Foma Fomapan "Creative" 200 -- a first try

[Roger Cole]

At least in the USA Fomapan now costs almost as much as Ilford or Kodak so I hope the QC has increased as well. Even the Freestyle version, with no DX codes anymore, costs more than brand name Kentmere from B&H.

Don't get me wrong. I love Fomapan but when there are no second chances I'll use another brand with guaranteed results even if they are not the Fomapan "look" I like so much. I've not had QC issues with the last few years batches of Fomapan but if the prices are the same I'll just take the Ilford product for now.

Sort of true. It's true if you buy it branded "Foma." But if you buy the Freestyle "Arista.EDU Ultra" brand you get the same film and it's substantially less expensive than Kodak or Ilford.

I've used a bit of the 400 in 120 and 4x5 but not 35mm. I never saw any QC problems. I HAVE scratched it, because it's very soft when wet and much easier to scratch than Kodak or Ilford or Fuji, but once you know that careful handling prevents that problem.

 

[Xmas]

Sort of true. It's true if you buy it branded "Foma." But if you buy the Freestyle "Arista.EDU Ultra" brand you get the same film and it's substantially less expensive than Kodak or Ilford.

I've used a bit of the 400 in 120 and 4x5 but not 35mm. I never saw any QC problems. I HAVE scratched it, because it's very soft when wet and much easier to scratch than Kodak or Ilford or Fuji, but once you know that careful handling prevents that problem.

I've used the 100 and 400 in 35mm (cassettes and bulk) and 120 since '06 without 'QA' problems, but my technique is very conservative, since I was told it was not pre hardened like Harman, Fuji or Kodak. I've used 200 occasionally as well but not enough to cover all their coating runs...

If you don't process proper stick with prehardened film.

I do use the data sheet ISO as EI but do follow Kodaks submission of 2 stops more when contrasty, which I do for any mono film...

It is only marginally cheaper than Kentmere in UK, but more available over the counter, some of the time. Some days neither is available!

The 400 gives me the '50-60 grain signature I like.

 

[baachitraka]

What I really like with Foma films is the green vomit after pre-soak ;-)

Nevertheless, it is very good film and its speed in Fomadon Excel is not far from advertised one.

Lets take photos only with Fomapan 200 and try to share them here.

 

[Ricardo Miranda]

What I really like with Foma films is the green vomit after pre-soak ;-)

Lets take photos only with Fomapan 200 and try to share them here.

I have never seen anything green, but I don't do "pre-soak".
Not needed.

Right, these are all in Fomapan 200 developed in Fomadon LQR:

2-6-2015_002 by Ricardo Miranda, on Flickr

2-6-2015_004 by Ricardo Miranda, on Flickr

2-6-2015_038 by Ricardo Miranda, on Flickr

 

[pentaxuser]

We seem to have two contradictory posts here in Ricardo's and baachitraka. I presume that the green is the anti-halation dye? If so it is difficult to believe that it all comes out in a pre-wash or there is not even a trace of it if a pre-wash is avoided

There may be an explanation which reconciles these two seemingly contradictory statements but I wonder what it is?

Nice shots, Ricardo

pentaxuser

 

[Roger Cole]

I personal in my Jobo. The water from Foma soaking comes out dark green.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk and 100% recycled electrons - because I care.

 

[R.Gould]

We seem to have two contradictory posts here in Ricardo's and baachitraka. I presume that the green is the anti-halation dye? If so it is difficult to believe that it all comes out in a pre-wash or there is not even a trace of it if a pre-wash is avoided

There may be an explanation which reconciles these two seemingly contradictory statements but I wonder what it is?

Nice shots, Ricardo

pentaxuser

I use nothing but fomapan, 200 and 400, in 120 the green is the anti halation layer, but only on 120, I don't use a pre wash, and the layer comes off mainly in the developer, turn my Rodinal a sickly shade of green, also turns my D76 a less vibrant green, but does not seem to affect it (I use stock), and the first water stop is very slightly green, it only affects 120 as Fomapan 35mm does not have an anti halation layer, I find in both RO9 and D76 I happily get box speed, Lovely film, I have used it since 2004 without any problems, never a QC problem,
Richard

 

[Ricardo Miranda]

I only use 35mm, so no green tinge for me.

Richard,
Didn't they change the base layer for F200 in 120 a few years ago?

 

[baachitraka]

I did not realize the format. Okay, the green vomit was from 120.

 

[removed account4]

guessing it is the same stuff ...
loved the t200, it processed like a dream in ansco 130

 

[R.Gould]

I only use 35mm, so no green tinge for me.

Richard,
Didn't they change the base layer for F200 in 120 a few years ago?

The base for all fomapan 120 used to have a blue tinge to it, never made any difference to printing, then 2 or 3 years ago they changed the base to the same as the 35mm, also the 120 had a bad curling problem, I had to put it under some weight for a few days to straighten it out, that has now gone, they sorted it out and now I find it is straighter than certainly Kodak, and possibly Ilford, Personally I think the both the 200 and 400 is now on a level with the big 2, my all time favorite film, long may Foma keep making film.
Richard

 

[pentaxuser]

I use nothing but fomapan, 200 and 400, in 120 the green is the anti halation layer, but only on 120, I don't use a pre wash, and the layer comes off mainly in the developer, turn my Rodinal a sickly shade of green, also turns my D76 a less vibrant green,
Richard

I knew there had to be a simple explanation and there it is. The added benefit is that I have learned something and we all remain friends, belonging as we do to the "Seekers of Wisdom and Truth Society" which has prevented any of us from wishing to delete our APUG account.

pentaxuser

 

[NB23]

Can you back up what you said with perhaps samples of your work?

