Likewise, but forgive me if I seem a little sceptical in that I will believe it when I see it.
Kodak-branded chemicals - official news (they are returning)
-
A
- Thread starter Milpool
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale Plaubel Peco rail 4x5
- Started by Gaston 012
-
Want to Buy Jobo Expert 3006
- Started by OlliJ
-
For Sale Enlarging Lenses - Bundle of 3
- Started by jdart3000
Forum statistics
Likewise, but forgive me if I seem a little sceptical in that I will believe it when I see it.
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2006
- Messages
- 2,188
- Format
- Multi Format
We've always had and still have several different E6 chemistry producers / suppliers:
- Fuji Hunt
- Chugai
- Bellini
- PSI (as OEM manufacturer for other brands)
- JOBO
So even with the interruptions / problems / market exits of Sino Promise and Tetenal I've never had any problems at all to get E6 chemistry to develop my films (and I am shooting a lot of positive film).
Best regards,
Henning
of course the availability of those brands does depend on what market you are located in. Probably easy to find several of those inside the EU. A couple of different ones in the 48 US states. the Kodak brand alone might make for more widespread distribution.
I concur.
Packaged D-76, for example not only has the chemicals for the developer but others to keep them 'fresh' and long package life.
Packaging is the 'pay me a larger premium', that drives up chemistry costs.
Good, often common chemicals are available, in relatively inexpensive volumes, that can make many batches of developers, etc. and you can build a wider selection of chemicals over time, instead of buying an assortment all at once, including things you might never need or want.
Mixing from scratch means you'll likely never have to put off developing film and papers, just because your normal pre- prepared chemistry is "out of stock" or it's maker folds up it's tent.
Lots of photographers here mix their own, so advice is never too far away.
Plus, many "photographic" grade chemicals are commonly and cheap, including Borax, Arm & Hammer Washing Soda, Baking Soda, white vinegar (for acid stop) Vitamin C, Metabisulfate, from beer and wine makers ships, swimming pool supplies, etc, with good online chemical stores.
Equipment needed, an accurate scale, digital or analog, (I use a Gunpowder, balance scale) which can measure in 1/10th grains, of which there are 7000 in a pound, but conversions to ounces or gram solutions are often part of the digital and some analog balance beams.
A set each of SS and plastic measuring spoons. Marked well, glass or plastic cups, measuring cups, a quality COLOUR thermometer, they read higher temperatures.
I like Kodak lab glass tubes but traditional darkroom metal and dial thermometers work well.
Glass and plastic stirring rods, brown glass bottles with plastic lab tops and dishwashing basins, and most importantly, a very good filtered mask, including eye protection, should pretty much get you going strong in the darkroom.
Im sure I've left minor stuff out but a trip to Walmart and the wine shop, should not be too expensive, over time.
Do consider rolling your own chemistries, to ensure you can have what you need when and where you want it.
Cheers.
In my experience... XTOL rocks!
Now I'll need the labs that have dropped XTOL to go BACK to using it. Could be tough... my former lab switched to Ilfotec when there were supply issues with Kodak, and I don't think they'll go back. Bummer.
Dale
Now I'll need the labs that have dropped XTOL to go BACK to using it. Could be tough... my former lab switched to Ilfotec when there were supply issues with Kodak, and I don't think they'll go back. Bummer.
Dale
{Moderator edit - copied from an E6 related thread in the Colour Film sub-forum}
In a related development, many have probably heard the news (first reported in John Sexton's newsletter, then later echoed on Nico's Photo News) that Photo Systems Inc. (PSI) of Dexter, Michigan has became the official licensee and manufacturer of Kodak photo chemistry. In the personal communication shared by John in his newsletter, PSI's CEO Alan Fischer announced that in addition to making Kodak's suite of black and white chemistry available by the end of this year, they have plans to offer C-41 and E-6 chemistry in 2024. This really caught my attention, as E-6 had, prior to the demise of the 5-liter Fuji-Hunt kits in 2021, constituted the bulk of my home developing.
I reached out to PSI via their website asking specifically about what these C-41 and E-6 kits would look like (i.e., separate bleach and fix? Kodak-branded?), and Alan Fischer was kind enough to respond to me personally. He wrote that PSI intends to release non-blix versions of both C-41 and E-6 processes at full strength (i.e., separate bleach and fix, no starters required) in the first quarter of 2024. The kits will be available in 1-liter and 2.5-liter sizes, as well as in 10-liter replenisher-type configurations (I'm assuming these would require starters). PSI already manufactures a lot of photo chemistry, including color chemistry, so they seem well positioned to quickly get things up and running.
