POLL Results: Best Developer for Black and White film? Rodinal vs HC110 vs D76 vs XTOL

[@willysheepskin]

I back Rodinal! HC110 always seems too smooth and clean for me, ideally I reckon ID11 is tha one, but Rodinal also suits me nicely.

[@ribsy]

I feel you. I think ima really like rodinal once I give it a go. Fan of the grunge! Haha

[@stevetaylor8099]

My choice would be Xtol because it is a good combination of sharpness, tonality and fine grain. I think its a major advantage that Xtol is less toxic than other developers. I am actually using Bellini Ecofilm at the moment, which is said to be a liquid Xtol and I am getting very good results with it diluting the stock solution 1+3, so its quite economical as well - I get 32 rolls from 1 litre of concentrate.

[@ribsy]

Yea I still need to try it!

[@kevinbrowne3089]

I am thinking about moving to SE Asia and wanted to be able to make my own developer due to shipping costs. An enthusiast experimented with borax water, Vit C and Phenidone in propylene glycol. He advocates use for Ilford delta 100, the Kentmere films and HP 5. Others reported success with alternative film stocks. It is really simple and also has a long shelf life. I crunched the numbers and considering phenadine costs about 13 bucks for a bottle (50 g), you can run 2000 rolls of film. Adding other ingredients it is less than 3 Pennies a roll. It is a an xtol home brew. Search engine PC-512 Borax. I’m going to give it a shot! Will use for t grain film and likely HC 110 for classics. Check it out.

[@SinaFarhat]

To be honest with you there is two parts to your question: 1. What look and grain structure are you after? 2. Are you after a developer that fits as many films as possible and has many available development times? If so I recommend d76! However you need to find the one that works for you and your frames! So the best way is to test out the four developers with a test roll of film! That is probably not the answer you are looking for but to be honest I can't read your mind and also we have different expectations of how we want our negatives to look like! One last tip regarding d76: D76 stock at 9-10 minutes works great for odd rolls with no official or hard to find dev times, I find that 9-10 minutes works great for iso 50-400 range!

[@ribsy]

I dunno! Haha, but I do like grain 😃

[@boerge0712]

Dann aber unverdünnt. 1+1 benötigt mehr Zeit.

[@erikboon6549]

I was recently given a bottle of Rodinal which is at least 40 years old. Still works as new. For me Rodinal, or R09 which is the same formula, works most economical in combination with Fomapan 100 bulk film doing stand development at 1:100.

[@ribsy]

Holy shit 40 years?!? That’s wild haha

[@seralegre]

that's like 2$ per roll included development?

[@erikboon6549]

@@seralegre Indeed, I think that's about it. Fomapan 100 is relatively easy on your fixer as well so you can reuse your fixer for a lot of films. You could also calculate the cost of reusable cartridges and a bulk loader but I didn't go that far.

[@amberlion4896]

Like most people from your poll I use HC-110. It’s the only one I ever used. Highly concentrated, cost effective. Btw. I love that format of short engaging video. Great work 👍

[@ribsy]

Thanks for watching! Not looking to waste anyone’s time 😃

[@Resgerr]

X-tol is a good all rounder but you do need a 5ltr container and keep it air tight. I used it one to one started last February and have just finished it( feb 2021). I didn’t have enough for two 35mm films so found that I could use it 3:1, turned out fine, as I was using it every so often I changed down to smaller bootlegs and used marbles to bring it up to get rid of air also I squeezed the bottle. Bear in mine I’m only little and it never got exhausted even with my handling. I am going to buy more. Watch out the price some places are dear don’t pay more than £15, some are charging @£30!

[@ribsy]

That’s a lot of volume! That alone makes me want to stay away from it

[@Resgerr]

@@ribsy it did at first for me but it lasted a year doing an average of a film a week- bulk film of about 20-15 frames and a couple of 120 rolls. That is where the HC110 is better as I think you just draw with a syringe/ dropper the amount needed to make up for the development

[@danhill2045]

I first encountered HC110 In my college photo lab, around 1966. We used it for 4x5 negatives, but found it too grainy for 35mm, for which we used D76. I've never heard it called anything but HC one-ten.

[@ribsy]

nice

[@Vintage35MM]

H C One Ten. That’s what I’ve always known it being pronounced as.

[@nickfanzo]

