c'mon, racoons wouldn't be ideal. Moles would be preferable--they're already used to working in the dark.
b) Foma 400 has WWII levels of grain, and is manufactured by a bunch of domesticated raccoons who pour emulsion on the gelatine in exchange for a sugar cube
Yes I am sure you have responded in the vein that albireo meant you to. Not his fault if others fail to recognise this and fail to provide good repartee.c'mon, racoons wouldn't be ideal. Moles would be preferable--they're already used to working in the dark.
c'mon, racoons wouldn't be ideal. Moles would be preferable--they're already used to working in the dark.
I don't think the recommendation to shoot at higher than box speed is a dig at the films. I always shoot Tri-X at 250 rather than box speed.
my voice goes to Fomapan 100Question; which of the Foma films is the "best" (i.e. given different speeds and all, but if I am to shoot box speed and light is adequate, which is worth trying first)?
Subjects to be people.
Ha, ha.Careful! The Antifoma brigade will be along shortly to let you know you that
a) you're wrong
b) Foma 400 has WWII levels of grain, and is manufactured by a bunch of domesticated raccoons who pour emulsion on the gelatine in exchange for a sugar cube
c) you need to expose Foma 400 at 50, Foma 200 at 7 and Foma 100 at -1 EI, otherwise an X-rite densitometer, somewhere, will cry in agony.
d) Foma is probably produced by non-baptised communists the other side of the Eastern Block, so it's EVIL stuff - use TriX
Shooting Fomapan 400 at lower than box speed at EI 200-250 is exactly what is shown in Foma’s own data sheet depending on the developer. So definitely not a dig, just facts.
And so on and so forth. So honestly I find all this obsession with simplifying everything to the magical 'EI' number a bit silly. Given all the above sources of variance, whether I state that I shoot Foma 400 at 320 EI or 250EI or 200EI makes absolutely no sense. Apologies, just my opinion based on personal experience.
I sometimes like the glow or aura in the highlights you can get with Foma, presumably due to a less efficient anti-halation layer. I see it most with Fomapan 400 in 35 mm.
Describe it however you like, but Foma rate their film at 200-250 in the most common developers. That's different from the other 400 speed films from e.g. Ilford and Kodak. Again, I am not knocking the film but if you tell people "go shoot this at 400" and they are used to shooting another 400 speed film at that same speed with all the same camera settings and light readings they will see a loss of shadow detail on the Fomapan 400 vs the other film. I would have liked to have known that way back in the day when I shot the first roll of it. Some folks may like that look, but it's not the native speed of the film.
See https://www.foma.cz/en/fomapan-400 on Page 2
.
Take a look at the bottom left plot in the spreadsheet you linked. See the curve for Fomadon LQN? That's one of the recommended developers and I'd be prepared to bet, not the the developer your 'generic 400iso film' shooter will use when trying out Foma 400. Foma's recommended ISO rating follows the old Agfa convention of using an alpha (contrast index) of ~.7 instead of .5-.6 (which is what traditionally Kodak & C recommended for condenser heads). A gamma of .7 is perfectly manageable by modern scanners and most projectors btw. Anyhow, when you intersect the gamma curve at .7 with the ISO curve you get to 320EI. This is extremely close to the advertised 400 and in real life the 1/3 stop will not be the cause of your blocked blacks: something else in the chain will.
FOMAPAN 400 Action has a nominal speed rating of ISO 400/27o , but due to its wide exposure latitude the film gives good results even when overexposed by 1 EV (exposure value) (as ISO 200/24 o ) or underexposed by 2 EV (as ISO 1600/33o ) without any change in processing, i.e. without lengthening the development time or increasing the temperature of the developer used.
Yeah, that's my combo too and it sure is great. I was very surprised that I get the images I get, exposed and processed in the same way you do.Nice images. I have come to really like FOMA/Arista EDU films. I shoot their 200 at box speed in XTOL straight (original form) rotary in my JOBO. I add a 5 minute presoak and develop for 6 minutes.
You mean like actually go outside and take pictures and then develop them????Based on the varying opinions of what Foma 400 is, isn't, can and can't do, what it's supposed to be exposed at, and then the comments of Foma themselves...
I'm starting to think this film is just a collective hallucination. And I've got some pictures I rather like taken on it.
From the data sheet:
Anyone tried EI 1600 with normal development?
You mean like actually go outside and take pictures and then develop them????
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?