When I have time.

 

[analoguey]

In 4x5 foma 100 is purplish on pre-wash -although I don't always use pre-wash.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Ricardo - what I meant by "rumor" was the alleged mechanical CAUSE of the flaws, which the mfg never confirmed - not the presence of those flaws themselves in particular cuts or batches, of which there is no question. There have been numerous past threads on this very
topic on several different forums, so this isn't guesswork. But until the cause or causes are definitively recognized and admitted, there won't be a dependable fix. For me personally, needing to shoot three sheets instead of one just to improve the odds of a keeper isn't an economical strategy. Besides, the very last time I had this problem I had hauled the 8x10 system up a steep section of mtn up to around 11,000 ft - not the kind of scenario when you can lug multiple redundant heavy filmholders. The pack itself was around 70 lbs. I managed to salvage the negative with a lot of tricky spotting. But never again - not until there's a known fix.

 

[Harry Lime]

Has anyone developed Foma 200 in Barry Thornton's 2-bath?
thx

 

[Ricardo Miranda]

Drew,
I understand now your dilemma better. Thanks!
But, as other have said I haven't seen such flaw in 35mm.

 

[Trask]

I have used Foma 200 from time to time. I've always found that it's a great film for bringing out clouds, as if you were using a light orange filter. The square 120 photo (developed in Obsidian Aqua) below demonstrates that aspect of the film. And the other shows some of the tonality you can pull out of the film (developed in 510 Pyro).

 

[R.Gould]

Drew, perhaps there is or was a problem with LF film, and I understand your point of view, but certainly in 120 or 35mm I have never had any problems, and I never use anything else, I must use 50 to a 100 rolls a year, and have done so since at least 2004, and never a problem, I admit I don't use LF, i prefer to carry a rollei to a 10/8, but so far all good,
Richard

 

[MrBrowning]

Has anyone developed Foma 200 in Barry Thornton's 2-bath?
thx

I have and I've had very good results with it. I would offer to scan some but my scanner stopped working about a month ago. Give me a couple of days and I'll see if I can find someone to scan them for me.

 

[Paul Howell]

Drew, perhaps there is or was a problem with LF film, and I understand your point of view, but certainly in 120 or 35mm I have never had any problems, and I never use anything else, I must use 50 to a 100 rolls a year, and have done so since at least 2004, and never a problem, I admit I don't use LF, i prefer to carry a rollei to a 10/8, but so far all good,
Richard

I shoot 4X5 past 5 years Foma 200 has been my film of choice, I have never had an issue with QC. I avoided Foma's 120 as I did not like the blue base, now that Foma is using a clear base I have started to Foma 200 for all formats. I use water for stop bath, if water can be considered a stop bath, I fix in standard Kodak fixer or T4, no pin holes.

 

[Meyer Trioplan]

+1 for Trask's comment.

This has become my go-to film for most scenes involving clouds in which a little bit of dramatic effect is desired. I've never seen this replicated in any other film.

 

[37th Exposure]

Sort of true. It's true if you buy it branded "Foma." But if you buy the Freestyle "Arista.EDU Ultra" brand you get the same film and it's substantially less expensive than Kodak or Ilford.

I've used a bit of the 400 in 120 and 4x5 but not 35mm. I never saw any QC problems. I HAVE scratched it, because it's very soft when wet and much easier to scratch than Kodak or Ilford or Fuji, but once you know that careful handling prevents that problem.

Recently I was about to order some more Arista Edu Ultra 100. It's $3.41 for a 36 exp. roll. At B&H Kentmere 100 36 exposure is only $2.95. Since this film is just for fun shooting I got the Kentmere to try. And I know the quality is beyond reproach since it is an Ilford product. If I really don't like it I'll pay the extra 46 cents a roll next time. But for once in a lifetime shots I'll just splurge and get Ilford or Kodak even if the "look" isn't always what I get from Fomapan. I'm hoping someday to be able to trust Foma film just as much.

The QC issues with Fomapan were the same as others have reported. Flecks in the emulsion. I also had one roll with complete fog mid roll, just the middle. It could be my fault. But the other rolls in the tank, from the same camera, all loaded in the same darkroom all at once we're just fine. Nor have I ever had subsequent problems with that tank set or camera or any fog whatsoever. The camera is bottom load so the whole first half of the roll would have shown fog on one edge if the bottom fell off without my knowing! (One entire side of the take up would be exposed to light rather than protected over by other layers of film as on a back loading camera so I don't think it's because I unlocked the bottom mid roll, and if it did unlock it should just fall off and I hope I would notice that!)

 

[Harry Lime]

I have and I've had very good results with it. I would offer to scan some but my scanner stopped working about a month ago. Give me a couple of days and I'll see if I can find someone to scan them for me.

Nice, thank you. What did you rate it at? 200 or 100?

thanks!

 

[marciofs]

I have never seen any problem with Fomapan and they have the films I like the most. The top 1 brand for me.

Here some examples I shot with formapan 200. Middle format.