Hc110 is a fantastic developer but unfortunately a lot of film shooters these days don’t test and go deep to find their proper exposures and development for their equipment, which varies extremely. Simply just developing blind without calculating tests, is futile. Now the key to achieving consistently good negatives is the correct placement of your shadows when exposing the film and ascertaining the correct development time for achieving good separation without losing the highlights. A simple and relatively quick way to way to pin all this down for the future is to do the following (WARNING: reading these instructions is more time consuming and a lot more laborious than actually doing it!!): 1. Find a scene with with a good range of tones 2. Using the box speed, meter the darkest area in which you wish to retain shadow detail 3. Move the camera so that you are only photographing this shadow area 4. From the meter's reading close down the aperture by 2 stops or increase the shutter speed by two stops and then expose 6 frames at: the given exposure then +1 stop, +2 stops, -1 stop, -2 stops and -3 stops less than the meter has indicated 5. Process the film 6. Using the frame that was exposed at -3 stops less than the meter indicated (which should be practically clear but will have received lens flair and fogging - i.e a real world maximum black rather than an exposed piece of film that has processing fog)and do a test strip to find out what is the minimum exposure to achieve maximum black - Print must be fully dry before assessing this 7. Do another test strip with the first exposure being what you have selected for achieving maximum black minus your dry-down compensation then plus 1 second, 2 seconds, etc 8. The time that achieves full black inclusive of compensation for dry-down is you minimum exposure to achieve maximum black for all future printing sessions - print must be fully dry before assessing 9 You now know the minimum time to achieve full black inclusive of exposure reduction to accommodate dry-down 10. Using this minimum exposure to achieve maximum black exposure time, expose all of the other test frames. 11. The test print that has good shadow detail indicates which exposure will render good shadow detail and achieve maximum black and provides you with your personal EI for the tested film/developer combination 12 If the negative exposed at the meter reading gives good shadows, your EI is (when metering shadows where you wish to retain good detail) the box speed (i.e. for 400 film you need to set your meter at 400) 13. If the negative exposed at +1 stop more than the meter reading gives good shadows, your EI is (when metering shadows where you wish to retain good detail) 1/2 the box speed (i.e. for 400 film you need to set your meter at 200) 14. If the negative exposed at +2 stops more than the meter reading gives good shadows, you EI is (when metering shadows where you wish to retain good detail) 1/4 box speed (i.e. for 400 film you need to set your meter at 100) 15. If the negative exposed at -1 stop less than the meter reading gives good shadows, you EI is (when metering shadows where you wish to retain good detail) double the box speed (i.e. for 400 film you need to set your meter at 800) 16. If the negative exposed at -2 stop less than the meter reading gives good shadows, you EI is (when metering shadows where you wish to retain good detail) 4x the box speed (i.e. for 400 film you need to set your meter at 1600) You have now fixed your personal EI but there is one more testing stage to go. 1. Find a scene with with a good range of tones 2. Using your EI, meter the brightest area in which you wish to retain highlight detail (but not the sky) 3. Move the camera so that you are only photographing this highlight area 4. From the meter's reading open up the aperture by 3 stops or decrease the shutter speed by three stops 5. Expose the whole roll at this setting 6. In the darkroom, process one third of the film for recommended development time 7. When dry put negative in the enlarger and make a three section test strip exposing for half the minimum black time established earlier, for the established minimum black time and for double the minimum black time. 8. Process print and dry it. 9. If the section of the test strip exposed for 1/2 the minimum black time gives bright highlights with a trace of detail then the film requires 20% more development 10. If the section of the test strip exposed for the minimum black time gives bright highlights with a trace of detail then the film is correctly developed 11. If the section of the test strip exposed for double the minimum black time gives bright highlights with a trace of detail then the film requires 20% less development 12. You can use the rest of the exposed highlight test film to fine tune the development time. YES - it is VERY boring but . . .for the investment of minimal materials and a few of hours you will have pinned down so many variables that it is really worth doing. Now back in the real world, all you ever need to do in future is meter the shadows that you wish to retain good detail with meter set at your EI and then stop down the aperture 2 stops or increase the shutter speed by 2 stops. In the darkroom start your first test print with the minimum exposure to achieve maximum black (inclusive of dry-down compensation) and go from there.

[@ribsy]

What you described is cool if that’s what you are into. But going with the flow is def not useless - some people care more about actually creating images. All preferences are ok and worthwhile

[@nickfanzo]

@@ribsy what I explained above was taught to us in photography school to know how to create consistent negatives and also know how long of an exposure you need in the enlarger without wasting paper on multiple test prints all the time. After working out what I mentioned above, we could make a print by just guessing the exposure times. We could make 50 prints in a day from knowing the exposing instinctively. That doesn’t mean we didn’t care about actually making pictures. Knowing is power, you can always break rules later. After all that’s what Picasso did, after he learned to be a master first.

[@EdmundKBoateng]

I started with D76 and really loved the results I got from it but then I switched to HC110 which I’m currently using but I’m really thinking of switching back to D76 even though its really hard working with it especially when mixing. Great video keep em coming brother

[@ribsy]

Yea I think hc100 is the move. Thanks for watching 🤟🏽

[@jimgraves4197]

Try them all and see which one YOU like. I like Rodinal, HC-110 and Ilfosol 3

[@ribsy]

I like the suggestion! But I can’t buy them all - don’t have enough space lol

[@jasonphilbrook4332]

Pyrocat HD or HDC is my goto. If I had to pick one from your list, D76 because of plentiful good experience with it.

[@ribsy]

I need to research pyrocat! I’m intrigued haha

[@ronmiller7248]

Agree on pyrocat-hd, been using it exclusively for a decade after using all the others on the list. Having 1 developer for the 6 4x5 films i use that is forgiving helps a lot. Usually print 16x20 and often larger and always happy. Well, not happy with it on foma 200 but i rarely shoot that for landscapes.

[@thecoreelementsmoto]

I used d76 for most of college its super flexible with all the film stocks. Hc110 has been my fave lately.

[@ribsy]

yea! hc110 seems to be the most popular nowadays!

[@Chrizzowski]

I use EcoPro Legacy ... basically an off brand Xtol. Same over the top 5L batch size but I've yet to run into an exhausted developer, even when I was 1yr+ into my first batch. Have seen some comments that the spontaneous exhaustion was more to do with their 1L kits and that's why they pulled them, or maybe the EcoPro is slightly reformulated to not have those issues.

[@ribsy]

Interesting - never heard of it!

[@wallywo7392]

Just to say a big thanks, I've just started listening to your podcast, crackin stuff, loved it. Thanks for your hard work.

[@ribsy]

Amazing - thanks for the support! Really appreciate it 😃

[@RonEMarks]

I use all of those developers. Xtol yields great results on every film I have used. Rodinal is my next choice but for only 120 and 4x5. I don't like it on 35mm regardless of the emulsion. I also have a recipe that I use Xtol and 5ml of Rodinal together! :)

[@ribsy]

Thanks for the info!

[@theblankcanvasfilms]

Rodinal is perfect if you shoot a lot of different film stocks and ISOs. You can even to an extent mix the ISO you shoot on a roll of film and stand develop in Rodinal and get useable results! Lasts forever and is very cheap. I always stand develop at 1:100 dilution, only takes 5-7mls per roll. It will not get you the finest grain results, but personally I like the grain.

[@ribsy]

Yea I like grain too. I’m excited to try rodinal

[@LearnFilmPhotography]

Of all developers out there, X-Tol is what I'm the most excited to try. It's the last developer to be developed with all the funding power and knowledge Kodak used to have, and it's supposedly the greatest developer based on over 100 years of film developing science - at least, according to Anchell and Troop (The guys who wrote the Film Developing Cookbook). DD-X is by far my favourite right now, but it's expensive. X-Tol is supposed to be even better and more environmentally friendly being based on Ascorbic acid (vitamin C) rather than metol, hydroquinone, or phenidone. I just wish it were a liquid concentrate or at least in powders to make 1L solutions instead of just the 5L.

[@ribsy]

Yea I’m intrigued by xtol

[@b6983832]

I use mostly HC-110. Also Rodinal once in a while.

[@ribsy]

nice

[@qnetx]

I prefer D-76 1:1 over HC-110 1:31 because I like finer grain. I use Rodinal either 1:50 or 1:100 stand development for use with very expired or unknown films.

[@ribsy]

thanks for watching!

