Ultrafine XTreme development: Data sheet vs Massive Dev Chart

[Autonerd]

I bought some Ultrafine Xtreme (100 and 400). I was looking for development times, and with the 400 film, there are *massive* disagreements between the data sheet and the Massive Dev Chart.

For the 400 speed fulm @ 400 iso, MDF's recommended dev times with D-76 are 2.5 minutes longer. At 1600 in D-76 stock (my preferred push developer), UF says 10.5 mins and MDF says 15.5! But for D-76 1:1 the difference is only 45 sec.

With HC-110-B they agree on 400 development time but @ 1600 MDF says 1.5 min longer. For UFX 100 they agree on HC-110-B but D76 times are 1 min more in D-76 stock or 1:1.

I usually go with what the manufacturer says -- they know the film best. But with Ultrafine, well... frankly I'm not so sure. They don't seem to be very definitive about anything.

Any recommendations? Any guidance?

Thanks in advance --

Aaron

 

[BWfoto]

Can't go wrong with the film developers charts. I think some of the Massive developers numbers are from people who have tested the film and chemical developers and came up with what they think prefer but that can be real subjective. Maybe try both if you can and see which you prefer.

 

[Steven Seven]

I bought some Ultrafine Xtreme (100 and 400). I was looking for development times, and with the 400 film, there are *massive* disagreements between the data sheet and the Massive Dev Chart.

For the 400 speed fulm @ 400 iso, MDF's recommended dev times with D-76 are 2.5 minutes longer.

Go with MDC.

I believe Ultrafine PDF has a typo, because for stock D76 it recommends 7 minutes for Extreme 400 but 8 minutes (!) for Extreme 100. Slower films usually require less time, not more. Yet, if you look at 1+1 times, it's corrected and Extreme 100 needs less time than 400.

I shoot Ultrafine Extreme 400 at box speed and develop in D76 for 9.5 minutes and love the results. BTW that's what Ilford recommends for Kentmere 400 film, which is (most likely) the same emulsion

 

[Autonerd]

OK , thanks all!