FomaPan 100, what gives?

[Links_147]

So I have been shooting Fomapan 100 for a few years now but recently changed to Fomapan 200 and I would suggest the Pyrocat may be what requires further investigation.

When I first saw this thread and the Magenta cast I immediately recognized something that has happened to me. To confirm I went though my archive of negs to see which ones have a magenta cast, according to my notes the only Foma 100 Negs I have with the cast are all developed in Pyrocat HD 1+1+100 for 10mins @20deg (curiously the volume isn't listed) in a Jobo CPE Plus. I have other negs developed in ID-11 and Fomadon Excel (Xtol clone) and all of these have the regular neutral base that I would expect. The Magenta ones still managed to be contact printed however it probably helps that I needed a high level of contrast adjustment for the images in this case, could be quite the problem if you are going for low key however I do not have an example of this.
Interestingly none of my Fomapan 200 images have this magenta cast even with the same process. What I suspect has happened in my case is I have done something wrong with the minimum amounts of pyro required as the strongest examples I can find for this are all on 4x5. As I switched to Fomapan 200 about a year ago I don't have any 100 around to do further testing with. I would suggest to anyone who is serious about getting to the bottom of this, start by trying to replicate with pyrocat and then seeing if you can replicate with another developer. If I would have to guess try going below minimum valuers of chemistry for the amount of film being developed however this is just a guess on my part.

I hope this can help and gets us a little closer to the truth.

 

[Agulliver]

Seems to me they are packaging whatever is left over from contracted film runs and calling it Foma. End cuts so to speak. I will give it one more try.
.

That seems a rather rash statement to make.

 

[DonW]

So I have been shooting Fomapan 100 for a few years now but recently changed to Fomapan 200 and I would suggest the Pyrocat may be what requires further investigation.

When I first saw this thread and the Magenta cast I immediately recognized something that has happened to me. To confirm I went though my archive of negs to see which ones have a magenta cast, according to my notes the only Foma 100 Negs I have with the cast are all developed in Pyrocat HD 1+1+100 for 10mins @20deg (curiously the volume isn't listed) in a Jobo CPE Plus. I have other negs developed in ID-11 and Fomadon Excel (Xtol clone) and all of these have the regular neutral base that I would expect. The Magenta ones still managed to be contact printed however it probably helps that I needed a high level of contrast adjustment for the images in this case, could be quite the problem if you are going for low key however I do not have an example of this.
Interestingly none of my Fomapan 200 images have this magenta cast even with the same process. What I suspect has happened in my case is I have done something wrong with the minimum amounts of pyro required as the strongest examples I can find for this are all on 4x5. As I switched to Fomapan 200 about a year ago I don't have any 100 around to do further testing with. I would suggest to anyone who is serious about getting to the bottom of this, start by trying to replicate with pyrocat and then seeing if you can replicate with another developer. If I would have to guess try going below minimum valuers of chemistry for the amount of film being developed however this is just a guess on my part.

I hope this can help and gets us a little closer to the truth.

Thanks! The next rolls I process will be with Rodinal. I might even cut one roll in half and do one in PyroCat-HD and the other in Rodinal.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I've never been impressed with the quality of any Foma film. But I don't think this has anything to do with either that or pyrocat developer. I'm trying to remember where I might have filed certain notes about this. A long time ago I figured out a way to deliberately and predictably induce this strong magenta cast for an unusual purpose. I did it with ordinary D76 developer and FP4; but there was some weird tweak I did with the fixer, and just can't remember off the top of my head what that was.

 

[Foto Ludens]

Not sure if this will help at all, but I find that the anti halation dye in 120 Fomapan 100 is quite stubborn. It takes me 3 changes of water during pre soaking to get rid of most of it. I've decided to do this elaborate pre soak with this film just in case staining developers interact with the dye, as Pyrocat might have done for you...

 

[PerTulip]

I've never been impressed with the quality of any Foma film. .....

Not impressed with Foma either. But it's dirt cheap, so I use it in my "walkaround camera" and to try things.

 

[albireo]

Foma 100 in 120 is absolutely fantastic stuff. Needs to be exposed and processed with care, though. I do all my critical work with it, and it has never once let me down.

Sadly, being rather cheap, this encourages people to treat it like dirt and then go bitch about how 'different it is from Tmax100' after 'testing' one roll of it on 12 shots of the backyard fence or the garden shed.

I wouldn't dream of complaining about any film stock unless I had shot at least 100-200 rolls in a variety of light conditions and unless I had developed at least the first 20 of those rolls in one of the chemicals recommended by the manufacturers. I have done both things. I vastly prefer Foma 100 to needlessly overpriced stuff like Tmax 100, for instance. Personal preference I suppose.

 

[darkosaric]

MHO it's not the film. Foma is a first class operation. I've limited experience with Foma films, but I've used a lot of their paper, outstanding products.