[@Uwe_Ludolf]

So a comment after your question on 1:11 For many different films Rodinal might not be the best option, with higher iso films the results might get quite grainy. That leaves us with HC110, D76 and X-tol... All three are good for your use and for many different films you can find times on the massive dev chart. HC110: long shelf life, hight dilutions so economical in use. Thanks to some ingredient (I think potassium bromide?) it works good with very old film, you'll see less base fog. But based on what I have seen I don't always the results. X-tol I think the most recent Kodak developer, good developer but shot shelf life. The last period there have quite some batches with problems, so I would never buy X-tol, but the Foma equivalent: Fomadon Excel D76: second oldest after Rodinal but still the benchmark where many other developers are compared to. I use it a lot and am happy with the results. Also here Kodak had some issues, that's why I always get ID-11. ID-11 also is available in 5L packages which can make it cheaper than D76 Anyhow, with my own opinion included I would recommend ID-11/D76

[@ribsy]

Thanks for the info. Yea, I think HC110 is the move

[@Uwe_Ludolf]

@@ribsy Ilfotec HC is almost the same. I don't know if there are problems with HC110 at the moment, I have read that it also changed a bit after the chemicals were taken over by a Chinese company. So you have EK producing film, KA selling it and a third (Chinese) company for chemicals. Ilford is one company....

[@jongmassey]

Just used up a pouch of R09 I bought in 2009 the other week, still worked great!

[@joeltunnah]

@@mtryambon wtf?

[@ribsy]

haha amazing! glad it worked

[@ribsy]

lol ?

[@ribsy]

haha dunno

[@stevenovosel2498]

XTOL is my favorite, I use it for everything. Rodinal would be my second choice. I've used the others quite a bit too, but the versatility of XTOL wins me over. And I am like you, I like to shoot a lot of different films.

[@ribsy]

Xtol sounds good but I can’t keep that much volume around

[@eyewandersfoto]

@@ribsy Sure you can. Replenishment system. Or even straight-shot, divide bottles into 1L or so and leave no air. They'll up to a year if left sealed (despite what the data sheets say).

[@karlmatthias2698]

XTOL. You need to have five liters sitting around but it works awesome with all film stocks, has a nice mellow grain in most films, and looks really good. I have all the developers in your list and this is the one I use 90% of the time.

[@ribsy]

thats alot of volume! a bit of a dealbreaker for me

[@acmhc8]

@@ribsy If I remember correctly the batch of xtol will last at least 2 months before degrading but ymmv. Xtol would be my choice as well. It was basically the last black and white developer Kodak ever created so it represents some of the most advanced photochemical tech ever created. It has a bit less grain than D-76, better shadow detail, and you can dilute it to modify its properties as well.

[@Adrian-wd4rn]

@@acmhc8 If you do stock solution yeah, it's about 2-3 months. Or you can divvy it up into 5 one liter bottles and have it keep for longer.

[@eyewandersfoto]

@@Adrian-wd4rn ​ @Ribsy This. Many people use it 1:1 or 1:2 or replenishment (best IMO) divied as such and get 8+ months from a batch without noticeable exhaustion. Replenishment is kinda forever (with some caveats).

[@jonnoMoto]

My rodinal bottle (Rollei R09) is about 15yrs old. Still good. Lots of crystals rattling around in the bottom. Id only recommend rodinal if you like grain, shoot slow films, or shoot larger than 35mm.

[@jimgraves4197]

In the event of a global extinction event, all that would be left is Cockroaches and Rodinal.

[@joeltunnah]

If you don’t like grain why don’t you just shoot digital?

[@ribsy]

thanks! just got me some rodinal 😊

[@ribsy]

hahha i like that

[@ribsy]

lol no comment

[@GavinLyonsCreates]

mmh... well, it very much depends on the speed of your film. Then it depends on whether you wish to push or pull. But most of all it really depends if you want a particular look. Each developer has own characteristics. I would recommend controlling your temperature. Try 20, 21,22 even 24. Then agitating plays a part too, Semi stand or stand, these things affect the grain. Rodinal is cheap and good start to learn these things. HC110, XTOL, DDX, etc are all great film developers but every tool needs to be mastered. Polls and opinions are just that. Making a decision is part chemistry and part art... just to mix things up I'm using Spur N Acurol (couple of videos on my channel about pushing film too)

[@ribsy]

haha i know it depends on a bunch of things. but i needed some helping going in a direction

[@JamesDBuzzard]

Yo thanks a ton for this! I knew I wanted to stick with Kodak as a first-time developer but thanks for sharing all this info help me narrow down my decision to D76 as my first chemical to tryout

[@ribsy]

awesome enjoy!

[@ldbass62]

Great video! I just started developing again and this video was very informative.

[@ribsy]

Niceeee

[@lichtmaler]

I think it depends on what film you use. FOMA 400 I would suggest R09 studio. for TMAX Adox FX39 and for TXP320 I like Rodinal and HC110. Sometime a bit of a mood thing too.

[@unpocodeluz_atill]

Rodinal, HC110 and D76 are conceptually different developers. Rodinal is a high accutance developer (more grain, but sharper images). HC110 is a strong developer (contrast images, but very flexible to push and pull). D76 is a compensator developer (it catch detail in highlights and shadows). I'm using D76, but diluted 1+3. It converts D76 in a high accutance developer, better than Rodinal. As I read, XTOL was designed to replace D76.

[@ribsy]

thanks for the detials! 😊

[@angelusrufus7479]

Rodinal is cheap and universal. And give great results in semi stand developing. But I want to try hc-110. Is it still possible to buy it? I can't find it in any shop. They was stopped production?

[@ribsy]

Yea it’s out of stock many places

[@GonzoTheRosarian]

I always used HC-110. It has great shelf life as a concentrate. It was Ansel Adam’s’ workhorse developer.

[@ribsy]

Ahhh the great ansel!

[@milesmetcalfe94]

XTOL can be super economical because it can be used in a replenishment system. But be careful there is an on going recall for certain production dates.

[@ribsy]

Ahh good point. I think I’ll stay away I’m the mean time

[@joeltunnah]

People need to understand that “fine grain” developers like D76 are solvents that literally dissolve the silver grains making them appear smaller, and also randomly redeposit it elsewhere on your negatives. This has the effect of reducing overall resolution. Non-solvent developers like Rodinal do not remove silver, so people say the result is “grainier”, but the grain size and amount is inherent in the film, and has nothing to do with the developer. I’ve used all of the above, and to me the tonality Rodinal produces is unmatched, and I like grain... otherwise why wouldn’t I just shoot digital?

