Ultrafine Xtreme+Caffenol-CL help?

Hello all.

A short while ago I bought a 135×100' roll of Ultrafine Xtreme 100ISO and a 120 sample pack of 4 400ISO and 4 100ISO.

Ive shot one of each 120 through my Ansco Shut-Shot Jr box camera and in my research of here and there and Flickr and such, it seems I like the looks that Xtol or Caffenol developers fetch the best.
I'm partial to Caffenol because its cheap and I like tinkering and mixing it myself. I tried for Caffenol-CH/CL and semi-stand development for the low and slow reduced fog and grain and more even development that it's meant to offer.
I'm very very particular and technical with my measurements and calculations and put a very great deal of research into both. I'm confident that my calculations and measurements are correct or at least close enough for tolerances if not spot on. I can't be absolutely sure because I had to look up the compound mass/density of each compound used and carefully measure volumetrically due to a complete lack of any funds needed for purchasing a gram scale that measures to within 0.1-0.001g increments.

I made sure all compounds were as pure as possible and warmed them in the oven @170f for hours to ensure they hadn't absorbed any water from hygroscopy even though I store them in air tight glass containers. I then let them cool to ambient temperature before measuring and mixing.

I mixed the caffenol-CL/CH the night before and stored in an airtight amber glass container free of contaminants to allow it to cool to the ambient temperature of 68.5F/20.3C. I started film and paper processing with Caffenol, and how particular I am on proper storage, maintenance, control and handling I am, I've had batches of Caffenol last 6 months without any change in development results. I've used both ID11 and D76 batches that were stored for almost 2 years without any notable change in development results from the same storage methods. So I'm 100% confident that the chemicals did not sour or oxidize (kinda impossible when they're stored in a dark cupboard in amber glass with all air displaced and an airtight seal) over the course of 12 hours. The fixer was mixed fresh and stored in the same manner. I'm also 100% certain that there isn't an issue with the water contaminants because I use distilled water that I bring to a boil for 10-20minutes uncovered and then let cool while covered to help rid it of contaminants. I do this with all chemistry I mix because when it comes to chemistry, decontamination, control, and precision is everything.

After days and days of research it seemed the better process for a semi-stand development was a pre-soak for 3-5 minutes, agitations for 1st 30 seconds with 3 inversions at 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, and 30 minutes and then stand till completion. All examples and calculations I could find seemed to point to 55-60minute development time for 100ISO and 65-70minute development for 400ISO.
Standard development for these films in caffenol-CL would be 20 minutes and 30 minutes respectively.

I developed for the pre soak and time, rinsed thoroughly for 3minutes (I usually prefer to rinse for 30 seconds to 1 minute before using an acetic acid/distilled vinegar stop bath for 3 minutes before another 1 minute water rinse to ensure that development is stopped completely and no developer contaminates the fixer which would disrupt fixing times. Though I was out of distilled vinegar and can't afford any at the moment), then fixed for 9 minutes which should be plenty considering a leader test from a 135 leader clipping showed 5.4 minutes to be sufficient fixing.
I rinsed with clean water for 5 minutes and then used a hypoclearing/drying agent for 1 minute.

The results were depressing.

I discovered 2 things.
1- instantly I could see the the film base was WAY TOO DENSE. It appeared almost black. I could still see images though. After the film had completely dried it is now about half as dense and when held up to the light I can see the negative images which appear to be more or less correctly exposed AND processed judging by approximate density. However the base is still really dark.
2- it seems I'm an idiot and got the label colors mixed up. I accidentally processed the 400iso at 57 minutes including time to empty the tank and wash until no developer came out.

As of right now I dont have a means to scan them with.

I do have my older ID11 which yielded exceptional results when I last used it about 2-3 months ago and has been stored in the most optimum conditions possible.

My questions are... Does anyone have much experience with the Ultrafine films and especially with caffenol chemistries?
Does anyone have a photo or 2 of a properly exposed and processed nagative of this filmstock that I might be able to view for an example?
And... Should I make an attempt with the 100iso in the ID11.

From examples I've seen of photos from this filmstock it appears as though caffenol chemistries and Xtol does best with this film. D76 appears to have the same issues with most film which is GREAT contrast and latitude but with very very gritty film grain. Microphen seems to be very flat muted but with exceptionally low grain and ID11 seems to be an almost happy medium with nice smooth grain and good sharpness but lacking in the highlights. I didnt see too many examplez of these film stocks with HC110 or Rodenol or other such developers. But from what I could see it looked like Xtol and Caffenol would be the best all around. Fairly smooth acceptable grain, great sharpness, good contrast with good latitude. In highlights, midtones and shadows.

Any advice would be helpful. If I can manage to find a light table and take photos of the negatives and base with my digital or even phone I may do so if it would help.

I'm kinda sketchy about wasting another roll and proceeding with either the ID11 or the Caffenol-CL In the process of experimentation because I don't want to waste more money. Though at the moment I have no money or income to purchase any more appropriate chemistry with.

Thanks a million.
-AJ.

"carefully measure volumetrically due to a complete lack of any funds needed for purchasing a gram scale"
no good

"I mixed the caffenol-CL/CH"
Which one used here? They are very different. Bromide or salt for the fast film?

"I made sure all compounds were as pure as possible and warmed them in the oven @170f for hours"
Only needed for the soda to determine how many water it contains. Weigh before and after heating to 250(!) °F. Finally it should be white powder.

