Ethol UFG

[beemermark]

I used to use this developer back in the day until it became hard to find. I still have a sealed tin can that makes 3 1/2 Gallons. Never used it because I couldn't figure out how to mix up and keep 3 1/2 gals of developer. Any ideas? I do have a lot of brown glass jugs but how long does this stuff last? Figure I could go to the hardware store and buy a 5 gal plastic bucket to mix it in. Or someway to make smaller volumes?

 

[Don_ih]

Open the can and thoroughly mix the powder. Divide it into 7 equal portions by mass and seal each portion in a ziploc bag, squeezing out as much air as possible. If you wrapped each of those in tin foil, sealing those up as good as possible, that would probably help keep it from going bad, but the ziploc bag might be good enough. Mix up one of the bags to a 1/2 gallon of volume and see if it works right (I can't imagine it doesn't).

If it doesn't work, use that and the rest of your powder to mix up the full 3.5 gallons and split it into full sealed jars. Not much else you can do.

 

[John Wiegerink]

I think I would mix it all and then decant into smaller sizes. Make sure the smaller bottles are filled to the brim with as little air as possible left in the bottle. This developer last a long time that way. Still, I would do a film leader test when using any bottle that had been opened for any length of time. Dividing developers in their powder form is frowned upon here so mixing all is probably best, but it's your choice. You could always sell what you have as there are folks like me that buy UFG if the price is right. I have a working batch in a gallon jug that I use with UFG replenisher that's more than a year old and still working great. I wish they would bring this developer back because it's easy to use, works with most all films, has good shelf life and is fast. Great for beginners. I doubt that will happen, but if it does happen Adox would be the one to revive it.

 

[jim appleyard]

I wouldn't divide the powder in small batches, you could get uneven amounts of critical chems in a batch and that could lead to uneven development. I also wouldn't store in plastic bottles as most plastic is air permeable to some degree. I would mix the whole batch and divide into glass jars filled to the brim. IIRC, this developer ups the EI of a film, so it may not be an everyday shooting scenario, but all I can say it go on a shooting spree and use the stuff up.

 

[Don_ih]

The debate over dividing powdered developers will continue unresolved. But I used to always weigh out enough D76 powder for 500ml of 1:1. It never failed. I just stopped buying it. The question you can ask about this is how did they fill the package - one chemical at a time or they mixed it all together and filled a bunch of packages by weight?

There are a wide range of powder mixers for industry, at all scales. They most likely used one of those.

 

[Kodachromeguy]

What was the advantage or characteristic of Ethol UFG over other developers?

 

[AnselMortensen]

IIRC, UFG stood for "Ultra Fine Grain".

 

[Kino]

https://www.digitaltruth.com/products/ethol_tech/ethol.pdf

 

[John Wiegerink]

IIRC, UFG stood for "Ultra Fine Grain".

It might be classified as an Ultra Fine Grain developer, but I found it to be semi-fine grain and not what I would call Ultra. Whatever Ethol meant by Ultra? I'm going to develop some Tmax 100 120 film in it tonight and will try to scan the negative tomorrow evening. I have a couple of sheets on long expire Agfa APX 100 4X5 that will go into UFG also and we'll see how they come out too. The one nice thing I always liked about UFG was that it wasn't a speed-decreasing fine grain developer like Microdol-X and Perceptol.

 

[Paul Howell]

When I freelanced at the Sacramento Union in the mid 70s the darkroom tech kept a gallon of UFG mixed for TriX that had to be cropped. Otherwise D76 or DK 50 for MF.

 

[beemermark]

When I freelanced at the Sacramento Union in the mid 70s the darkroom tech kept a gallon of UFG mixed for TriX that had to be cropped. Otherwise D76 or DK 50 for MF.

I have some DK 50 still but don’t shoot 4x5 anymore.

 

[beemermark]

I think I’ll separate it into 3 bags for 1 gallon and 1 bag for 1/2 gallon.

 

[Paul Howell]

I have some DK 50 still but don’t shoot 4x5 anymore.

Dk 50 1:1 works well with MF, my last 2 rolls of Foma 400 6X9 had nice tight grain and tones.

 

[John Wiegerink]

I think I’ll separate it into 3 bags for 1 gallon and 1 bag for 1/2 gallon.