[@marcossantana1164]

"otherwise why wouldn’t I just shoot digital"? This my friend, is the right answer\question.

[@ribsy]

interesting. seems like finer isn't actually better ...

[@ribsy]

LOL word

[@MockUPie]

I used Rodinal, HC-110 and Iltec DD-X so far. I used DD-X together with Ilfords Delta-Films for a while because it is recommended by Ilford. Besides that I stick to HC-110 now, because it is liquid already (I don't have to mix a powder with water at a specific temperature), it is a concentrate and has a long shelflife. (Sorry if you say the same things in the video, I paused when you asked us to ;-) If anyone has experience: How are the results of Delta-Films developed with HC-110 compared to DD-X?

[@ribsy]

haha all good! thanks for the comment

[@danielcoburn7696]

What’s the best developer for T grain film?

[@erwindegroot8760]

The legendary shelf life of Rodinal counts only for the old versions, the modern Rodinal you can't keep that long anymore. Some of the old ingredients aren't available or allowed anymore (carcinogenic). And it's less suited for faster films; big grain. Personally I use ID-11 (it's said that's the same recipe as D76) in the 1+3 dillution (one shot). I mainly use HP5+, FP4+ and Delta 100 and these all have a development time of 20 minutes at 20° C in ID-11 1+3. That means I can put them together in the developement tank. Also the 5 litre package of ID-11 costs the same as 2 x the 1 litre package, so that makes it cheaper.

[@ribsy]

ah good call! still need to get me some rodinal

[@i.k.8868]

I found a bottle of rodinal from 40 years ago and it is completely crystallized, even though there's barely any air in the container. First I have to melt it I guess. Hope it still works :P

[@ribsy]

haha good luck!

[@stephenperera7382]

Xtol is superb…..I use it at 1+1 dilution…..less toxic as well….I also have Rodinal and D76 currently…….don’t forget acutance and grain are topics in themselves

[@ribsy]

Yea k hear good things

[@severedsixteen]

how would you compare grain from D76 switching to Xtol? I only ever shoot tri x and always used D76. Worried my work wont match. thanks

[@devroombagchus7460]

Thanks! Great fun. I use Ilfotex DD-X. Why? I still have some left.

[@ribsy]

Hahaha the best is what you have

[@misham6547]

And BNH has it in stock

[@franciscovarela7127]

Have used Rodinal since the 1970's with 35mm and 120. Always good to me.

[@ribsy]

yea can't go wrong with that!

[@camblyth]

I use Ilfotec HC which is apparently identical to HC-110. Could be cheaper for you in the UK!

[@ribsy]

Yea! Already got some eyes on it haha

[@jimwlouavl]

Watching in late June. What did you buy?

[@ribsy]

Ilfosol 3 haha, and some got some pyro too 😃

[@basschurink]

Hc110, it has a long shelf life and is very economical. It can be used for a lot of films with good results. Xtol comes over here in 5 litre packages and is hard to mix ans store for me. Rodinal can be done but use it for stand development, grain is all the way with high speed film > iso 200 and normal processing. Stand development can give pleasant results and also very economical. Downside is it takes a hour to develop it.

[@ribsy]

I don’t have the patience for stand developing! Haha

[@JenniferM13]

I've recently been using Adox XT-3 and I find it very much like Xtol although perhaps even slightly 'better'. I like that you can get it in smaller packs to make up 1l of solution.

[@ribsy]

Nice!

[@sh0ebox21]

I’ve been using and have really liked the results I’ve gotten from Ilford Ilfotec DD-X with all sorts of film stocks, but plan to give HC-110 a try mainly for the shelf life.

[@ribsy]

yea same on hc110!

[@sh0ebox21]

@@ribsy I will say, though, that my bottle of DD-X has been opened and in use for over 1 year and is showing no signs of slowing down... so if you’re concerned about that I would say don’t worry and give it a shot. It’s really great stuff!

[@benjaminvleugels5609]

I've heard that the new HC 110 doesn't have the long shelf life anymore because the new formula contains water I've heard it only last a couple of months now when opened apparently ilford HC is the better option now it lasts about 5 years opened and is almost the same as the original HC 110 I am by no means an expert and only found this out just now I really wanted to try HC 110 I was about to buy it but now I have serious doubts unfortunately

[@sh0ebox21]

@@benjaminvleugels5609 Interesting. I haven't read that yet but I also wouldn't say I've closely followed HC-110 talk. In general re: shelf-life, I think the advertised shelf lives of chemicals are frequently very conservative. As an example, I've been using a bottle of Ilford Ilfotec DD-X since November 2019, stored in its original bottle (without any measures to remove excess air) in a dark cabinet under the sink I use to develop chems (not in a bathroom) and it's still going strong without any signs of depletion. It has an advertised shelf-life of 6 months half-full. I think so long as your storage conditions are reasonable, many of these popular chemistries will hold up plenty long enough.

[@benjaminvleugels5609]

@@sh0ebox21 thank you for the information it's just I really want to be able to trust the developer to give me consistent results so I can experiment and if I don't shoot for a while I still know it will be fine like a 30 year shelf life like old HC 110 or Rodinal gives me confidence I don't need to worry about how old my developer is that's a variable I can take out then

[@patrick.hudepohl]

Rodinal! Because I remember my dad using it many years ago, so I bought a bottle of Rodinal when I started developing my own film last year. Want to try HC-110 (“one ten”) as well, sometime later this year, see what the difference is. So far, I like the contrasty, grainy results of Kodak Tri-X and Rodinal. Used both 35mm and 120 film, rated at 400, 1600 and once even at 3200. I want to get to know this combination of film & dev really well before moving on.

[@ribsy]

Rodinal the classic!!

[@humbertodelacruz2735]

I haven’t gotten into black and white developing because there are too many options with different results lol. I’m in the same boat as you. I have a bit of a back log too.

[@ribsy]

Haha yea. I’ll figure it out soon

[@humbertodelacruz2735]

@@ribsy I hope you make a video of it after you do. 🤙 thanks for making videos like this!

[@jonnoMoto]

Recently, my go to is XTOL-r. Otherwise ddx or rodinal.