I'm still somewhat curious about the branding. I'm assuming these will be Kodak-branded products, but am wondering if they will be Kodak-specific recipes, a la Flexicolor and the circa-2010 Kodak E-6 chemistry. Regardless of the answers, this is all great news. Given that the continued availability of color positive film is linked to the availability of the chemistry needed to develop it, this could/should be a much-needed shot in the arm for analog color photography.
In a related development, many have probably heard the news (first reported in John Sexton's newsletter, then later echoed on Nico's Photo News) that Photo Systems Inc. (PSI) of Dexter, Michigan has became the official licensee and manufacturer of Kodak photo chemistry. In the personal communication shared by John in his newsletter, PSI's CEO Alan Fischer announced that in addition to making Kodak's suite of black and white chemistry available by the end of this year, they have plans to offer C-41 and E-6 chemistry in 2024. This really caught my attention, as E-6 had, prior to the demise of the 5-liter Fuji-Hunt kits in 2021, constituted the bulk of my home developing.
I reached out to PSI via their website asking specifically about what these C-41 and E-6 kits would look like (i.e., separate bleach and fix? Kodak-branded?), and Alan Fischer was kind enough to respond to me personally. He wrote that PSI intends to release non-blix versions of both C-41 and E-6 processes at full strength (i.e., separate bleach and fix, no starters required) in the first quarter of 2024. The kits will be available in 1-liter and 2.5-liter sizes, as well as in 10-liter replenisher-type configurations (I'm assuming these would require starters). PSI already manufactures a lot of photo chemistry, including color chemistry, so they seem well positioned to quickly get things up and running.
I'm still somewhat curious about the branding. I'm assuming these will be Kodak-branded products, but am wondering if they will be Kodak-specific recipes, a la Flexicolor and the circa-2010 Kodak E-6 chemistry. Regardless of the answers, this is all great news. Given that the continued availability of color positive film is linked to the availability of the chemistry needed to develop it, this could/should be a much-needed shot in the arm for analog color photography.
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks for the update. This is great news. These folks have been making chemistry for decades.
Fantastic! Thank you for asking on our behalf and sharing the response.
If PSI could bring back the 5 L E6 kit of Kodak that would be great.
1L kits for Flexicolor C-41 would indeed be a dream come true. I'll believe it when I see it.
This is an interesting comment, especially in light of the recent HC110 “reformulation.” If the chemicals are simply Kodak branded, and not the Kodak proprietary formulas, why bother using Kodak chemistry at all?
I agree, which is why I'm curious about the exact nature of the agreement between Kodak and PSI. In truth, we may be making this more complicated than it needs to be. What Alan Fischer said was that PSI had become the "worldwide licensee for Kodak Professional chemistry." To be a "licensee" implies that you've agreed to manufacture a specific product over which the licensor holds intellectual property rights. In my mind, that's to be distinguished from a simple "branding agreement," in which you manufacture a close-ish approximation of a product and stick another company's logo on the package.
So, for example, "Kodak" presumably still owns (or maybe not?) the patent on the yellow, high-viscosity HC-110 that many long for. If Kodak was going to enter into a licensing agreement with PSI to make HC-110, it wouldn't make any sense for PSI to produce anything other than that exact same stuff, since it's quite clear that several companies have already managed to make their own clones of HC-110 (albeit low-viscosity ones) without the need for such an agreement.
This inexorably leads me to another question: Which Kodak entity actually owns/owned the patents on Kodak photochemistry? Are such patents still in force, or have they expired? I believe it was Kodak Alaris that sold the photochemicals division to Sino Promise. Does that necessarily mean that Kodak Alaris owned the patents? And for that matter, was Sino Promise manufacturing Kodak photochemicals in accordance with the original patented Kodak formulations, or were they simply making clones and sticking the Kodak logo on the outside? I'm betting @MattKing and others have some insight on this.
It depends what the license is on/for. It can be the recipe, it can be just the logo.
MattKing
Moderator
Eastman Kodak retained ownership of the rights all the way through the Kodak Alaris and Sino Promise years - they just licensed them exclusively, and presumably agreed not to compete.
The problem with old vs. new HC-110 isn't one of licensing - it is difficulty of manufacture (of the old stuff).
It is doubtful that the exact methods of manufacture or constituent components are identical between Eastman Kodak produced versions and current versions though.
The problem with old vs. new HC-110 isn't one of licensing - it is difficulty of manufacture (of the old stuff).
It is doubtful that the exact methods of manufacture or constituent components are identical between Eastman Kodak produced versions and current versions though.
I vaguely recall Photo Engineer metioning that one of the precursors to HC-110 could detonate in Some circumstances.
close as I can find quickly in the search is this thread : https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/legacypro-l110-hc-110-equivalent.121345/#post-1607616
Talk about making your photos pop.
