UFG dev times?

[greyhaze]

Hey everyone,
So I decided to go outside of my comfort zone and have adventured into trying a different developer than D76. That being Ethol UFG. I've seen some times and I have all the times on the massive dev chart, but oddly, many of the times are not done at box speed. ex. Efke 50 @ 64asa. The solution could be to shoot it at 64, but frankly I like box speed and sometimes the ASAs are even more far from the original. I have been told to do a clip test which is what I plan on doing, but it would be even easier if anyone had some times themselves. Just some info, I do not replenish and I do it one shot (I dilute or use stock, then I toss it). Does anyone have any times to share?
The one time I have for a film I need is 5.5min stock for FP4+. I'm looking for SFX, Efke 25kb, rollei infrared 400 and more.
Any help is appreciated.

 

[Christiaan Phleger]

I've used a wide range of films in UFG over the years but not those three and my times would not be of any real use since I use UFG replenished.
I will say that its pretty easy to get in range with one or two exposure/clip tests with that as a starting point for the films listed; UFG is pretty active so an E.I above box speed is to be expected.

 

[Christiaan Phleger]

Efke 25 at 40 for 1.5 minutes at 69.8 yes 90 seconds 1 minute 30 seconds is what the company charts says.

http://www.foto-r3.com/files/hoja_tecnica_ethol_UFG_LPD.pdf

 

[pentaxuser]

Efke 25 at 40 for 1.5 minutes at 69.8 yes 90 seconds 1 minute 30 seconds is what the company charts says.

http://www.foto-r3.com/files/hoja_tecnica_ethol_UFG_LPD.pdf

Is that a record for the shortest development time ever? Incredible!

If development can be done in this time without any of the problems that many speak of here then maybe we need to re-think the consensus that anything under 5 mins is fraught with danger.

pentaxuser

 

[cmacd123]

Back in the 1960 era, some folks at the camera club in my high school liked ETHOL 90. which would develop every film in 90 seconds. Can't say I ever tried it.

 

[greyhaze]

Ethol apparentally suggests that film should be dunked into a tank that's already got developer inside it, then removed the same way in order to get proper development. Still, at those short times, I would rather dilute just to be safe.

 

[Christiaan Phleger]

I usually do a 3-4 min development with my run of replenished UFG, most of the films I use and how I like them seem to do well with that time at about 75F. I do continuous agitation for the first 15 seconds then 5 inversions per 30 seconds and it has no issues with uneven development.

 

[greyhaze]

So would stock be that much different from replenished? That sounds like a good time and a lot less risky than 90 seconds dev time. However Efke 25 at 2x it's recommended time still sounds like it could overdo it... I guess I just need to do some testing...

 

[Christiaan Phleger]

Well I've used it stock/replenished for a while now, more than 5-6 years. The replenisher seems to have vanished but the stock is still available. Using any developer in a replenished form does change how it works a bit and how it looks, but *for me* I like how the replenished looks, the UFG formula is as you can tell very very active so running it in a replenished style tames it and to me when it gets a bit seasoned it really looks good. I still have some replenisher but at some point I'll have to switch and I've given some thought to it, I'll end up using the stock powder mixed with 75% water as the replenisher and tune the replenishment amount to balance the working solution.
With the proper replenisher I've used the same 1 liter bottle for at least 2 years or more.
Oh and yes with the Efke and older style emulsions the development times are very fast.

 

[BarneyL]

Sorry for resurrecting an old thread, but I've just got my hands on a can of Ethol UFG that I got at a discount, as it was the last one in the store. I'm always eager to try some new stuff and experiment, so it didn't bother me that this thing is discontinued and I probably won't ever see another tin. However, it turns out, that the manufacturer dev times do not contain data for Neopan Acros (only 400 and 1600), and this is my go to 100 ASA film. Massive dev chart doesn't help in this regard either.

Has anyone from you done some Acros development in Ethol UFG? What dev time do you suggest, and how do you like the results?