[@ribsy]

Seems like you move around a bit like me. Can’t make up my mind

[@mikafoxx2717]

I would like to say that you can't go wrong with any of these developers, they're all some of the best of the past 150 years. I'd argue that Rodinal is also very environmentally safe, and it can be made from 3 ingredients that are all food safe. Sodium metabisulphite, used in wine making and can be found at brewing stores, acetaminophen/paracetamol, and lye, which isn't exactly safe in concentrated form, but extra diluted or mixed with something that reduces it's pH, is safe too. Used in soapmaking or as a drain clearer in concentrated form. You could probably take a very unpleasant, but non-toxic sip of rodinal in 1:100 diluted form, same goes with caffenol.

[@ribsy]

yea good point on the rodinal!

[@housemusic325]

Rodinal and HC110, Both are goto depending on what you are doing. If you shoot expired films : Go for HC110, it contains Benzotriazole which help to remove the fog effect. If you need lower grain than Rodinal : Go for HC110 also If you want to develop anything with the ability to fix exposure errors : Rodinal at 1:100 If you want a cheap way of developing, Rodinal Also Plus for Rodinal and HC110 : They are both impossible to kill. You can let them on a shelf for years and still get great results.

[@ribsy]

Haven’t tried either!

[@frankwolff2903]

Do you have any experience or opinions on the CineStill Df96 Monobath developer? thanks, FW

[@ribsy]

i don't actually!

[@stephencastleberry157]

d-76--USED THAT FOR MY NEWSPAPER WORK--HC-110 WHEN THERE WAS A RUSH AND QUALITY WAS SECONDARY

[@ribsy]

sounds legit

[@JamieMPhoto]

"HC One-ten." For me, HC-110 is the jack of all trades. D76 was my go-to, but HC-110 lasts longer in terms of use and storage, which overall is the main reason I don't use it as much anymore. Rodinal is my favorite overall, except I don't use it for the most part above 200 ISO because it really brings out grain. HC-110 is sometimes a bit too contrasty to me, but I can always trust I'll get something acceptable from it. I haven't used X-Tol, but I keep hearing things that make me want to try.

[@ribsy]

Hah thanks for the pronunciation 😂 - I’m torn between rodinal and hc110

[@larryhayes3040]

Over three decades I have used Rodinal for it’s sharp grain and economy. Use 110 when I want smoother grain.

[@derekkonigsberg2047]

When I first started, I went with D-76 and liked the results. When I got back into it more recently, I went with HC-110 because it seems far more practical for sporadic use (concentrate lasts forever, can mix just what I need on-demand, etc). But I'm not sure I liked the results as much. More recently I've used DD-X, especially for T-grain films, and I think I like it better than HC-110. (But when I finally develop some B&W film again, I'm not sure if my existing bottle of DD-X concentrate will still be usable.) (And the next thing I want to develop is BwXX/5222 in D-96, which I suppose is similar to D-76.)

[@ribsy]

thanks for the info!

[@EdwardIglesias]

The only developer I have experience with, at least in this Millennium, is HC110. I got it on Jamie Madonado's suggestion and it has worked very well for me shooting HP5 mostly.

[@ribsy]

Nice! Seems like can’t go wrong with it

[@peterkay9050]

Great video. I love your work as its hugely informative and thought provoking :). I use HC110 (pronounced (by me) HC one ten), D76 (in ID11 form), Rodinal and Caffenol. I find it depends on the film. HC110 and D76 produce lovely crisp negatives and Rodinal gives the extra punch. I use XP2 with mono devs and D76 gives the best results with HC110 a close second, fomapan200 is similar but also does extremely well in Rodinal. Rollei Retro 400s is fabulous in D76 but when it comes to expired film, HC110 is king. I have some 30yo Orwo NP27 and HC110 gives excellent, characterful results. When it comes to stand development, Rodinal is superb. I will be testing HC110 stand soon. Other than the results, Rodinal and HC110 are great to keep in as they last forever. D76(ID11) has a short shelf life so I feel pressurised to use it up. I use it stock, adding 10% dev time per roll so get ten rolls out of a litre. Its not as economical as Rodinal but you can hardly call it expensive. Caffenol is just there for fun. That is after all what its all about :) keep up the excellent work

[@ribsy]

Thanks for watching

[@RaymondCheng97]

HC-110 is very versatile can work well with many film stocks. You can experiment with different dilutions which will give you different results. The compensating nature of HC-110 makes it easier to work with.

[@ribsy]

yea thats what i like. seems like a good choice

[@flyingo]

After 2 years, I’m curious about two things; 1. What developer were you using most often before the poll was taken?, and 2. What developer(s) do you use most often now? Basically, did any of them change your attitude and make you a big fan? Thanks for your channel and all of your content! It’s all great. Oh, and thanks for making your New Classic EZ400 film available at a very decent price!

[@ribsy]

recently its been hc110! i like how much yield you get out of a bottle of concentrate

[@m0rph3u1st]

I have a biased opinion as I always used HC1-ten with the classic B dilution (1+31). Never used, but Rodinal seems to be sharper and grainy than HC110, so the answer is more: "it depends". Meaning, it depends on the results you want to get to your photos. Sometimes you may feel to want fine grain; other times you may want to have coarser grain; or more contrast; less contrast. Of course, you can always change the contrast while doing digital post-production or using multigrade filters while enlarging a print, but grain is key and the developer is where you can control it. I'm currently changing some variables in the developer, although keeping the same B dilution and development time (6 minutes), namely temperature and check the outcome of it. It's not just the developer which matters, but temperature and develop time also have a word about it.

[@espenbjrkvold5119]

Xtol is one of my favourite developers, but after I have played a bit with Adox Atomal 49 lately, and especially with Fomapan and Tri-X, I find that one to be my absolute favourite. If you want grain and accutance, Rodinal is your pick. Developers are very different, and playing with them is fun. 😊

[@ribsy]

Yea! Gonna mess around and see!

[@TheJaFraman]

Audio's sounding nice and clear bro!

[@ribsy]

Thanks! 😀 still working through it

[@cfabz2023]

Take this suggestion with a grain of salt since I've only been getting into film photography in the past 5 months, and I've only used Rodinal. I really like Rodinol not only for it's economy and shelf life, but also for it's qualities as a compensating developer. I often do stand or semi stand developing with a very dilute solution and get good contrast with a lot of shadow detail. The biggest downside is it tends to be very grainy. I found that adding sodium ascorbate, which is sold as a form of vitamin c, at 4g/L to mixed solution can tone down some of the grain. I've tried it on T-Max 100, and I did notice a difference. It smooths the grain out, but doesn't reduce it, so it doesn't have as much of a difference on higher speeds like 400. I'm waiting on some Xtol to try something new, but overall I like the Rodinal and have grown to like its look and feel.

[@ribsy]

Yup - never tried rodinal tho

[@MultiSigil]

Only used Ilford HC to date at home. Tried caffenol once as well but not exactly a mainsteam means of developing 😅 Have you tried pyro 510? New developer on the market

[@ribsy]

Yea pyro is cool

[@The78bluedevils]

i was a fan of hc110 the syrup. used a case of the developer over 10yrs. mostly on 4x5 ilford sheet film. 35mm for friends. lookin to replace it with home made developers from darkroom cookbook and other variations from online formulas.

[@ribsy]

Yea hc110 is great

[@nikiljonathan9674]

Hey Ribs, I've been using Ilfosol 3 since mid-2020 based on feedback from a few friends. They said it's better to start out with a liquid developer rather than mix one up from a powder kit. But I'm guessing that should be no trouble at all for you. Last weekend, I got the ingredients for Rodinal and made a batch. Waiting for the solution to settle and test it out before I can test it out. I've heard great things about Rodinal and how it's best suited for stand developing. I'd love to try HC-110 someday though.

[@ribsy]

yea ilfosol is what i started with. i can't complain but i want to explore more 😊

[@RonEMarks]

one more comment.... Xtol is great but you have to mix 5 Liters and use it within 4-6 weeks. HC110 has relatively short dev times and harder to be exact when pouring. 10 seconds is a big deal when you only have 5minutes total time. It's also not as sharp as I prefer. So for a beginner in developing, I suggest Rodinal (when it becomes available again). It's fool proof, lasts for ever, dilution and agitation can be done many different ways to yield a variety of looks. You can do "Stand" development with great results and lastly there is a HUGE community of people with many ways to use it. It is very versatile! On 120 and 4x5 it's amazing. If you shoot 35mm film, anything above ASA100 can result in more grain than you may like in Rodinal. There are some Flickr groups you can view for each developer and find a look you like. :)

[@ribsy]

Ahh good cal!

[@alfepalfe]

I have only developed 2 rolls of film and a 500ml bottle of rodinal with 1+100 stand development can easily last for more than 100 rolls so it is the only thing I have tried. It does however seem very simple to use with stand development. While I have never tried it I have also heard that rodinal stand development helps compensate for under exposure. To quote Technology Connections *"prodcing an end result which sort of allows you to push process individual frames within a roll."* The reasons I bought it were however how simple it seemed to be to use and also it was the cheapest developer the place I ordered from had in stock.

[@ribsy]

yea rodinal is a great option

[@bchoward0000]

Love your content. I'm currently building my own darkroom and asking myself the same question as you're facing. I'm tempted by HC110 (convention), Rodinal (shelf life is attractive for hobbyist), but also Cinestill DF97 (single step is attractive). Curious to know how you come out.

[@ribsy]

Good luck with the setup!

[@Uwe_Ludolf]

If I may mix in the discussion... With the monobath you hardly have any flexibility. I developed my first roll 2 years ago, using seperate developer, stop and fixer and trust me, it isn't that hard. Different people with all different opinions make it appear hard. Good luck!

[@bchoward0000]

@@Uwe_Ludolf Thanks for the advice, but I'm curious if you could elaborate on what you mean by the lack of flexibility. For just starting out, I'm not sure I need much flexibility if I understand correctly....

[@Uwe_Ludolf]

@@bchoward0000 for example if you want to push /pull the film or increase the contrast. The variable with normal developer is time and/or temperature. Monobath of such designed that after - let's say 5 minutes - the developer doesn't work anymore and the fixing starts, you can only play with temperature, which I find harder. Furthermore I have read the sometimes your fixer isn't working properly anymore with mono bath so after a couple of rolls it's guessing of it will be fixed, so it's better to have an extra bottle of fixer "in case of"

[@bchoward0000]

@@Uwe_Ludolf Thanks for the explanation. Although I think I'm unlikely to want to push/pull any time soon, I think you may have a point that I shouldn't invest in learning a process I'm soon going to grow out of, especially if I need additional chemicals just in case. Much appreciated for the advice!

[@samtt2001]

Most labs use D-76 or X-tol because it can be bought in large quantities, that's pretty much the standard look for b&w film. Both are versitile and will always give you at least decent results. HC-110 (my personal choice) is good for pushing and is a little more contrasty than the others. Rodinal can be very economical and has lots of sharpness (it accentuates every single grian particle), but is really bad for the envoirement; unlike other developers, you can't flush rodinal down the drain, even when dialuted. It also isn't reccomended for pushing, but if you want to do something with it there's someone somewhere who's already written a blog about it because it's so widely used. If you're testing out different films I'd suggest using Xtol or D-76, except for T-grain films like Ilford's Delta series and Kodak's T-max. Normal black and white film has a 'cubic' grain structure while those films have a 'tubular' structure which develop better with specialised developers like Ilfotec DD-X and Kodak T-max developer (big surprise). those developers also work with cubic grains, but those will come out more clumped and less sharp than with other developers. If you're really going to be adventurous and develop C-41 in black and white developer (which don't have any standardised times, unlike the regular C-41 process) you must know that most (professional) colour negative films like portra and ektar have a T-grain structure as well. In that scenario it won't matter as much, since the dye clouds develop differently and things get all complicated, blah blah blah, you grain will still look a little clumpy so the developer doesn't affect the look too much. Another thing to consider when you're really experimental is when you want to make slides out of your C-41 film you have to develop them first with a black and white developer as mask, for which HC-100 is basically the only thing that works in my experience. I have tried it with ilfotec DD-X, but that doesn't develop C-41 film the same way HC-110 does. I've done a lot of talking here, but hopefully it helps you out.

[@ribsy]

thanks for the info! yea, i think hc110 is it for me 😊

[@b6983832]

It can be technically prohibited in some localities, but unless you are developing film in quantities some professional labs do, pouring Rodinal down the drain is not actually an environmental issue. Yes, I know, that my opinion is unpopular in today's woke world, but this is the reality. Same goes with used fixer, and silver compounds in it.