If psi brings back the old hc110, I'll still be a kodak man, otherwise I'll move to adox or foma.
Carlos
Carlos
Other than the fact the concentrate lasts forever, what's so special about HC-110? I have an unopened bottle of the old syrup I've been meaning to experiment with but haven't. The comparisons I've seen have shown slightly less speed and more grain (also slightly) than D-76 when developed to the same contrast.
I think the virtue of HC-110 was that it was a very good compromise on speed, Grain, Acuity and contrast, while being a product that you could use even if your development activities were more in Bursts than every day. For the labs and (newspapers back in the day) it could be a substitute for several "Classic" formulas, and was easy to set up a replenished line when the HC-110 replenisher was still available.
We will have to wait and see which version we will be getting. the Watery Liquid does work, but folks are not convinced that it will store for decades even if opened. I know that I was surprised that my Bottle of L110 had a crystal in the bottom , (although I noticed this AFTER getting a batch of negatives that Looked OK - so I may be just being my Normal Paranoid self.)
We will have to wait and see which version we will be getting. the Watery Liquid does work, but folks are not convinced that it will store for decades even if opened. I know that I was surprised that my Bottle of L110 had a crystal in the bottom , (although I noticed this AFTER getting a batch of negatives that Looked OK - so I may be just being my Normal Paranoid self.)
Isn't HC-110 the only commercially available standard developer which is a liquid? Everything else I've looked at has been specialized: DDX (pushing), Ilfosol, Rodinal, SPUR, FX-39 (sharpness). The one I haven't looked at was Clayton F76, but an old thread I found here said it's close/identical to DDX.
Essentially if one needs an easily avilable "liquid D76" there's not much else to recommend.
Essentially if one needs an easily avilable "liquid D76" there's not much else to recommend.
TMax Developer is available in liquid, same shape and size of bottles that photo flo come in. It seems to store ok (had mine for a year so far, still perfect)
TMax Dev keeps very well indeed, at least the formula I used 7 years ago. I kept mine for one year partially opened and it still worked ok. It has 35-45% DEA according to some msds files, so not as thick as HC-110 syrup and there is some water. Although it seems to use SO2/DEA adduct for sulfite ions induction (SO2 is declared as component).
All the labs I know use syrup HC-110 for low volume B/W film development with manual or semiautomatic (Jobo) processing. Excellent keeping properties, versatility (works with any film), cost and short development times (B dilution).
Last edited:
In addition to the more "pragmatic" characteristics mentioned above (e.g., shelf stability, good compromise between speed, grain, acutance, etc.), an often overlooked characteristic of HC-110 is its aesthetic -- i.e., it's one of the few developers still around that has a tendency to produce an upswept curve. This gives prints and scans a boost in contrast, wherein the images have deeper shadows (hence, a slight loss of film speed) and brighter highlights. Some (many) contemporary photographers consider this to be a technical defect of HC-110 and prefer the more S-shaped curves produced by compensating developers (e.g., Xtol, dilute Rodinal, the various pyro developers, etc.).
On paper, an S-shaped curve should be technically "better" owing to its improved preservation of details in the shadows and highlights, but from an aesthetic standpoint, I often find compensating developers to be a little too cautious. They preserve details, yes, but the images they produce can often look flat and lifeless, and they almost always require the reintroduction of lots of contrast at the printing or scanning stage to produce an appealing photograph. Boosting the contrast "in post" can be easily done, of course, but the end result sometimes looks a little wonky to my eyes (something about the upper midtones not looking right).
Except it is more specialised than people understand - it was designed to substitute for DK-60a (dilutions A & B) and DK-50 (C, D, E) - the Kodak graphic arts data materials of the era of its introduction literally states the substitutions (there is some divergence over time since then, but the reasons are effectively summarised by Adox in the comments about Ilfotech) - and none of those are as general purpose as a fine-grain developer like D-76. D-76/ ID-11, Ilfosol 3, Xtol/ XT-3 far outperform it for general photographic usage, but there are effectively two hold-out audiences for which divergent features of HC/ HC-110 have appeal (leaving aside the tiny number who use it for GA applications, and who are generally knowledgeable enough to understand that you can mix up DK-60a or DK-50 instead) - firstly, those with relatively high rates of throughput (but who don't want to run a replenished system) for whom the high concentration has utility, and those with extremely low throughput for whom the non-aqueous nature of HC/HC-110 is useful. Both roles can be substituted. The problem is more that people are rather firmly wedded to 'Ansel Adams and his followers used/ recommended it, so it must be good for everything, even in the face of evidence to the contrary'
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |