New HC-110 Formula

[mohmad khatab]

Hello esteemed experts.
Actually I couldn’t get the recipe (HC110), I have some chemical raw materials.
Therefore, I found a recipe that might be close to (HC110) which is (Kalogen), but I committed a photochemical crime, when I started preparing the recipe, I was surprised that the metol stock was finished with me and found the package completely empty, so I did By adding (CD2) instead, and the rest of the other elements are completed.
The result is a very powerful developer that needs to be diluted in a ratio of 1: 100 and still needs to be tamed.
I think he will live long, I think.
What do you think of that heinous crime.
I think it is a very nice crime.
I am a nice and respectable criminal.

 

[Pixophrenic]

It is of course nothing like the HC-110, old or new. How long ago did you prepare this solution and what is its color now?

 

[pentaxuser]

It is of course nothing like the HC-110, old or new. How long ago did you prepare this solution and what is its color now?

I don't think Mohmad has told us enough to make that judgement, has he? It might be interesting to see his ingredients and then judge the similarities and differences between his developer and HC110

pentaxuser

 

[Lachlan Young]

Hello esteemed experts.
Actually I couldn’t get the recipe (HC110), I have some chemical raw materials.
Therefore, I found a recipe that might be close to (HC110) which is (Kalogen), but I committed a photochemical crime, when I started preparing the recipe, I was surprised that the metol stock was finished with me and found the package completely empty, so I did By adding (CD2) instead, and the rest of the other elements are completed.
The result is a very powerful developer that needs to be diluted in a ratio of 1: 100 and still needs to be tamed.
I think he will live long, I think.
What do you think of that heinous crime.
I think it is a very nice crime.
I am a nice and respectable criminal.

You are extremely unlikely to find the recipe for HC-110 readily in the public domain, nor should you be attempting to manufacture it outside of an appropriately equipped laboratory environment as in its traditional/ original form it uses some potentially seriously harmful ingredients. And more to the point, it has never (as far as is known) contained metol. You may have made a functional film developer (not difficult) but it is not under any circumstances HC-110.

 

[mohmad khatab]

How do you differenciate the old from the new formula? From the name of the manufacturer (Kodak Alaris)?

Hey guys.
What is the problem now?
This is the amazing developer ,, found in companionship.
The first bottle is the primary developer, and the second bottle is the working solution (24 ml +980 deionized water),
- The attached image, is a picture of my mother, was tested quickly (24 ml + 276 water). Developed in 3 minutes at 21 ° C. (Regardless of whether the camera is sick or the lighting is poor, it is only a test).
Formula is:
700 ml deionized water 52 ° C
(CD2) .........................13.5g
(HQ)...........................53.0g
(sod.sufite) ................180.g
(Tri sod. phospate)......35.g
(pot.bromide) ..............9.g
(KOH)............................4.g
Inti fog.........................0.2g
Water up to one liter.
The solution was filled in a glass bottle for a week tightly closed.
After a week, the solution was heated to 60 ° C, stirred well, and filtered with a coffee filter.
The dilution mentioned in the original recipe is 1:11, develop 3 minutes 21 ° C.
Experiments have proven that the dilution should be greater than 1: 50 - and experiments are still underway to determine the dilution ratio, temperature and time.
Important note: everything is mixed in order completely except for (CD2)
(CD2) was dissolved in 50 ml cold water separately and added at the end and not at the beginning after the temperature of the solution became at room temperature, and this is in order to avoid the oil stains that will be produced from (CD2) when it is mixed At somewhat elevated temperatures, it produces sebum spots that can never be controlled.

 

[Donald Qualls]

I don't see anything there that would produce the "syrup" consistency of HC-110. I've been a user of this Kodak elixir for many years, and believe me, i wish the formula were public, because Kodak can change it without warning, and someday they may even quit making it entirely.

Fortunately, I can still make D-23, D-72, and D-76 from ingredients (and the replenishers for D-23 and D-76), and if I want long-lasting syrup, I can go dig up the formula for PC-TEA -- Phenidone, Vitamin C, and triethanolamine, just those three ingredients. Most of the time, though, for film I'll just use Parodinal (made from acetaminophen, aka paracetamol) -- if I can find lye again locally.

 

[cmacd123]

I don't see anything there that would produce the "syrup" consistency of HC-110. I've been a user of this Kodak elixir for many years, and believe me, i wish the formula were public, because Kodak can change it without warning, and someday they may even quit making it entirely.

actually the last time they changed suppliers the formula was changed to a non syrupy constancy like Legacy pro L-110.

HC-110 syrup is unique that as supplied it has no water in it.

Ron the Photo engineer did mention at one time that the many of the steps involved in making the syrup used chemicals that were so unstable that there was a risk of explosion, until they were all combined. (last two ingredients apparently reacted to produce the developer after the were mixed together.) None of the ingredients are apparently used in any other product and so Kodak or their contractor would make then from scratch.

it is still up in the air if they new formula from Kodak Professional will have the stability of the traditional formula.

the proposed formula listed above using more of less conventional ingredients may work well, but has no relationship with HC-110

 

[mohmad khatab]

I don't see anything there that would produce the "syrup" consistency of HC-110. I've been a user of this Kodak elixir for many years, and believe me, i wish the formula were public, because Kodak can change it without warning, and someday they may even quit making it entirely.

Fortunately, I can still make D-23, D-72, and D-76 from ingredients (and the replenishers for D-23 and D-76), and if I want long-lasting syrup, I can go dig up the formula for PC-TEA -- Phenidone, Vitamin C, and triethanolamine, just those three ingredients. Most of the time, though, for film I'll just use Parodinal (made from acetaminophen, aka paracetamol) -- if I can find lye again locally.

Excuse me ..
I did not fully understand what you mean.
Are you angry because of the change in the formula ,,?
Or you do not want to adopt that formula and say that you have many alternatives and do not need that formula.
But you did not try the (criminal innovation) that I provided.
Trust me ,, you will find it very cool.
You might like, man, why not. . Think about it.
Dear Colleagues,
I wish I lived next to your homes. At that time, I would have given each colleague a free gift of those wonderful recipes and formulas that I prepare with criminal methods.
If there is any colleague living in Egypt, I hope he will contact me so that I can give him many valuable gifts.
Calbi-49
FX-10
AGFA - neutol-wa
Kalogen
Gevart- G.242
D-11
ID-19
ID-3

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

- The attached image, is a picture of my mother, was tested quickly (24 ml + 276 water).

Mohmad, this attachment is missing in your post. Can you please add it again?

Coming to your formula, would be interesting to know how you arrived at it. It is not the same as Kalogen (Jerry Koch's formula) with CD2 substituting metol.

 

[mohmad khatab]

Mohmad, this attachment is missing in your post. Can you please add it again?

Coming to your formula, would be interesting to know how you arrived at it. It is not the same as Kalogen (Jerry Koch's formula) with CD2 substituting metol.

Yes ,, my mother’s photo, the image is large and refused to upload. I do not know what to do .
- This is the formula (Kalogen), but only (Metol) has been replaced by (CD2). Perhaps you are right, I think this is a very fundamental change, and we need to call this formula a new name, perhaps we call it (KCD2) Why not?
The situation was coincidental.
Maybe I will try to take another picture and develop it with this crazy developer and attach it to you ,,,

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

Yes ,, my mother’s photo, the image is large and refused to upload. I do not know what to do .

You can reduce the size of the image in any photo editor and upload it.

- This is the formula (Kalogen), but only (Metol) has been replaced by (CD2).

Curious to know from where you got your Kalogen formula. I've brewed Kalogen a few times using Jerry Koch's formula detailed here:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/peterbcarter/33875791150/in/album-72157644217980207/
Your formula is very different.

 

[BradS]

...and other than being a highly concentrated film developer it certainly has no relation to HC-110 new or old.

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

Kalogen, the developer Mohmad modified to use CD-2, is a Rodinal substitute. Jerry Koch was quite fond of this developer and modified the original century old Kalogen formula to make it last longer. It was never considered to be a HC-110 substitute.

 

[mohmad khatab]

...and other than being a highly concentrated film developer it certainly has no relation to HC-110 new or old.

I apologize, guys.
This is a completely new formula ,,, maybe it is a modification of the formula (Kalogen)
It has no relationship with (HC110) nor has it any relationship with (Rodinal) at all,
It is just a crazy formula. You can try it, maybe it will give better results than HC110 and Rodinal, why not.

 

[Donald Qualls]

I'm sorry, I didn't realize Kodak had changed HC-110 in the roughly fifteen years since I last bought it. Apparently it no longer comes in syrup form (so-called because it has a consistency much like maple syrup or corn syrup) -- what they sell now is what I'd have called stock solution -- dilute 1+31 to make Dilution B. What I've used (and pretty sure I still have some syrup stored away) would have needed a first dilution to get from the bottle to the stock solution (and I never used stock solution after high school in the 1970s, always measured with a syringe and diluted direct to working solution -- the syrup lasts a lot better than stock).

Still, Kalogen has nothing to do with HC-110. HC-110 that I know was a phenidone/hydroquinone developer with a hint of ammonia (grain solvent) and diethanolamine (the syrup base), a strong anti-fog of some kind, and a concentrate life in full, sealed container measured in geological time. No metol at all. Seems likely that what Kodak sells now is approximately the same stuff, pre-diluted to stock strength (the only reason I can see they'd do that is a change in formula to remove the slightly carcinogenic diethanolamine so they can continue to ship to California and possibly New York), or to cut back on shelf life to increase repeat business. The latter would likely have the opposite effect with knowledgeable users, so it's probably a regulation-mandated formula change. For myself, however, if I can't get it as syrup, I'll use up what I have in storage (if it's still good) and then use something else -- results were always quite similar to D-76, but I've been wanting to try XTOL, so this might be a good time.

 

[MattKing]

I'm sorry, I didn't realize Kodak had changed HC-110 in the roughly fifteen years since I last bought it. Apparently it no longer comes in syrup form (so-called because it has a consistency much like maple syrup or corn syrup) -- what they sell now is what I'd have called stock solution -- dilute 1+31 to make Dilution B. What I've used (and pretty sure I still have some syrup stored away) would have needed a first dilution to get from the bottle to the stock solution (and I never used stock solution after high school in the 1970s, always measured with a syringe and diluted direct to working solution -- the syrup lasts a lot better than stock).

Still, Kalogen has nothing to do with HC-110. HC-110 that I know was a phenidone/hydroquinone developer with a hint of ammonia (grain solvent) and diethanolamine (the syrup base), a strong anti-fog of some kind, and a concentrate life in full, sealed container measured in geological time. No metol at all. Seems likely that what Kodak sells now is approximately the same stuff, pre-diluted to stock strength (the only reason I can see they'd do that is a change in formula to remove the slightly carcinogenic diethanolamine so they can continue to ship to California and possibly New York), or to cut back on shelf life to increase repeat business. The latter would likely have the opposite effect with knowledgeable users, so it's probably a regulation-mandated formula change. For myself, however, if I can't get it as syrup, I'll use up what I have in storage (if it's still good) and then use something else -- results were always quite similar to D-76, but I've been wanting to try XTOL, so this might be a good time.

Donald,
The old stuff you have (unless it was the European version) is also stuff that requires a 1 + 31 dilution to achieve dilution B.
The instructions for HC-110 describe two methods of handling. For dilution B, low volume users are directed to dilute 1 + 31 straight from concentrate. High volume users - such as commercial labs with large tanks - are directed to make a 1 + 7 dilution stock solution and then, for use, further dilute the stock 1 + 3.
The high volume users were most likely to buy the much larger package sizes - cubitainers even - and the intervening stock dilution makes sense for their workflow.
Historically, the stock solution has a much shorter storage life than the extraordinary storage life of the old version of the concentrste. It was primarily (from the perspective of this thread) that extraordinary storage life that both set HC-110 apart from others, and made it complex and expensive to manufacture.
The current product probably won't offer that extraordinary storage life - but we won't really know for a few years whether the actual storage life for it will be much longer than the "best before" date.
The other feature of HC-110 - and the real reason that it was initially developed - is that it is usable in a variety of different dilutions, and that the different dilutions perform in different ways.
The idea behind it was that it would enable commercial labs to switch from the various different developers they were using to one, easily handled and economic liquid product, by using a dilution that offered performance that would replicate their existing developer. It was particularly useful for labs that offered different lines to meet the needs of different customers.
Until very recently Kodak also offered HC-110 replenisher for those labs that preferred the economy and stability of a replenishment regime. The current, 2017 datasheet still refers to the replenisher. I used that replenisher with dilution E for years, but relatively recently switched mainly to X-Tol, which is a lot simpler to use with replenishment.

 

[mohmad khatab]

Donald,
The old stuff you have (unless it was the European version) is also stuff that requires a 1 + 31 dilution to achieve dilution B.
The instructions for HC-110 describe two methods of handling. For dilution B, low volume users are directed to dilute 1 + 31 straight from concentrate. High volume users - such as commercial labs with large tanks - are directed to make a 1 + 7 dilution stock solution and then, for use, further dilute the stock 1 + 3.
The high volume users were most likely to buy the much larger package sizes - cubitainers even - and the intervening stock dilution makes sense for their workflow.
Historically, the stock solution has a much shorter storage life than the extraordinary storage life of the old version of the concentrste. It was primarily (from the perspective of this thread) that extraordinary storage life that both set HC-110 apart from others, and made it complex and expensive to manufacture.
The current product probably won't offer that extraordinary storage life - but we won't really know for a few years whether the actual storage life for it will be much longer than the "best before" date.
The other feature of HC-110 - and the real reason that it was initially developed - is that it is usable in a variety of different dilutions, and that the different dilutions perform in different ways.
The idea behind it was that it would enable commercial labs to switch from the various different developers they were using to one, easily handled and economic liquid product, by using a dilution that offered performance that would replicate their existing developer. It was particularly useful for labs that offered different lines to meet the needs of different customers.
Until very recently Kodak also offered HC-110 replenisher for those labs that preferred the economy and stability of a replenishment regime. The current, 2017 datasheet still refers to the replenisher. I used that replenisher with dilution E for years, but relatively recently switched mainly to X-Tol, which is a lot simpler to use with replenishment.

Is the formula unknown (confidential)?
Or is it impossible to prepare it manually? Even if it was in the hands of an experienced and veteran chemist?
I didn't quite understand what that mysterious formula was?

 

[MattKing]

The classic formula is both confidential and impossible to prepare manually.
It isn't so much the active parts of the developer that are the challenge - after all the purpose of HC-110 was to mimic a whole bunch of other developers by varying the dilution.
Classic HC-110 was designed to withstand long term storage and to give predictable variations of activity and performance when dilution is varied. It is these features that require the confidential design and difficult and expensive modes of manufacture.
It is quite likely that the very recent new version of HC-110 will not offer the legendary long storage life that was a feature of classic HC-110 - the new MSDS indicates major changes in the materials that permitted the former water free product. For that reason, it may now be possible for more manufacturers to come closer to emulating the current product.

 

[mohmad khatab]

The classic formula is both confidential and impossible to prepare manually.
It isn't so much the active parts of the developer that are the challenge - after all the purpose of HC-110 was to mimic a whole bunch of other developers by varying the dilution.
Classic HC-110 was designed to withstand long term storage and to give predictable variations of activity and performance when dilution is varied. It is these features that require the confidential design and difficult and expensive modes of manufacture.
It is quite likely that the very recent new version of HC-110 will not offer the legendary long storage life that was a feature of classic HC-110 - the new MSDS indicates major changes in the materials that permitted the former water free product. For that reason, it may now be possible for more manufacturers to come closer to emulating the current product.

Okay .
I did not understand what the meaning of the symbol (MSDS) is, I don’t know what it means.

 

[cmacd123]

Okay .
I did not understand what the meaning of the symbol (MSDS) is, I don’t know what it means.

MSDS == Material Safety data sheet.

manufacturers are required in Canada and the US as well as europe to provide a sheet that lists the hazards of any product sold for commercial use.. (in Canada this may be labeled WHMIS - workplace Hazardous Material Information system which is also responsible for the bold dashed line seen on some chemical packages) ) Generally this has a listing on the chemicals that would require precautions to be taken, details of flammability and other hazards.

downloading the sheet often hints as to the active ingredients although the sheet may only hint at the formula.

