The developer certainly is not bad, the standard dilution for HC 110 is the
so called dilution B which tends to give developing times that are too short
for my own liking, I would suggest that for a convenient liquid concentrated
developer, that you try Ilford DD-X diluted at 1:4 instead. Start with the
standard small tank times minus 10% and round this figure down to the
nearest minute or half minute (Which ever comes first) and see how well your
negatives print.
If the negatives are a little too flat for your enlarger, increase the
developing times in 30 second increments until you reach the required
contrast that you need.
Likewise if the negatives are too contrasty for you, in which case you
decrease in 30 second increments. This assumes that you are not using a
pre-rinse which Ilford do not recommend, if you do use a pre-rinse, then
start with the small tank times.
This all depends on your personal preference.

Visit www.davebutcher.net to see some examples of how well Ilford DD-X
performs.

I use a Jobo 2500 series tank in a Jobo CPE-2 processor.

I have never had trouble with any developer. I control contrast by
changing the development time. I process at 75F because it is too
difficult to use lower temperatures in the summer (though I do it once
in a while by putting a block of artificial ice in the water bath to get
it down to temperature and then removing it. The thermal mass of the
water bath is sufficient to maintain temperature during the developing
step).

I have used different developers in the past, mainly D76 and D76d,
Microdol-X, Diafine, HC-110, and TMax-RS. I have also used D23 and D25
straight, and as bath 1 of two-bath developers (mainly on 4164 Tri-X).
For modern (e.g., TMax) film, I do not like two bath development as the
grain reduction is much less needed and they result in what I would call
"mushy" negatives: a reduction in sharpness that I find unacceptable.

Different developers give different D/H curves, so you will have to pick
among them to find one that gives best results with the materials you
use and the processing system you employ. Sorry, there is no way out of
testing it yourself, since no one else can be assumed to use exactly
your processing methods, and, more important, have your taste and
objectives.

I have found HC-110B a very good developer, convenient to mix. Fred
Picker used to mix 1 ounce of the concentrate syrup (not the stock
solution) with 31 ounces of water to make Dilution B directly. I would
not do that for a roll or two of 35mm film, but it is quite practical
for mixing 1/2 gallon for use in developing tanks. If you find that
gives you less than 5 minutes development time for the contrast index
you require, you could either add water or lower the development
temperature.

    Add 1 stop to your EI and decrease development by 20% and try
it again. As an alternative you can try the Dilution D (1:9) or even
the Dilution E (1:11) to help with contrast control. HC110 is a good
developer but highly active. I've often thought it might make a good
paper developer.

Regards,

  John S. Douglas, Photographer -  http://www.puresilver.org

Your possibly running into issues of scene brilliance, without
the compensation of decreasing the development time even
when using high dilutions you still get higher contrast. HC110
in my experience does yield a little more contrast than D23 if used
at the E dilution, I would play around with possibly decreasing
development at your chosen dilution. Why: because HC110 does
produce very nice "grain" it can be a good developer, it is very
consistent.

HC110 is an industrial developer, for commercial work. It is best with
sheet film. Unless well-diluted, I would avoid using it for fine work.

...

...

mar2805 from Lloyd Erlick,

You might like the results of exposing your films at
half their rated EI in any case. Judging by the sound
of your subject matter (brightly lit with high
contrast) you might like:

-a lower EI (provides greater shadow detail),

-slightly reduced development (ten or fifteen per cent
less time in developer) (highlights tend to block up to
lesser degree),

-a normal developer like D76 or Xtol diluted
appropriately (personally, I use Xtol diluted 1+2 in
distilled water),

-a slightly soft working developer like D23, perhaps
diluted. (Some people use D23 diluted 1+2 or even 1+3.)

The way to be sure is to make prints from negatives
exposed each way. My prediction is that you will prefer
prints from negatives exposed at about half their rated
EI developed in diluted developer.

If you plan to judge your prints, be sure to include
prints that strike you as having "too much" contrast. I
think it was Ansel Adams who pointed out that it is
best to approach a satisfactory print from the
too-contrasty direction. Human perception seems to
accept 'too little' contrast quite readily, but not
'too much' contrast.

