My apologies on the time between posts lately as I’ve just moved to a new place and also got a quick mini-vaca in recently (more on that later) from work
As mentioned in my previous post, I’ve been developing ALL my black and white film with Caffenol (specifically Caffenol CL) in place of all the chemicals I used to use
I mostly shoot Kodak Tri-X, ilford HP5 and also the Lomo Earl Gray films these days. All have been developed in Caffenol mixtures
I was very serious about being happy (also a bit shocked) about the results I was seeing
But is it really as good as I’ve been viewing it or has the romance between this developer and I finally ended?
Everything has a romance period, but if you still find yourself wanting something after this amount of time then you know you are still loving it for sure
I need to prove to myself that this is real
I need to show myself i’m not just making it up in my mind because it’s new to me and i’m still amazed at how it works
So that is exactly what I did
I had recently accumulated enough off time at my job and had a good solid week out of office to focus on this
I decided to put it the Caffenol against one of my old favorites (and very popular) Kodak HC-110!
The images shown today will be from different parts of Boston, New Jersey and New York City
So before I move on to results, I’d like to give you some info on gear
The following shots are taken using my Leica M6, Voigtlander 50mm f1.5 ASPH and the film, Kodak Tri-X 400 Pushed to 1600The first of the images will be Caffenol CL
The second set of images will be with the HC-110 (Dillution B)
As i look at them now, side to side i can honestly say i see the difference..but is one better than the other?
I’m not sure..I think its more of a decision of preference
After looking at all of the results, I really can’t pick one over the other
There may be some increased contrast and clarity with the HC-110 but that could be due to the CL formula of Caffenol being a sort of semi-stand development process compared to the HC-110 needing rotation every minute during development (which in my experience increases contrast and sharpness)
I’m sure i could use another Caffenol recipe (CM maybe?) and get similar results to what i see with HC-110 (maybe I’ll perform test with that)
In either case, i love them both but i think the HC-110 performed slightly better for Kodak Tri-X in this instance..or maybe I just like the content more? The actual content of the images does matter to me
Does this mean that i will never use Caffenol again? Absolutely not
I still think the fact film photography addicts like me can develop using products usually found around one’s home is astounding and incredible
Also, These tests i do not only keep me motivated but they also show the beauty of film
The various cameras and their styles, the various films and their looks, and the many many different development methods is more than enough reason for anyone to fall in love in my opinion
Hope everyone enjoyed the imagery from the tests
Which is the better result in your eyes? Have you ever tried any of the Caffenol recipes? How were your results?
Feel free to reach out with any questions and hope all is well with everyone this holiday season!