Fomapan 200 or 400 (SHEET FILM) recommendations / advise for an all around film.

[awalker]

Hi,

Trying to figure out what kind of cheap! sheet film I should stick with. ISO400 version doesn't archive box speed or at least so are "big boys" told to me, they said it's more like ISO200 so how does ISO200 version performs does it give you full 200?

Basically I like to find an easy all around film for sunny/overcast days for summer (and for the winter in daylight). There's all so need for film for the indoor photo shoots in artificial light.

Gear I am using is Graflex w/ f4.7 Ektar.

Thansk in advance
Tero

p.s. developer isn't problem I think, I have D-76/ID-11, Perceptol, Michrophen, D74, Rodinal and everything probably can be found from web shops

p.s.s. Are those Fomapan sheet films base colored blue (like 120 version)???

 

[Regular Rod]

This is just personal experience based on usage rather than any scientific analysis...

As far as I can tell, FOMAPAN 200 is accurate to the box speed. However, my exposures are calculated as per Ansel Adams' Zone System (for which I find the box speed of 200 is correct) and I use PYRO or CATECHOL based developers. The tonal range is very good indeed. The base is only slightly tinted bluish and this has not given me any problems. There is one thing that is inconvenient about FOMAPAN 200 and that is its astonishing degree of reciprocity failure. I returned to ILFORD films because of this.

RR

 

[mgb74]

I asked a similar question over on LFF recently. Here's a link:
http://www.largeformatphotography.i...288-Another-Arista-EDU-Ultra-Fomapan-question

 

[R.Gould]

For a number of years I have used Fomapan 400 in 35mm and 120 and use it at box speed, developed in either Rodinal 1/50 for 18 minutes or D76 stock for 8 minutes, it is my main goto film, and for around a year now the 120 is no longer on a blue base,

 

[removed account4]

hi tero

id pick some up and see how you like it
geographics might come into play
you know, finland maybe getting a different quality of light
and all that ... i enjoy that film in 120 but sadly even though
i have a few 4x5 boxes they are still " conditioning" ..
i have never shot anything at box speed chromes, 41 or bw ..
i f it says 400 i will go down to 200 and 200 to 100 or whatever ..
while i take advice from online fora peeps its usually a starting point
for exploration and deviation ....

have fun!

Hi,

Trying to figure out what kind of cheap! sheet film I should stick with. ISO400 version doesn't archive box speed or at least so are "big boys" told to me, they said it's more like ISO200 so how does ISO200 version performs does it give you full 200?

Basically I like to find an easy all around film for sunny/overcast days for summer (and for the winter in daylight). There's all so need for film for the indoor photo shoots in artificial light.

Gear I am using is Graflex w/ f4.7 Ektar.

Thansk in advance
Tero

p.s. developer isn't problem I think, I have D-76/ID-11, Perceptol, Michrophen, D74, Rodinal and everything probably can be found from web shops

p.s.s. Are those Fomapan sheet films base colored blue (like 120 version)???

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

My experience with Fomapan is that it does NOT rate at box speed, rather it should be shot one stop slower (200 should be rated at 100, etc). It is very responsive to development, with noticeably shorter development times than other standards (7-9mins for Fomapan 200 as opposed to 11+ for FP4+ and 14 for Tri-X using Pyrocat HD 1:1:100).

 

[Ian Grant]

I've shot a lot of Fomapan 100 & 200 and get great results always at half the box speed and at about 75% the dev times of other films.

Excellent films but you need to do some quick personal tests to get the optimum film speed and dev times that suit you.

Ian

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Also, IF you are planning to do alt-process prints from your negatives, the Foma films are terrific for this as they build contrast very rapidly. It is not hard to make a negative with Foma that will work well even for albumen or salt printing.

 

[jspillane]

I rate the 200 speed at 125 and like it, and shoot the 100 speed as 50 and like it. As mentioned, reciprocity failure is truly terrible, so I think it would be hard to use as an only emulsion. For any exposures 1 sec. or longer, I don't think they are worth the headache. Anyway, they are cheap (even cheaper as Artisa.EDU at freestyle); get a box of each and try them out and see what you like.