 

[mohmad khatab]

MSDS == Material Safety data sheet.

manufacturers are required in Canada and the US as well as europe to provide a sheet that lists the hazards of any product sold for commercial use.. (in Canada this may be labeled WHMIS - workplace Hazardous Material Information system which is also responsible for the bold dashed line seen on some chemical packages) ) Generally this has a listing on the chemicals that would require precautions to be taken, details of flammability and other hazards.

downloading the sheet often hints as to the active ingredients although the sheet may only hint at the formula.

God bless you ,,
Yes, I know that document in one phrase (Data Sheet).
But it seems to have another, more comprehensive and detailed name.
Thank you for this explanation.
- Generally, I am not interested in preparing this developer, as (in my view) alternatives are available.
- I am currently making headaches at home, I cannot go out, I do not have any black and white rolls, when I can buy black and white rolls, I will do accurate tests on the modified Kalogen developer I have prepared.
- Perhaps, perhaps, we can get from this developer amazing results. Why not, so if we look closely at the functionality and properties of CD2, I think it is a very great development component and has not received the attention and appreciation it deserves. He may be able to produce negatives of no less than HC110 quality, why not? Let's wait and see
- The CD2 component is the main component used in the process (ECP2D) and it is the process that produces the final movie movie that we pay money to watch in the cinema (on the silver screen).

 

[cmacd123]

the MSDS for HC-110 (new version) is available from https://www.freestylephoto.biz/stat...s_SDS_US_English_KODAK_HC-110_Dev_1058692.pdf

 

[DREW WILEY]

I do know someone who has replicated the original HC-110 formula for personal use; but he has access to a full research facility. It is probably impossible to reproduce in a basic home darkroom. Among the great features of HC-110 were its tremendous keeping quality in concentrate, and it's ability to work over a very wide range of dilutions. I haven't tried the new formula yet.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Hmm. I see diethylene glycol, that should make it syrupy, phenidone, hydroqinone, borax, potassium hydroxide (so probably the metaborate as an end product) -- clearly not the same as the old HC-110. The diethanolamine is still present.

We'll see how it keeps as concentrate, but it's clearly not the same as the old version. And this is exactly what Ansel Adams wrote about becoming dependent on commercial developer vs. mixing your own from base chemicals -- the latter means you 're in control, can always have consistent process. The vendor can change the formula of commercial products (and did, with HC-110, on several occasions with far less fanfare than this time) and change the photographer's darkroom results.

I plan to make my own D-72 for prints, rather than buy Dektol. I already make my own Parodinal, every bit as good as R-09 or other Rodinal work-alikes (don't know that it lasts like Rodinal concentrate did, but I've kept it for over a year, to the color of cola, and it still worked the same). Get me a formula that works like XTOL, and I'll be done with commercial developers for black and white.

 

[bnxvs]

If we abstact of the nuances of formulation, it seems to me that there is nothing supernatural in the HC-110. In my humble opinion, this is a completely ordinary phenidone-hydroquinone developer, concentrated on an anhydrous basis. Its fundamental difference from many other concentrates based on organic base and solvents - is the use of the sulfur complex (IV) of diethanolamine (DEA-SO2) ... Which acts as a source of sulfite ions (apparently not only this function, possibly more - silver solvent and part of pH regulator).
Naturally, this is the main problem in the preparation of such a concentrate at home, since it is not easy to obtain DEA-SO2. But it is quite possible. Bubbling DEA with sulfur dioxide, obtained from sulfite treated with concentrated acid (H2SO4), could probably give an acceptable result.
Naturally, it will be necessary to find out the equivalent ratios of replacing ordinary sodium sulfite with such a DEA complex, but this is apparently a matter of experimentation. As well as the regulation pH of solutions.
Unfortunately, in my country it is quite difficult to obtain DEA for personal experiments (and TEA is not suitable, since it has a much lower ability to form a complex with sulfur dioxide - almost three times) and I can't check these my assumptions.