 

[Christiaan Phleger]

Ha thanks for reviving it; I had some good notes on using this. What size did you get?
I do less developing and haven't dabbled in UFG in ages. Its still a top favorite.
Knowing both Acros and UFG and probably having at some point done this I would suggest a Tmax 100 or Plus-X time as a starting point, and test/adjust from there. You may find 1+1 more agreeable for one shot; the Stock can last a very long time in amber bottles full and properly well capped. 1+1 extends volume wise but can still be used at least once more; I used to do 1+1 for 1 35mm 4 tank and two single 120 reel tanks and it had plenty of gas at the end, you may be able to replenish the used 1+1 with 20-30% and use it expediently. Have fun! It handles a very high amount of light, as well as very low light.

 

[Christiaan Phleger]

If it was my film, Acros in UFG 1+1 68 I would try 8 min at 68 and do a snip of six widely bracketed frames, at least several stops over and under; that would get me close. This developer mostly gives a higher than box speed, and in some cases more than double. So Acros could shoot correctly at EI 320, or even EI 640, especially if you are ultimately just only scanning.

 

[pentaxuser]

. This developer mostly gives a higher than box speed, and in some cases more than double. So Acros could shoot correctly at EI 320, or even EI 640, especially if you are ultimately just only scanning.

Is there a downside in grain etc when it gives you higher than box speed and in some cases 2x box speed?

In terms of its ability to deliver such speeds I wonder why it was discontinued ? These speed increases seem a lot better than any other makers' claims for speed increases

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[Christiaan Phleger]

Ha well with UFG grain is a feature not a bug.

UFG is one of the most active developers I've ever used, and with hard misuse such as excessive agitation, temperature drift upwards, and slack timing will create even more grain than is necessary. So, good agitation technique (full complete and random), maybe a water bath for the developer, and good pour in/out technique to get the timing within 5-10 seconds. Keep your process tight and the grain is surprisingly low for what can seem like kinda bull**it claims of 2x box speed, but there ya go, try it and see. YMMV to those that scan, but I used UFG as my push developer for weddings so my desired neg might have had more beef than what a film scanner would generally prefer. Keep in mind the higher exposure grain that UFG forms was printable, you just had to force the light thru the neg by long printing times or a couple of extra lens f-stops. Most scanners don't have the actual light horsepower to punch into some of those negs; I'm talking 1-2 *minutes of print exposure at f/4 on a cold light head. The whole image would gain a bit of contrast but hey, this was a save yer ass when it came time to print that neg of beach shots of the bride in a white dress. Nothing was unprintable.

The grain that UFG builds seems to be a rather pleasant affair, I have noted compared to Acufine ( a similar product that was formulated by the same guy as UFG but with patent restrictions) UFG is more of an etched sharpness and finer than Acufine, which seemed larger and mushier. Burnt toast crusts versus oatmeal with raisins ha. All in all you'll be able to see the grain and for what I see I like the UFG better; you can get some good edge effects as well. I recall a few high key prints where print was essentially white with just visible edges of crispy clean grain.

The way I understand it and by how it smells and handles, there are at least 4 major developing agents in UFG, and I'm fairly sure the reason it works better over the other 'mega' developers (my own term) is that the balance of all of them is just right. It was a long lasting developer and many professional volume labs and studios used it, and used in a replenished style (as I noted above years ago) it can be very cost effective. It was discontinued because essentially it was a studio/lab developer, and those that are left are running Xtol (most likely).
Those that want to tinker should try the current product Acufine. Its close enough to do the same processing tricks and has a similar look and tone, with a speed boost but less and a softer grain. The Acufine replenisher is much easier to find as well.

 

[BarneyL]

Ha thanks for reviving it; I had some good notes on using this. What size did you get?
I do less developing and haven't dabbled in UFG in ages. Its still a top favorite.
Knowing both Acros and UFG and probably having at some point done this I would suggest a Tmax 100 or Plus-X time as a starting point, and test/adjust from there. You may find 1+1 more agreeable for one shot; the Stock can last a very long time in amber bottles full and properly well capped. 1+1 extends volume wise but can still be used at least once more; I used to do 1+1 for 1 35mm 4 tank and two single 120 reel tanks and it had plenty of gas at the end, you may be able to replenish the used 1+1 with 20-30% and use it expediently.

