Seaberg of Kodak’s chemical division, SinoPromise Group. I told Mr. Seaberg about my recent experience, to which he replied:

“We have advised other customers that the product is ok to use by decanting the liquid, and it is good you found this by your own testing.  We think the issue is solved in our newer batches but need extended keeping time to confirm.”

I asked if there was some way that film shooters could identify if their HC110 might be affected by crystal formation.

“I checked on [your] batch number [Batch #11697] which was made in August 2020.  We made an adjustment after this batch so batches with expiration of 08/2022 or earlier, under certain conditions, could crystallize. The next batch we made has an expiration of 11/2022 and we have made three more batches thus far in 2021 (with expiration dates of 2023).”

Nikon F2sb | Nikkor 50mm 1.4 S.C. Pre-AI | Kodak TMAX P3200 rated at & processed for 6400 | NEW Kodak HC110b | © 2021 Johnny Martyr
Nikon F2sb | Nikkor 50mm 1.4 S.C. Pre-AI | Kodak TMAX P3200 rated at & processed for 6400 | NEW Kodak HC110b | © 2021 Johnny Martyr

Feeling pretty confident with my tests on personal photos, I went ahead and began processing client photos with the new HC110, both before and after crystal formation. The photos featured in this article were all processed with a bottle of HC110 AFTER the crystals had formed. Yet all my results have been excellent and consistent – insofar as the development anyway. The photographer, however, could always use some improvement!

But my point is, if you have some New HC110, are considering buying it, or have already found crystals in your bottle, don’t panic! It’s alright! Kodak is taking care of it and your photos will turn out wonderfully.

I’ll look forward to a crystal-free New HC110 and am happy to hear that Kodak are aware of the issue and have worked to resolve it. I’d be curious if you have found crystals in your new HC110 and what it’s expiration is. Or if you share my opinions about its reliability or not. In any case, hopefully these photos and comments will instill some confidence for those who have been questioning the change to their classic Kodak developer.

Thanks for reading and happy shooting!

Follow, Favorite, Like, Add, Insult, Contact Johnny Martyr 

     

14 thoughts on “These Photos Were Processed In Kodak’s New HC110 In Spite of The Product’s Single Flaw

  1. Good to hear the crystallization isn’t of any concern. Thanks for posting your findings. I appreciate it. Once this new formulation has been around a few more years it’ll be interesting to see if it proves to have the same longevity as the old stuff. Hopefully it will.

    Take care, Johnny.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Many folks seem really obsessive about the crazy long shelf life of the old HC110, but I really don’t understand why. I go through a liter of developer every couple months. The only way I could see keeping it for multiple years would be if I were rotating many different developers or not shooting with any frequency. I also don’t reuse my developer so that causes some high consumption but how many times can one really safely reuse it?

      Like

      1. I don’t reuse developer either, but I only use concentrated developers meant for one-shot use (like HC-110) and typically at pretty high dilutions.

        The reason I care about shelf life, and I’m sure the reason many others do as well, is because I don’t shoot enough film to rapidly burn through a liter bottle the way you do. It’s not because I don’t care to. Trust me, I wish I could, but film has gotten so absurdly expensive I can’t afford to even shoot a fraction of what I’d like (and it’s getting worse all the time). So, a single bottle of HC-110 would last me a very, very long time.

        If you’re going through a liter of HC-110 every couple of months and always using dilution B, that means you’re using 32 liters of working solution in that time. Assuming you’re using stainless tanks and developing 35mm rolls, that means you’re shooting about 128 rolls of film every couple of months. You’re a pro, so I can see that if you have jobs. But you’ve got to understand most of us are not pros, and can’t offset the cost of film the way you can, which allows you to shoot a great deal amount more than your average amateur.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. P, I’m working on a blog to help film photographers pay for their film amidst these rising costs. I hope it will be useful to you!

        BTW, impressive math! I use Patterson tanks that I discussed a few blogs ago. I guess these use more chemistry because I am definitely less than 128 rolls every couple/three months, more around 60- 80. Although I don’t count. But I am very liberal with chemistry too. I’m not getting every last drop out of the bottles which probably adds up.

        Like

  2. Great article, Johnny! To be honest, I never noticed the crystals until after reading this article, I checked my bottle of the new stuff and sure enough, they’re there.

    One other thing that I’ve noticed which you may not because of how fast you go through your chemicals is that I’ve noticed that the new formula starts out clear, but turns yellow over time. It’s not quite the deep amber of the old stuff, but mine has a strong yellow cast to it now.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Thanks for verifying the color shift. I THOUGHT I’d seen that since opening also, but wasn’t sure if I was imagining it. I think the old formula changed color with age/oxidation also but never tracked it as it was inconsequential. Thought maybe these shifts indicate the degree of aging/oxidation?

      Like

    1. Mike,

      Just a heads up.

      L110 is not half the price of HC-110. L110 comes in pint (16 ounce) bottles, whereas HC-110 comes in liter bottles (33.8 ounces — a little over two pints). So, at $15 per pint, buying L110 is just ~14% savings versus buying the “real stuff,” which costs $35 per liter bottle. It’s effectively $30 versus $35 for basically the same volume, or, a $5 savings. 5/35 = 1/7 = ~14%.

      I prefer L110, not just because it’s a bit less expensive, but also due to the smaller bottles. They’re easier to handle and since I go through developer very slowly they’re beneficial in that regard, too. I’ll keep buying L110 so long as they don’t jack the price up, which is precisely what they did with their EcoPro XTOL clone. It’s now more expensive than official XTOL is so there’s no point in buying it instead of actual XTOL.

      Liked by 2 people

  3. I was happy to use hc110 for a long time as it seemed to work well with about any film and it had good shelf life. Then, a couple years ago, I saw some problems in using the developer and some similar complaints from others. So, I switched to LegacyPro L110 and was happy with that, particularly liking the lack of viscosity. Now, half-way through my current bottle of L110 I’m getting some weak-looking negatives, so I’m throwing out the bottle and getting another one. Was there a problem with the components? Did I not pay adequate attention to avoiding oxidation? Was there a problem with the film, or the camera? My only conclusion at this point is that I’m not the one to ask.

    Like

  4. I had the same problem with crystals but do not now. The product does oxidize as it ages. When I buy the product I store it in 12 oz brown glass bottles. Only the bottle that is being used has any oxidation. If it is enough to bother me I just throw it out and go to the next bottle.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. I got my new bottle of L110 today, so I poured out what was left in the old bottle and found there was a big mushy glob in the bottom. Looks like some of the components precipitated out leaving a weak solution which may account for my poor results. I’ll try giving the bottle a few shakes now and again.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s