I can't really comment on HC110. I didn't like it much
when I tried it, but that was a lifetime ago. There are
people in this newsgroup who like it very much, though,
so you'll have to experiment to find out your own
preferences.

regards,
--le

HC-110 is sensitive to dilution and temperature. Ansel Adams and
Fred Picker loved it, but they also did extensive tests with it to
find the optimal EI and developing times for their dilutions of
choice. Your "1-79 dilution or so" sounds pretty arbitrary -- which
 dilution is this and how did you arrive at the developing time
and EI for it?

You are over developing the film.

You are underexposing the film.

HC110 is a 'vigorous' developer and will give much more contrast
than D-23 and a whopping lot more contrast if overdeveloped.

You don't mention the film you are using or the film size.  HC110
works best with 120 and 4x5 and up -- it is not really recommended for
35mm -- though I am sure there are folks who swear by it for this format.  
It is most often used with Tri-X.  I find it results in grainy
negatives and the grain is poorly defined -- squishy.

Try some experimentation:

1) Take one (or more) rolls of identical shots of a typical
  problem subject.  Shove your meter into the shadows where you
  will just want some detail and then close down by 2.5 stops.

2) Develop the cut strips/rolls/sheets at Kodak's recommended time
  and at 90%, 80%, 70% and 60% of Kodak's time.  Use dilution B -
  after you get 'B' to work to your liking then experiment with other
  dilutions.

3) Pick a development time that gives you the highlights you want.

Though I'm sure devotees may flame me, HC-110 isn't really all that
wonderful a developer for the serious hobbyist.

It IS, however, a whiz-bang developer for commercial use. Back when I
ran a couple of rental darkrooms, it was all I stocked. (Users could
bring their own soup, if they liked) Among the advantages were easy
mixing and dilution,  and fast action. (time is money)

Whie it could be replenished, it was (at the time) cheap enough to use
one-shot. The photographic results were decent to very good with the
wide range of negatives my customers produced.

Didn't you just answer your own question?

I started using it about two years ago, after too many trial and error
nightmare development stories with many developers. My "ideal" developer is
D-76 1:1, but I don't always shoot enough to keep it safe from oxidization.
Someone suggested HC-110 dil B (1:31 syrup), and I haven't looked back
since. Is it as fine-grained as some other developers? No...Is it easy,
economical, and able to store for long periods? You bet your arse.

I would suggest halving the dilution (1:63 syrup), rating the film at 1/2
the manufacture's rating, and developing about 75% of twice the dil B
development times. Just use those as a starting point, and go from there.
Unless there is a specific quality to a developer you like, I would say try
getting used to HC-110. It is a fantastic developer for me.

Also, I shoot the standard type films like HP5, FP4, Tri-X etc. I'm not a
Tmax/Delta fan. Maybe that has something to do with it.

I go by look, not science, when judging negs/prints. I don't do the
densitometer/zone thing, I just try to get negs that print adequately at
grade 2 or 3.

More than you may think....

Thanks everyone for the feedback and some good suggestions.  I'll give
HC-110 another try with more exposure and less development and see how
that works.   I hope to report back here in a week or so.

BTW, I'm shooting FP4 and HC5 4X5.  

Marco

Why?

-- but my question is:   "What's up with HC-110?"   Every time

First, IMHO, constant agitation is a lousy way to develop B&W film, and
HC110 in standard dilutions is so active that it exacerbates the worst of
constant agitation.

Did Picker and Adams recommend constant agitation?

Ciao Marco,
i like so much HC110 becauseit gives a quite sharp grain and acutance is nice.
BTW it's not the finest grain developer on the market, but it gives IMO my
favourite balance to fine grain-acutance.
In most of times I use it for the 120 format, sometimes i use it for 35mm (
with doubled diluition B and double times of developing).
In every time this is the only one withXtol that give me more consistent
results, even my manual agitation in small tanks--

Ciao,
Stefano Bramato

--
ed io imparo...

Small film benefits from intermittent agitation.

Sheet film? Who gives a sh.t?