[@terrywbreedlove]

Long time D76 user and it works well with just about any film. But I am going to try xtol soon. I shoot enough film i will quickly go through 5 liters quickly.

[@ribsy]

I still need to try it

[@severedsixteen]

how did you find the grain comparison ?

[@thebrouhaha1]

I use both rodinal and hc110 mainly because of them being liquid. I tend to use hc110 for faster films and pushing, and rodinal for slower film and expired film.

[@ribsy]

That’s my plan exactly!

[@BryanBirks]

So I've been using Ilfotec HC since I started and its the same as HC110. I knew that. But what I didn't know was the price difference. What the hell. HC110 for now on it is!

[@ribsy]

Haha man! Funny enough I’m about to get some ilfotec hc cuz my local shop doesn’t have hc 110... 😅, shop local right? 😂

[@eoghanhennessy15]

@@ribsy well Ilford is English and Kodak is American so it makes sense :-) probably works the same way with film prices

[@tonymetzger6304]

Xtol all the way if you’ve got time and patience to find what you like with 1-2 emulsions and you can go through 5 litres in a couple months. HC110 is the backup when Xtol doesn’t work for you due to the limited shelf life of Xtol. Rodinal is the catch all. Medium and larg format complex exposure? Rodinal. 35mm varying exposures/ iso’s/ screwed something up? Rodinal stand. Bottom line, unless you’re consistent, fastidious and religious, having a few options on the shelf can save you from some outright disappointment.

[@ribsy]

yea for sure! good advice

[@Resgerr]

Xtol for me, got into it last year. Have HC-110 got to have as back up as it last for years, used D-76. Say it HC-hundred and ten

[@ribsy]

Haha I think I have finally learned to pronounce it 😃

[@Resgerr]

@@ribsy the HC-110 keeps for a long time as it’s a syrup

[@Adrian-wd4rn]

If you have important work, like landscapes, headshots and fashion work, use xtol. Full stop. It has fine but very sharp grain, so you can actually make large prints of your work. Pretyy much, pro work, xtol. Street photography, HC110 so you can just burn through the rolls on the cheap. Artistic work, xtol or D76.

[@ribsy]

I like grain tho 😁 even for important work

[@Adrian-wd4rn]

@@ribsy Until a client is yelling at you about "can you get rid of some of this grain? we can't print it out too big".... :/ ask me how I know...Make it stop ribsy, MAKE IT STOP!

[@matthewsoza417]

HC-110 and D76 all the way!! Been using them for years

[@ribsy]

Nice. Seems like you can’t go wrong with that

[@soulstart89]

Rah I’m surprised about hc (1 10) but in a away makes sense as it’s a liquid where as id11/d76 is a powder where you need to mix

[@ribsy]

yea im not sure why its the most popular but it has convinced me haha

[@mattdavis9986]

Xtol for anything faster than 100 iso in 35mm and rodinal for slower speed films. In medium format I use rodinal for up to 400 speed but for Ilford delta 3200 or if I’m pushing hp5 or delta 400, I’ll use xtol. Horses for courses type scenario. Ps HC one ten

[@ribsy]

Seems like I should def get two. I may be able to make space for it haha

[@ruffprophetproductions]

I voted d-76 in the poll, but hc-110 is better because the syrup lasts longer. BUT I did use some stock d76 the other day that I mixed up jan 2020, and it worked out fine. Negs a little thin, but I think I could’ve fixed that but developing a little longer.

[@ribsy]

Haha I feel you. I prefer longer lasting and convenience

[@CarlosJimenezGuerra]

I recommend rodinal if you like the grain, and in case you love shoot different film stock, you could make a stand development and develop two (or more) different stocks. As you said, rodinal never "dies". By other hand, the hc 1-10 😉 its the most versatile developer... But you need save it in glass bottles with vacuvin caps airtight. I recommend you to watch the Herman Thothroot's channel (in Spanish, but after the ifwefilm interview I know you speak Spanish to). Cheers

[@ribsy]

Rodinal may be the move for me. Seems low maintenance which I appreciate 😃

[@CarlosJimenezGuerra]

@@ribsy this is the reason why I choose it half year ago when I start developing my own B&W. But... I think the shorter times of Hc110 maybe great to... But for low maintenance Rodinal (check the fotoimpex pack with I start, it includes all you need except the stop bath). Saludos

[@dennyoconnor8680]

Xtol for box speed exposures and 1 stop pull. HC110 for 1 stop push. Diafine for 2 stop push. I can type hundreds of words explaining the whys, wherefores, and chemistries - - - but I wont.

[@elsueniero5922]

rodinal

[@ribsy]

yup! lol

[@ebreckpo6563]

Kodak D-76/ Ilford ID11. The classic developer used for rating film speeds for years and an industry standard until the late 80ies when Kodak pushed XTol. D-76 uses 2 components for developing i. e. Metol and Hydroquinone and was an upgrade to the discontinued Kodak D-23 which uses only Metol as a developing agent. You can have the D-76/ID11 in 1 liter packages and 1 US Gallon. I am of the opinion this is the developer for starters and still a very viable option for general use. Mostly used in dilutions 1+1. the stock dilution keeps about 3 months. Kodak Xtol same preparation as the D-76 (mixing powders). The stock solution has the reputation of disintegrating without warning but should be more environmental friendly. HC-110 concentrated liquid developer introduced in the early 60ies a myriad of dilutions available and also different stock dilutions (US vs Europe) has somehow been cleared out as this added extra confusion regarding dilutions/developing times. Rodinal One of the oldest formulas around can be used virtually at any dilution to have different looks. I used it mostly for stand developing 1+100 as it has a compensating effect on the highlights Works fine on MF and lower speed emulsion (100ASA and lower), on higher speed more grainy. Base solution keeps virtually forever. As with film, stick to one and once you get consistent results you can start experimenting...

[@ribsy]

yea fair enough! ive been using microphen mostly

[@Esoxhunt]

If you can't get excellent results with D-76, forget film. As a BW lab technician in the 80ties we used large tanks, and threw Tri-X, Plus-X, HP4, you name it, all in the same soup of D-76. 8 min, and if the film was exposed right, it printed pretty well on grade 2 or 3. D-76, ID11, or Agfas no longer produced Refinal are all based on the same recipe.

[@ribsy]

haha fair point!