Good luck! When you open the can you will see why trying to separate into three separate bags might not work well with this developer. When you open the can you will see a fine grain sand like mix, but also longer straight little stick like strands that I think are hydroquinone. They want to stay separate and you might not get the same amount of each chemical in each of the three bags. That's why trying to divide powdered developers is not recommended here on these forums. It might work with some powdered developers, but not all.

 

[Don_ih]

That's why trying to divide powdered developers is not recommended here on these forums.

That's why you dump that powder into a bigger container and mix it up as best you can before splitting it up. Powders mix just as well as anything else, if you actually try it. And I recommend splitting developers on this forum regularly. You just need to be sensible and test to make sure it works as it should.

I challenge anyone to get any single-package developer to separate in any meaningful way. It won't happen.

 

[John Wiegerink]

That's why you dump that powder into a bigger container and mix it up as best you can before splitting it up. Powders mix just as well as anything else, if you actually try it. And I recommend splitting developers on this forum regularly. You just need to be sensible and test to make sure it works as it should.

I challenge anyone to get any single-package developer to separate in any meaningful way. It won't happen.

Oh, I'm not arguing with you Don, I'm just saying that others here frown on it. With some developers like D23 or even D76 you might get away with it no problem. Then comes a developer that has a tiny amount of say, Phenidone A in it , which is extremely important in its makeup. If you don't get that tiny amount of Phenidone mixed 100% equal in the three or four parts you're in trouble. I think that's why some here think it's not a good idea to split powdered developers. Me, I'd have no problem with D23, but UFG is a whole different developer.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

I used to use this developer back in the day until it became hard to find. I still have a sealed tin can that makes 3 1/2 Gallons. Never used it because I couldn't figure out how to mix up and keep 3 1/2 gals of developer. Any ideas? I do have a lot of brown glass jugs but how long does this stuff last? Figure I could go to the hardware store and buy a 5 gal plastic bucket to mix it in. Or someway to make smaller volumes?

I see no reason why you couldn't take a smaller amount of the powder and prepare a smaller quantity after mixing the contents of the can thoroughly.

 

[beemermark]

Curious, UFG came in smaller cans to make 1 gallon. And maybe smaller than that. Do you think the mixing on the assembly line was different for different size cans? I don't.

 

[MattKing]

On some assembly lines, the "mixing" was actually done by adding precise measures of the constituent components into the final cans.
I'd risk it with print developer, if I absolutely had to, but I wouldn't with film developer.
And I actually do it with Kodak HCA.
You can decide for yourself what your risk tolerance is.

 

[Trask]

Curious, UFG came in smaller cans to make 1 gallon. And maybe smaller than that. Do you think the mixing on the assembly line was different for different size cans? I don't.

Yes, UFG came in cans to make a quart -- and so did the UFG replenisher. I'm attaching 13 files that together are a full review of UFG in 1956, just for background. Now all you need is some DuPont S-X or Ansco Supreme film and you're all set! Actually, UFG works perfectly well with modern emulsion IMHO.

 

[Christiaan Phleger]

I ran a batch of replenished UFG for a few years, great stuff and likely the ultimate in "Classic Street Photography" look. A very distinctive look and a natural 'speed enhancement', I agree I would not separate the powder. I seem to recall a technique to mix up the stock UFG much stronger and then dilute some to make the stock and the other as a replenisher as needed (dilution as necessary) and to be honest I would consider doing exactly that if I were you. Perhaps mix the 3.5 gal into 1 gallon and then separate that gallon into 4 quarts, then dilute that "stock" by 1;2 or 1;4 for a working stock, and then replenish that. I know that seems like a lot of dilution, but, ya don't know this particular stuff, so to speak. Very strong, in many ways. Rumor was that it had several different actual developers, PPD, Metol, HQ and l think a bit of Glycin and prob some Para-aminophenol just for good measure. When you mix it you'll smell what I mean and I strongly recommend wearing PPE mask gloves and googles and be prepared to do a lot of stirring. Great stuff and one of the ones I wish would come back, Accufine is close, enough for you is your judgement.

