Availability of 8x10 sheet film

[khh]

Availability of x-ray film in Europe is virtually nonexistent. The only practical way is to import it from the US. This brings the cost per sheet in the same region as Fomapan, which is in all respects a far superior product.

Ah. I've tried looking for that before, to no avail. Same with lith film.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Fomapan, which is in all respects a far superior product.

Those are words I don't see much here...

 

[koraks]

Those are words I don't see much here...

No, I guess it's inherent for complaints to be spun out more broadly than praise. And of course, this is in relation to x-ray film specifically. After hundreds of sheets in 4x5 through 8x10, I feel very comfortable in that statement. Ektascan B/RA was a relatively OK product for an x-ray film, although the tonality was still quite poor. The double-sided stuff..man, don't get me started. Horrible. Fomapan sheet film has quite effective anti-halation measures, full panchromatic response, there's no mucking about with having to strip one emulsion layer that otherwise just softens the results and creates weird artifacts, it's very easy to develop with perfect evenness in trays, tanks etc. while with xray you have to figure out some kind of freemason's handshake development routine to get decent results, its response to contrast control is normal whereas xray is...well...xray...then there's the scratching issue...The short of it is that you learn to appreciate all those advancements in film technology in the 1900-1970 period or so that we tend to take for granted, but that are left out of x-ray film for a variety of reasons.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Well, FWIW, I've been using mostly Fomapan (unless I needed something Fomapan couldn't do) since the early 2000s when I discovered it (after a couple decades away and growing up thinking Kodak was all there was). I keep telling myself I need to try Kentmere, since it's about the same price and widely reported as better quality controlled, but I have bulk rolls of Fomapan 100 and 400, 4x5 in both as well (and Kentmere isn't yet offered in sheet films) -- so I won't get there soon.

And I've never used X-ray film; in 4x5 it costs as much as Fomapan unless I'm willing/able to recut it from 8x10 myself (and I'm not).

 

[John Wiegerink]

Well, FWIW, I've been using mostly Fomapan (unless I needed something Fomapan couldn't do) since the early 2000s when I discovered it (after a couple decades away and growing up thinking Kodak was all there was). I keep telling myself I need to try Kentmere, since it's about the same price and widely reported as better quality controlled, but I have bulk rolls of Fomapan 100 and 400, 4x5 in both as well (and Kentmere isn't yet offered in sheet films) -- so I won't get there soon.

And I've never used X-ray film; in 4x5 it costs as much as Fomapan unless I'm willing/able to recut it from 8x10 myself (and I'm not).

Ah, Kentmere in sheets! I bet if it ever came to be and was priced near Foma sheet films, it would be an instant hit. I just don't see it happening, but who knows in this strange market atmosphere.

 

[retina_restoration]

Ah, Kentmere in sheets! I bet if it ever came to be and was priced near Foma sheet films, it would be an instant hit. I just don't see it happening, but who knows in this strange market atmosphere.

I made an inquiry with Ilford (through a friend who manages one of the American retailers) about this, and was told that it won't happen. Apparently there are issues with the Kentmere emulsions not being compatible with the sheet film base and/or the coating process.

Those are words I don't see much here...

Complaints get far more traction than compliments, sadly.
I started using Fomapan 100 and 400 a few years ago, and although it has poor reciprocity traits, and it's "classic" grain is coarse compared to more modern (IE: more expensive) films, I have used it in sheet film sizes and found it to be quite excellent.
So yes, I agree with Koraks: Fomapan is vastly superior to X-ray films, in every way. It all depends on what you are comparing it to.

 

[John Wiegerink]

The first time I used Foma in sheet film was when I fixed up an old 9X12cm plate camera and needed film for it. Foma 100 9X12cm was the only one I could find. I was surprised in how good that old camera did and also in how Foma 100 turned out in Pyrocat-MC that I was using at that time. I think Foma 100 and even 400 get a bad rap from folks who haven't taken the time to learn how to expose and develop it.

 

[ntenny]

I think Fomapan 100 is a terrific film, but I have run into more QC issues with it than with all other films combined. Mostly pinholes, which are mighty annoying when they get in the middle of your best images, but a couple of instances of what seemed to be strange emulsion defects all over the film area. I still shoot it in roll formats (and 9x12, where it’s usually the only game in town in the US), but I gave up on spending sheet-film money on it.

X-ray film is challenging to handle for sure. I eventually found that my best way to develop it was inside a gallon (~4 litre) plastic bag, so I wasn’t agitating it in contact with anything rigid that could scratch it.

-NT

 

[Don_ih]

X-ray film is challenging to handle for sure. I eventually found that my best way to develop it was inside a gallon (~4 litre) plastic bag, so I wasn’t agitating it in contact with anything rigid that could scratch it.

Similarly, I had my best results from xray film in hangers, in a tank. They couldn't touch anything at all.

One of the issues with xray film, though,is you can scratch it by pulling it out of the box. If at all possible, it should be lifted out, not slid across other sheets.

And I've never used X-ray film; in 4x5 it costs as much as Fomapan unless I'm willing/able to recut it from 8x10 myself (and I'm not).

Well, it is pretty simple to cut, since the safelight can be on. But it's mostly not worth messing with.

 

[pentaxuser]

Foma Ortho 400 was available in 8x10 last I checked. It's about €87 for 25 sheets.