"using an acetic acid/distilled vinegar stop bath"
Not recommended at all for soda-rich developers. Can produce CO2 gas in the emulsion and cause damages. Rinse 2x 30 sec with agitation in plain water instead.

Here is an inquiry (yours?) from my blog:
"I'm a bit confused. I looked at the density of Sodium Carbonate for volumetric conversation from standard caffenol-CM to the caffenol-CM(RS) version. Here you have listed 100mL(CC) of Sodium Carbonate being equal to 54g. But according to molecular density... 2.54g/CC(mL) anhydrous 2.25g/CC(mL) monohydrate 1.51g/CC(mL) heptahydrate Or 1.46g/CC(mL) decahydrate. But 100mL being equal to 54g woukd put density at 1.852g/CC(mL) so Heptahydrate that's absorbed a little water through hydroscopy? Should I just use 40g which woukd be equal to 100mL?"

Volumetric measuring can be very misleading especially with hydrated soda but also with the other ingredients. Make the proper soda-heat test with a small amount (10 gramm is enough) and use a scale.

"So I'm 100% confident"
I'm not

Sorry. Potassium (Kalium) Bromide. If you are Reinold/ImageFrugales both are listed as having 1g/L of Kbr. The difference is CL is listed as strictly 1g/L where CH is listed as 1-2g/L.

I fried the potassium bromide because it was stored in the small plastic container it came in which cased a bit of clumping and caking even with the silica packet in it. Clumping and caking=moisture, moisture= inconsistent results if volumetric. The soda had been dried previously and stored in a sealed glass container. After being dried again just for safety sake it lost a total of 3cc out of 100. 40g should be 15.74cc, I used 16CC which would be 40.64g. And it was a fine powder, not crystals.
The ascorbic acid I bought the 99.4% pure meant for food and laboratory use but I also dried it because it came in a thick plastic Ziploc bag. I only trust amber glass bottles for my chemicals because I had purchased and used the brown plastic chemical storage bottles but had a batch of C-41 that soured prematurely (expensive mistake). After some research I found that plastic isn't exactly airtight. Even if it has an airtight seal on the top oxygen and other gas molecules can permiate the plastic itself and help you oxidize the chemistry. So I'm not taking chances with the plastic bags for dry chemical storage.

I processed a roll of Kentmere 100 last night because I know that film better and know what the base looks like with caffenol, ID11 and D76. Caffenol chemistry DOES give a slightly darker base compared to the others. But only very slightly.
The Kentmere 100 also came out with the images on the film looking pretty close to correct (only printing or scanning will tell) though the base is still too dense.
My best guess is I may have miscalculated on the soda.

In gonna try having one of them scanned professionally as well as as scan it myself and see what it turns out. I'm also going to try a roll of the Ultrafine Xtreme 100 in 135 with a Kentmere 100 135 in the ID11 and see what comes up and how they compare.

Its kinda interesting though. Is guess fog/base density would probably make it more flat and muddy but impossible to have inky blacks. If I'm inverting in my head correctly. Clear parts of the film would be black parts of the image.

Ah, now I see the difference between CL and CH due to that table. I cant remember where it was, though I'm almost positive that on one of the blog pages it was showing CL as being the same as CH only with more margin of error on the KBr. Perhaps I'll try the CL with the reduced soda and Ascorbic Acid. And see how that fares. If I can find a friend with a light table Ill take better pictures of what the images on the film looks like. Again I've always been rather poor coming from an impoverished family and never having been able to afford any form of technical school or college or university. The best I've ever been able to do for myself was a few years in a factory. Most every other place where I live doesnt want to pay more than $9/hr.
So I dont havr much in the way of any funds for all the toys and knick knacks that most anyone else could afford. Life has been more about struggling to pay bills and survive with little to spare IF any at all. that's why most of my stuff I havent been able to scan or do anything else because I can't afford much.
And as of right now I have no money whatsoever and have had to rely on family for bills and grocery money because I quit my job to go to a technical school so I could actually make some money for a change.

Any advice or assistance would be greatly appreciated. I'm not stupid, I have a genius level intelligence when it comes to technical things and matters like this. And In OCD, if In going to do something I put hours, days, weeks or more in research, calculations etc to try to do it the best I can.

Here are a couple examples of the very first test strip I ever developed with no Photoshop or digital manipulation. The woman who ran the photos at the local Wal-Mart was a friend of mine and I just needed a point of reference of which of the 3 test strips was closest to correct. So she put them through the Fujitsu scanner on auto exposure and they were all close but the first one I did was the one that should have been the correct time and it appears to be spot on.

So far Ive early ever had any issues with any films not being correct or ruined simple because I'm neurotic about getting it right before beginning. I can't afford to waste money and materials in getting it wrong.

Also I may have made a miscalculation. I'm,currently in truck driving school (Lorrie if youre from the UK) and its 11 hour days, have to be up at 5am to get there and dont get home till y or 6:30pm and with stress and anxiety I've only been getting about 4-5hrs sleep a night. That's why I've pulked out the film and chemistry. As a means to try to unwind and not think about everything else for a little bit.

Please note the remark "as a starting point".
https://caffenol.blogspot.de/2010/08/recipes.html

For the reduced soda (rs) versions look here:
https://caffenol.blogspot.de/2015/05/the-rs-and-rsa-variants.html