 

[John Wiegerink]

Curious, UFG came in smaller cans to make 1 gallon. And maybe smaller than that. Do you think the mixing on the assembly line was different for different size cans? I don't.

Yes, there was quart size, both UFG developer and the replenisher came in that size.

 

[John Wiegerink]

I ran a batch of replenished UFG for a few years, great stuff and likely the ultimate in "Classic Street Photography" look. A very distinctive look and a natural 'speed enhancement', I agree I would not separate the powder. I seem to recall a technique to mix up the stock UFG much stronger and then dilute some to make the stock and the other as a replenisher as needed (dilution as necessary) and to be honest I would consider doing exactly that if I were you. Perhaps mix the 3.5 gal into 1 gallon and then separate that gallon into 4 quarts, then dilute that "stock" by 1;2 or 1;4 for a working stock, and then replenish that. I know that seems like a lot of dilution, but, ya don't know this particular stuff, so to speak. Very strong, in many ways. Rumor was that it had several different actual developers, PPD, Metol, HQ and l think a bit of Glycin and prob some Para-aminophenol just for good measure. When you mix it you'll smell what I mean and I strongly recommend wearing PPE mask gloves and googles and be prepared to do a lot of stirring. Great stuff and one of the ones I wish would come back, Accufine is close, enough for you is your judgement.

I had heard that UFG used Phenidone instead of Metol, but I can't say one way or the other. I'd lean more toward the Metol rumor. If it's using small quantities of other developing agents it's hard to break down or split the developer. If you have just 1 or 2 grams of Phenidone as a developing agent for the 3 1/2 gallon size UFG and you want to break it or split it into 3 or 4 separate packs/bags there is no possible way you will get an equal amount of Phenidone in each bag. A 1/4 or 1/2 gram off on Phenidone and you're screwed. Something like D23 with a large quantity of Sodium Sulfite and Metol is much different when it comes the splitting it up.

 

[Don_ih]

Try it out with something unimportant first, if you split up the powder. It takes a few seconds to load a roll of film in a camera, take a few shots, then pull just that exposed film out of the camera and put it on a reel. Nothing lost if it doesn't work, because the whole amount can be mixed (in the extremely unlikely event that a chemical manufacturer didn't thoroughly mix the powders prior to packaging them).

Dry mixed powders are used all the time. A cake mix, for instance, has a very small amount of salt in it compared to flour. It's fully mixed as a large quantity and individual bags are filled from that. There's nothing more magical about film developers - except that the chemicals may react with one another. In that case, either they are kept apart (ID11) or something is added to prevent it (D76). Now, if something is added to prevent it, I doubt that would be very effective if the powder was not fully mixed prior to packaging.

But who knows. Maybe the factory line had a dozen people with teaspoons putting individual chemicals in individual cans as they passed by on a conveyor belt....

 

[John Wiegerink]

Try it out with something unimportant first, if you split up the powder. It takes a few seconds to load a roll of film in a camera, take a few shots, then pull just that exposed film out of the camera and put it on a reel. Nothing lost if it doesn't work, because the whole amount can be mixed (in the extremely unlikely event that a chemical manufacturer didn't thoroughly mix the powders prior to packaging them).

Dry mixed powders are used all the time. A cake mix, for instance, has a very small amount of salt in it compared to flour. It's fully mixed as a large quantity and individual bags are filled from that. There's nothing more magical about film developers - except that the chemicals may react with one another. In that case, either they are kept apart (ID11) or something is added to prevent it (D76). Now, if something is added to prevent it, I doubt that would be very effective if the powder was not fully mixed prior to packaging.

But who knows. Maybe the factory line had a dozen people with teaspoons putting individual chemicals in individual cans as they passed by on a conveyor belt....

Yup, I'm sure it would work, but how good I couldn't say. I'd think there might be slightly different results per split batch, but maybe not.
I finally developed that sheet of 4X5 APX 100 (exp July, 1995) and a roll of Tmax 100 that was a test for focus in a newly refurbished Kodak Medalist II. The APX 100 is slightly fogged, but really very good for no cold/freezer storage and the negative looks pretty good. The Tmax 100 from the Medalist was rated at ISO 100 and by the looks of it I could have used EI 200 for the 6 minute developing time. I'll scan these later today and actually wet print both to see what they look like both ways.