[@atroche1978]

I started developing my B&W film in ID-11 (powder), which the dark web says is basically D75. After my 5 liter batch died it's slow painful death I decided to try something different. For the sake of longevity, I picked up both Rodinal and Legacy Pro L110 (basically HC110) which I mix as needed as a one shot.. I shot Tri-X at 250 and developed in Rodinal at box speed but find it a bit too contrasty and way too grainy. I pushed HP5 to 800 and develop at 800 in L110 and it looks very good! It has great tonality, and the grain isn't bad. Either way I miss Ilford ID-11. It's a great all around developer IMO. Tri-X and HP5 both look good developed in it. But it only comes in 1L or 5L powder batches. Once mixed, it starts going bad. I wish it came in liquid form though. Based on my personal experience I'd rate them in this order- ID-11/D76, L110/HC110, Rodinal. I've never used anything else so I can't comment on anything else.

[@ribsy]

thanks for the details. i think hc110 an rodinal for me

[@irials]

My go to is HC110, but I'm still on my first bottle. Seems to work pretty well with just about any film you throw at it, for regular and stand development.

[@ribsy]

That seems like the trend! It’s a real contender for me

[@ronmiller7248]

After decades of developing with all these developers, I settled on Pyrocat-HD. Forgiving if the temps rise/fall a few degrees in the baths and worked exceptionally well with the films that are and were my staples. Nothing worse than needing a specific developer for a film.

[@ribsy]

i have a pyro developer that i have enjoyed a bit. will drop a review soon-ish

[@andywalczak7659]

What about pyro 510 ?

[@ribsy]

its not the most common, but im messed with it a bit

[@MurphysFilm]

Hc110 is most economical and works well with most films, but my fav in is ilford ddx it seems to give me the best results and smooth grain looks lovey when printing negs in the darkroom

[@ribsy]

Yea Ive heard nice things about ddx but I don’t mind some hard grain

[@thadytra547]

Have you ever used df96? 😃

[@ribsy]

I don’t think so!

[@thadytra547]

Ah it's great! 😁 Super cheap too! 😁 Only 23 pound from Bristol cameras and does 16 rolls in a 1 bath solution 😊 Would love a review of it! 😁

[@AdrianBacon]

The top four you named are all great. Rodinal and hc-110 are both great if you go a period of time between developing sessions as they both keep in concentrate form for a long time and don’t require a lot of storage space. D-76 is basically the gold standard developer that’s been around for a very long time, so if you want reliable dev times with a lot of films, pretty much every film made will come with a recommended dev time for d-76. Ilford’s ID-11 is functionally the same as D-76. All that being said, XTOL is the newest developer and is pretty state of the art in terms of performance, especially if you’re using it in a replenished regime. You’ll be pretty hard pressed to find a developer the delivers more film speed with finer grain and buttery smooth tonality than replenished xtol. It basically takes the awesome level and cranks it up to 11 when you use it replenished. That doesn’t mean the other developers are bad, and XTOL used normally (non-replenished) isn’t bad, but man... replenish it, and it is on a whole other level. The downside is, because it’s relatively new (compared to other developers), it doesn’t have quite the following, and even fewer people replenish it, so that dark magic is relatively obscure, but it’s real. Replenished xtol is it. I’ve processed thousands of rolls in replenished xtol (side effect of owning a film processing lab in the states), and can attest to its performance. It’s just a bummer that Kodak has recently been having production problems with it..

[@ribsy]

thanks for the insight!

[@ayenoppa4717]

I got the best results with Xtol however I usually go for HC 110 as it last longer and easier to find.

[@ribsy]

ahh marks sense. ive been using microphen a bunch

[@aantonic]

i used Rodinal with HP5 at 400, at 800, for delta 400, trix. Delta 400 and Rodinal for me is bad combination, other pretty good, especialy for tri x.. with trix has a gritty look but i like it..Last week i tried delta 3200 shot at 3200 but for that reason i bought Ilford Michrophen. Came out good, abit grainier then normal but i really liked that delta 3200 film. I could control contrast well with printing. My new favourite film.

[@ribsy]

nice! good stuff

[@matthewdeacon1970]

Perceptol is beautiful with Ilford films like pan f, fp4, etc.

[@ribsy]

Interesting!

[@victordesabata]

HC110 gives you lots of room to adjust contrast by adjusting concentration. It's also cheap and has a long shelf life. Can't really see much drawback with this developer, that explains the popularity.

[@ribsy]

Can’t go wrong with it!

[@marcossantana1164]

Yeap, HC110 (HC ONE TEN) Had to be the winner. I use it to develop 100-400 speed films, love the contrast. For pushing, I prefer to use a developer designed for that matter, my go to is Ilford ddx. I do have 2 bags of D76 and a bottle of Rodinal in my arsenal, which I'm planning to use for comparisons with other developers sometime before summer.

[@ribsy]

Word! That’s too many! I can’t have them all 😆

[@dominicmeakin]

I really like ID-11/D76 as it's very flexible and produces great results no matter what film you use with it. However, I'm trying Ilford's clone of HC110 Ilfotec HC, which seems to better value for money than ID-11/D76 and has a longer shelf life.

[@ribsy]

Yea I think the ilford clone is the one I’ll get. Most others are sold out it appears

[@MD-en3zm]

Rodinal and HC110 have the advantage of crazy shelf life. These are great if you want long term storage and only develop film occasionally. D76 is the developer that others are judged by, but its shelf life isn’t great (slightly better than XTOL’s). It’s very versatile and can do just about everything fairly well. XTOL is unquestionably the safest and best for the environment (it uses vitamin C rather than hydroquinone), and it gives the finest grain (whether that’s good depends on what you want). It is the last developed and was the pinnacle of achievement for Kodak imo. Personally, I use XTOL because I have no concerns dumping it into a septic system. If I had a sewer, any of those 4 would be fine in the small quantities I use. The only really dangerous developers out there are pyro based - very toxic.

[@ribsy]

Yea good points

[@jaycoronado3441]

For pushing film, I like to use Ilford DD-X.

[@ribsy]

Never used it!

[@stefan_becker]

In my opinion XTOL delivers great results and is also environmental friendly. For me it's no issue to store it in 10 bottles of 500ml each. Pyro510 might be the very best developer, but in my opinion it's just too poisonous.

[@ribsy]

yea understood. i've started to mess with pyro recently and i like it!