Thank you for the video Andy.
I love Foma 320. I am one of those former Foma users who found and reported problems with their 200 product in 120 (in fact I don't use it anymore) but Foma 320 has always been nothing but perfect. Never once an issue, a blemish, over hundreds of rolls exposed and developed.
Where did you source your test roll? This is not being produced since a long time, and any roll will now be expired. Not fair IMHO to assess QC of an entire line of products from an expired roll. Was it frozen by any chance?
I know you're a fan of HP5+ but comparing HP5+ with Retropan 320 is like comparing a bottle of Heineken with one of Trappiste Chimay. Most people will agree that HP5+ is just about 'right' and a great all rounder - whereas Retropan is not an all rounder, it's a specialist product used to achieve certain creative results. Some people will hate the Chimay, some people will love whatever novelty it brings to drinking a beer.
Retropan 320 works absolutely fine at box speed (incident Sekonic metering) in my own workflow using its dedicated high energy developer (Foma Retro Special). Overexposing it results in inferior image quality, because the poor halation properties really start to show up strongly.
When I tested it in ID11 I thought the results were subpar, like those you show.