# fighting low contrast



## JacobtheKidd (Feb 25, 2013)

Due to the low cost and my lack of skills, I've gone the cheep route and purchased a bulk roll of kentmere 400, I've processed several rolls in hc110 and have not been impressed in the contrast in any of them. I understand that 110 is known for it's low contrast, but I'm pretty dismayed by how low it is, considering I've been shooting in good light. I was steered toward the direction of 110, because of it's sharpness and lack of acid, but now I'm looking in other directions and was wondering what you all could weigh in.
Oh, and I've been developing in dilution b at 68° f for eight min.
thank!


----------



## timor (Feb 25, 2013)

Do you really want a high contrast ? K400 IMO is a high contrast film. What is your processing in HC110 ? Maybe you just over expose and under develop ? Maybe you shoud shoot at ISO 640 and extend the developing time ? maybe switch to Rodinal ? Maybe shoot at 400 and develop in Polymax T ?(1+49 for 7-8 min in 20 C). There is many ways to get higher contrast, just don't pay that much attention to Kodak guidelines and experiment a bit, HC110 is one very flexible brew.


----------



## Mully (Feb 25, 2013)

Look up pushing film on the internet and it might give you some insight into what you are after


----------



## dxqcanada (Feb 25, 2013)

Sounds like it is under developed ... shoot some test strips ... develop with +50% and +100% time.


----------



## BobMarvin (Feb 26, 2013)

Contrast can easily be increased in conventional (wet darkroom) printing or scanning. IMO low contrast negatives are generally desirable to avoid blown highlights and get as much information as possible recorded on your negatives. For that reason I usually use a two bath version of D23, which is pretty low contrast, although my final prints are usually fairly contrasty.


----------



## timor (Feb 26, 2013)

Good practice. With two bath development like this is easy to control contrast of the negative.


----------



## bsinmich (Feb 27, 2013)

Eight minutes with HC110 sounds like a long time.  I would cut it to 6.5 or 7 min. and see what happens.  Don't skimp on the agitation.


----------



## Josh66 (Mar 2, 2013)

I've been shooting a lot of K400 lately (it's been pretty much my 'go-to' 35mm 400 ISO film for about the last year).  I didn't like it much in HC-110.

IMO, it looks best in T-Max Dev.  I have put it in HC-110, Xtol, Rodinal, T-max, and ID-11.  T-Max was by far the best (my opinion, of course).  My second choice would be Rodinal (or Rodinal and HC-110 - together).
It has very coarse grain in HC-110 too, probably even grainier than Rodinal - which is saying something, lol!

edit
It's a very underrated film.  It's not bad, and it's not hard to push.


----------



## Josh66 (Mar 2, 2013)

In T-Max Dev (1+4, 5 minutes):




2012072716 by J E, on Flickr




2012061701 by J E, on Flickr




2012081101 by J E, on Flickr


In Rodinal and HC-110 (1+1+98 stand):




2012070629 by J E, on Flickr





2011120824 by J E, on Flickr

edit
Here's a couple in HC-110 for comparison:




2012111121 by J E, on Flickr




08101121 by J E, on Flickr


----------