Thanks so much for the reply. I have a 1 gallon tin. From all the dev times I found, none of them suggests 1+1 dilution... some sources suggests 1+5, with constant agitation (and triple the times of stock). I'm eager to try that 1:1 route though. Do you recommend specific agitation rhythm?

Have fun! It handles a very high amount of light, as well as very low light.

Indeed, one of the reasons I decided to try it is that it's ability to preserve highlights is legendary. Is Acufine like that as well? As for my workflow, I mostly scan things (with a DSLR) but I do some wet prints too, assuming I capture something worth printing

 

[Christiaan Phleger]

Ok the 1+1 is a workaround for 2 challenges; 1., UFG is freaking strong (as seen in the very short developing times) so full strength is often way way too hot for modern films, being 7% off on development time is not too much of a big deal at 12 minutes but at 2;45 its far too easy to make compounding errors. 1+1 gives breathing room without compromising the look and working style of the developer, 1+5 makes it work more as a 'one shot' style with more apparent mid tone grain and in my opinion, less of that highlight magic you are looking for.
2. You only have a gallon of the full strength UFG, and as far as I know there is only old stock left. I would mix the whole gallon up (distilled water) and divide into 4 quart glass amber bottles and seal well. Then I would mix 1+1 500ml total and use that as your working replenished solution, adding in and replacing an amount probably around 1oz of 1+1 per roll, in a replenished working scheme. With only 500ml total 1+1 you should be able to test a few snips and rolls to get you really close to ideal while stretching out what you have, and then you will be confident to commit to full rolls from that testing. If you do it this way you'd commit one quart to being open; 16oz for making the 1+1 stock and another 16 oz to use as the replenisher (1+1 of course), and each stock (1+0) Quart could do 8-16 rolls replenished (perhaps more). I've successfully kept UFG mixed with Distilled water for several years with no issues, so your mixed and divided gallon could last you years over dozens of rolls. Keep notes!

 

[BarneyL]

Looks like quite a lot of experimentation ahead of me. Thank you for all the hints and starting points, RidingWaves. I will share some results after I find sweet spot for my favourite films.

 

[Trask]

I’ve used UFG on a variety of films, including Acros, over the past few years — it’s quite an interesting developer. I’m attaching a couple of photographs taken on 120 Acros with a Plaubel 67 Wide at a Cars ‘n’ Coffee in 2017. Here are my developing notes made at that time: “Develop in Ethol UFG (3rd use) straight, in Combina narrow 120 film tank, 450ml, 22 Centigrade. No pre-soak. Total development time 5 minutes 45 seconds. Agitate first thirty seconds, then five seconds every 30 seconds — tilt tank at 45 degrees around the four cardinal directions for the first 2 1/2 minutes, thereafter tilt twice forward/back or side/side. Water stop bath, then PF TF-4 fixer 5-6 minutes fixing with intermittent agitation. Rinse, hypo clearing agent for two minutes, then running water (fill/agitate/dump). LFN and PhotoFlo in tap water, hang to dry.” I hope this helps.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Hey everyone,
So I decided to go outside of my comfort zone and have adventured into trying a different developer than D76. That being Ethol UFG. I've seen some times and I have all the times on the massive dev chart, but oddly, many of the times are not done at box speed. ex. Efke 50 @ 64asa. The solution could be to shoot it at 64, but frankly I like box speed and sometimes the ASAs are even more far from the original. I have been told to do a clip test which is what I plan on doing, but it would be even easier if anyone had some times themselves. Just some info, I do not replenish and I do it one shot (I dilute or use stock, then I toss it). Does anyone have any times to share?
The one time I have for a film I need is 5.5min stock for FP4+. I'm looking for SFX, Efke 25kb, rollei infrared 400 and more.
Any help is appreciated.

just rely on the mass dev chart; it's always close enough.