It appears to be out of stock as of now according to the its own Harman Tech site

pentaxuser

 

[Don_ih]

It appears to be out of stock as of now according to the its own Harman Tech site

Foma Ortho 400

 

[Donald Qualls]

Foma Ortho 400

Yeah, Ilford's Ortho is ISO 80...

 

[pentaxuser]

Yeah, Ilford's Ortho is ISO 80...

Yes I was replying to the OP from Norway who specifically mentions Ilford Ortho Plus as follows:
"Is there anything up with the availability og 8x10 sheet film these days? Both of the films I use the most, T-Max 400 and Ilford Ortho Plus, isn't available right now. The availability of T-Max 400 hasnt always been the best, but Ortho Plus has usually been available."

Foma 400 may well be a replacement for him assuming he regards it as such. Does he?

pentaxuser

 

[pkr1979]

I tried reversing Foma 400 in 120, and decided it wasnt for me. This doesnt mean I will not like it as a negative film in 8x10 though. I wasnt really considering it, but maybe I should.

 

[GregY]

I tried reversing Foma 400 in 120, and decided it wasnt for me. This doesnt mean I will not like it as a negative film in 8x10 though. I wasnt really considering it, but maybe I should.

From my experience w Foma in various sizes and speeds...i'd be more inclined to try HP5 in 8x10 as far as QC...

 

[blee1996]

I also consider Foma 100 a very good film for large format (8x10, 9x12), and good value overall. I have not used enough of them to encounter any QC problems yet.

 

[GregY]

There's no doubt that quality control is much better with Ilford products, that's true. But I've used a few hundred sheets of Fomapan 100 and 400 and rarely found a manufacturing defect, and the few I encountered were very minor.
I think the quality issue with Foma products is a bit exaggerated.

RR, The OP originally asked about the availability/scarcity of two specific films in 8x10 TMax 400 & Ilford Ortho Plus..... by my read, he wasn't really asking for suggestions of alternates, so our discussion about our film use doesn't really solve his problem.
The fact that i've used & loved TMY-2 and you've used hundreds of sheets of Foma hasn't helped him source the film he's after.

 

[pkr1979]

So - Ilford customer services came back to me - it seems like Ortho Plus has its own campaign now... Like ULF-film.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Ortho Plus has its own campaign now... Like ULF-film.

So they're only going to cut and confection it once a year, by pre-order? Better than dropping it entirely, I guess, and with other "custom cut" sizes (like 2x3) dealers tend to buy a good sized batch each time they're offered, so there's usually enough (or nearly enough) in stock to get through until the next "event'.

 

[pkr1979]

So they're only going to cut and confection it once a year, by pre-order? Better than dropping it entirely, I guess, and with other "custom cut" sizes (like 2x3) dealers tend to buy a good sized batch each time they're offered, so there's usually enough (or nearly enough) in stock to get through until the next "event'.

Indeed.

 

[Light Capture]

I just posted an announcement for Ilford Ortho Plus ULF campaign for 2025

2025 Ilford Ortho ULF run, Kodak, Ilford, Flic Film chemistry and film, Foma Ortho 400 in stock in 4x5 and 8x10 and Camera shows

Exciting updates for Ilford Ortho ULF campaign (flyer attached, prices listed in CAD) and local availability of Foma Ortho 400. There will be well over 100 SKU's of fresh film and chemistry (bulk chemicals too) at this weekend's camera shows in London (Canada) and Montreal. Show specials...

www.photrio.com

8x10 can be ordered as a regular item and is not listed on this year's list.

 

[DREW WILEY]

What is "good enough" is relative. Back when I was single I used to think the restaurant where I ate lunch was good; after I was married and routinely got better meals, I didn't think it was all that good anymore.

What one can or cannot afford is not exactly the same topic. TMax certainly isn't cheap; but it certainly is good.

 

[David Lyga]

May I ask a question which, at first glance, might seem snarky, but is intended to be entirely above board?

I could never understand why large format users like ISO 400 film. To me (maybe naive) it seems to me that a Tmax or Delta 100 film in 4x5 would be the equal of those same films at ISO 400 in 8x10 in terms of resolution and grain. To me, if I were paying for 8x10 there would be no way that I would let a slower 4x5 compete with me. What am I missing? - David Lyga

 

[MultiFormat Shooter]

May I ask a question which, at first glance, might seem snarky, but is intended to be entirely above board?

I could never understand why large format users like ISO 400 film. To me (maybe naive) it seems to me that a Tmax or Delta 100 film in 4x5 would be the equal of those same films at ISO 400 in 8x10 in terms of resolution and grain. To me, if I were paying for 8x10 there would be no way that I would let a slower 4x5 compete with me. What am I missing? - David Lyga

Sometimes you need the extra two stops, to keep from running in to really long reciprocity failure times. Other times you may want to "stop action" such a trees blowing a windy day, and still have a smaller aperture.

I am sure others with way more experience than me will chime-in.

I realize stop action is relative term in 8x10, thus I put it in quotation marks.

 

[Focomatter]

Multiformat got it right!! I live in Alaska. The sun here is NEVER overhead although it can be above the horizon for a long time. It is dimmer even on a sunny day. Reciprocity failure thus always has to be dealt with even with ISO 400. As well I live near the ocean so it is frequently breezy or stronger.