Also, be aware that they scratch quite easily (don't use squeegees on them!).

 

[DREW WILEY]

I'd agree. Realistically cut the speed in half, and expect relatively horrible long-exposure characteristics. I'm holding out since my last experience
to see if the quality control has improved. And I honestly don't know if the Arista branded product was at one time was cut from an otherwise
slightly flawed batch of Foma 200. So is there any qualitiative difference between current Arista EDU and Fomapan? I honestly don't know. But
the so-called 200-speed product does have exceptional ability to handle lighting extremes due to its very long straight line and remarkably
steep toe, so is quite tempting. The 400-speed product never particularly impressed me compared to its expensive cousins like TMY and HP5.
But it is an otherwise competent film, in a Ford/Chevy sense, and obviously well priced.

 

[Michael W]

I've used Foma 200 in 4x5 processed in Rodinal. Has nice tonality, not as high resolution as FP4 which I compared it to. Best rated at 100 in Rodinal whereas FP4 is a true 125.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I've always rated FP4 itself around half-speed, just to get the shadows up off the toe some, and well differentiated. With Foma 200 you can
go way down there, and separate clear into Zone I or even 0, because the toe is so steep. But go too far, by rating the film too high, and the
shadows will just go blank. Just depends how contrasty your scene is.

 

[awalker]

Thanks everyone for the sharing your experiences with these films. This will help me go forward.

 

[Ian Grant]

Reciprocity failure of Fomapan 100 & 200 isn't as bad as the datasheets and many posters claim in my experience. Perhaps it helps that I shoot at half the box speed and with reduced development compared to other films anyway. I tested the films a few years back in typical low light situations I might encounter and was surprised how little extra exposure was needed around the 1 second to 10 second range, approx 1/2 a stop at 10 seconds = 15 seconds was enough. It's rare I shoot longer times than that with MF and with LF I can carry other films stock if needed anyway.

Ian

 

[Nokton48]

Helpful information here!

Good to know, I am just starting with FOMAPAN 100 & 200 in 9x12. Bought 300 sheets of each, to use in my three Plaubel Makiflexes. Yes the prices are low, about 80 cents a sheet delivered to me. Less than half the price of Ilford HP-5+

 

[Xmas]

I find Formapan 100 and 400 close to data sheet speeds which are different from box...

Not tried any thing slower than 1/30 yet.

Not had any problems with 135, bulk 30m or 120 yet.

 

[peter k.]

I've shot a lot of Fomapan 100 & 200 and get great results always at half the box speed and at about 75% the dev times of other films.

Ian.. thanks allot for the note... I've been shooting Arista (Fomapan) 400 off and on, but have had trouble with sky burn out.. no where else, so decided to run some new tests. Nothing has worked so far, but today, shot two negatives of the same view. Developed Hc110, diluting H, one at 75% less as you suggested, and the other at my normal developing time. WOW.. that did the trick.
Will do some more tests... but thanks... and wonder why Fomapan needs less development time ...
is it because of a thin emulsion?

 

[Ian Grant]

Will do some more tests... but thanks... and wonder why Fomapan needs less development time ...
is it because of a thin emulsion?

I think it's just a characteristic of Foma's B&W emulsions, I don't think they are thinner coatings than others except the old Adox/EFKE which need normal dev times anyway.

Ian

 

[mgb74]

Ian.. thanks allot for the note... I've been shooting Arista (Fomapan) 400 off and on, but have had trouble with sky burn out.. no where else, so decided to run some new tests. Nothing has worked so far, but today, shot two negatives of the same view. Developed Hc110, diluting H, one at 75% less as you suggested, and the other at my normal developing time. WOW.. that did the trick.
Will do some more tests... but thanks... and wonder why Fomapan needs less development time ...
is it because of a thin emulsion?

I'm a bit unclear when Ian suggests "75% the dev times of other films". If you are saying 75% of the dev times listed for Fomapan at box speed, I understand. But if you're saying 75% of the time that other films (of equivalent box speed) require, then how do you account for the differing development times of various 100-125 speed films in a given developer?

For example, using MDC times for D76 1:1, I see:
Fomapan 100 - 10.0 min
Acros - 10.5 min
APX100 - 13.5 min
Efke 100 - 10.0 min
Kentmere 100 - 11.5 min

I realize you're suggesting a starting point for zeroing in based on individual technique and preferences, so perhaps it's OK just to get close to begin.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

I think it's just a characteristic of Foma's B&W emulsions, I don't think they are thinner coatings than others except the old Adox/EFKE which need normal dev times anyway.

Ian

Fomapan 400 in 35mm doesn't have good antihalation properties either, which often causes the highlights to bloom. The 120 film doesn't suffer the same problem, and I believe the sheet film is treated like the 120 roll film in this respect also.

I found that Pyrocat was a really great developer for this film for that very reason, to keep those highlights in check. I have stopped using the film in favor of HP5+, but remember that good results from Fomapan 400 was all about trying different approaches until it works. Once dialed in it's beautiful.

 

[Ian Grant]

I'm a bit unclear when Ian suggests "75% the dev times of other films". If you are saying 75% of the dev times listed for Fomapan at box speed, I understand. But if you're saying 75% of the time that other films (of equivalent box speed) require, then how do you account for the differing development times of various 100-125 speed films in a given developer?

For example, using MDC times for D76 1:1, I see:
Fomapan 100 - 10.0 min
Acros - 10.5 min
APX100 - 13.5 min
Efke 100 - 10.0 min
Kentmere 100 - 11.5 min

I realize you're suggesting a starting point for zeroing in based on individual technique and preferences, so perhaps it's OK just to get close to begin.

I wouldn't take the times in the MDC as a indicator of anything, for many years (at least 27) I've processed APX 25 & 100, Tmax100 & 400, EFKE PL25, HP5, Fuji Acros, Delta 100 & 400 for the sames time (for normal development) in Rodinal, Xtol and now Pyrocat HD with superb results. Probably because I'm processing for a long tonal range this helps to bring the ideal development times very close. So only Foma films fall outside that as far as I'm concerned.

It's worth noting that before Colour films became dominant in the D&P market all B&W films were processed to a standard dev time in commercial D&P processing labs.

Ian

 

[marciofs]

I wouldn't take the times in the MDC as a indicator of anything, for many years (at least 27) I've processed APX 25 & 100, Tmax100 & 400, EFKE PL25, HP5, Fuji Acros, Delta 100 & 400 for the sames time (for normal development) in Rodinal, Xtol and now Pyrocat HD with superb results. Probably because I'm processing for a long tonal range this helps to bring the ideal development times very close. So only Foma films fall outside that as far as I'm concerned.

It's worth noting that before Colour films became dominant in the D&P market all B&W films were processed to a standard dev time in commercial D&P processing labs.

Ian

Sorry for bringing this old topic up, but what is the standard time for all these films in Rodinal?

 

[Dennis S]

Helpful information here!

Good to know, I am just starting with FOMAPAN 100 & 200 in 9x12. Bought 300 sheets of each, to use in my three Plaubel Makiflexes. Yes the prices are low, about 80 cents a sheet delivered to me. Less than half the price of Ilford HP-5+

Wow... That should keep you busy next year. Looking forward to your pic posts.

 

[AlanC]

Tero, to try to answer your original question, I don't think you will get box speed out of the 200 or the 400. I recently tried Foma 200 for the first time and found it worked well at 125. I have used a lot of Foma 400 and rate it at 200.
Are you aware that these are completely different films, in terms of how your finished prints will look? Foma 400 has more character than perhaps any other film, and yields prints a very distinct bright , sharp micro-contrasty look. I think it is great but it is not everyone's cup of tea. By comparison I find Foma 200 to be rather bland....
If you have a medium format camera why don't you try out a couple of rolls of each, in different lighting conditions, and see which you like best? Ignore people who say Foma 400 has short dev. times. Give it the same as TriX or HP5 and you won't go far wrong.

Alan

 

[Nokton48]

Does Acufine work well with these films? I have a gallon can of it in the basement.