+1
Using papers and films from Foma for more than 10 years, never had any issue. Never.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Just because a few of you haven't personally had problems yet is hardly statistical evidence worthy of offsetting the numerous legitimate complaints of those who have. Foma films don't even belong in the same sentence along with the quality control level of TMax. I had nothing but trouble with Foma, and it sure as heck wasn't due to any lack of technique on my part. Manufacturing defects. Never again. You get what you pay for. Cheap film = cheap film. I didn't test one roll of 120, but multiple boxes of 8x10 sheet film. That's a lot or work and a lot of money, and a lot of disappointment.

Did I get some nice prints out of all that work - yep. But it required a hecka lot spotting, and a total reinterpretation of all the marketing BS. For example, Foma 200 isn't even remotely a replacement for Super-XX or Bergger 200. It does have a very long straight line, but can't be developed anywhere near the same contrast level, is nowhere near actual 200 speed, and has downright abominable long exposure recip characteristics. Another hard lesson - you can't use just the clamshell film boxes after removing the inner black plastic sleeve - the corners leak light. You have to transfer the film to Kodak or Ilford boxes.
I could go on and on, including remarks on their 400 product. It's cheap student film. But it ain't cheap if you have to double or triple the shot hoping that at least one won't have manufacturing scratches, cracks, or coating zits.

 

[John Wiegerink]

I think the emulsion and the base are really good, but it's how Foma puts it all-together that's the problem. Not first rate backing paper(pretty course) and not first rate coating/cleanliness. They do somethings better than even Kodak. Like put numbers on the backing paper that can be read looking through a ruby red window. JHW

 

[Pioneer]

It is funny to watch the party crashers. As soon as someone has a problem with a given film, and it really doesn't seem to matter which film it is, there are always a few people that have nothing pertinent to add to the discussion but they feel the need to jump in with their bad experiences with the given film.

Unfortunately I suspect I am just as guilty of doing similar things so I need to remember to butt out myself.

 

[Tim Stapp]

Unfortunately I suspect I am just as guilty of doing similar things so I need to remember to butt out myself.

I think that we are all guilty of this at some point.

 

[Tim Stapp]

I think the emulsion and the base are really good, but it's how Foma puts it all-together that's the problem. Not first rate backing paper(pretty course) and not first rate coating/cleanliness. They do somethings better than even Kodak. Like put numbers on the backing paper that can be read looking through a ruby red window. JHW

John, good to see you around. I've missed you. We should meet some time. I'm in between Big Rapids and Reed City.

I've only shot FOMA film as rebadge Arista EDU Ultra in 35mm and 4x5. I love it in LF developed in EXTOL.

 

[John Wiegerink]

John, good to see you around. I've missed you. We should meet some time. I'm in between Big Rapids and Reed City.

I've only shot FOMA film as rebadge Arista EDU Ultra in 35mm and 4x5. I love it in LF developed in EXTOL.

I'm guilty too! My problems, as far as Foma film goes, are only with 120 film. Those were just spotty and the last rolls were fine. I just bought a bulk roll of Foma 100 and the 200 and will give it a try. I hope they're good since the way I shoot 35mm they will last a very, very long time. I was thinking of picking up some 200 in 4x5, but have held of, because I might just have enough 4x5 for the rest of my film taking career.
Hi Tim,
Yes Tim, we should get together. I don't know when as I have a big plate full "stuff" at the moment. We're selling our house near GR and moving to the cottage in Lake. Slow process at the moment! I have no darkroom anymore, but still hand-develop film in the laundry at the cottage. Now, I will have to get my Nikon 8000LS scanner, Microtek flatbed scanner and A3 Canon printer up and running at the cottage. Oh, and also on that plate of stuff my mother just passed away and I'm left with administering to the selling of her property and dividing of the estate. It looks like Fall would be a good time. Ha-ha! At least the air is clear and the colors are pretty then. JHW

 

[DREW WILEY]

Dan - It was my party that was crashed! One expects film to be dependable. It's not supposed to be a quality gamble each shot. Not an incidental gripe at all. And never in my entire life have I had comparable problems with Kodak or Ilford or Fuji sheets films. Never. Just review some of the previous threads on Foma/Arista films. It didn't happen just to me. So yes, it DOES matter when a specific film or specific manufacturer is involved. It means they need to address the issue and not let it slide just due to price point.

 

[Tim Stapp]

I'm guilty too! My problems, as far as Foma film goes, are only with 120 film. Those were just spotty and the last rolls were fine. I just bought a bulk roll of Foma 100 and the 200 and will give it a try. I hope they're good since the way I shoot 35mm they will last a very, very long time. I was thinking of picking up some 200 in 4x5, but have held of, because I might just have enough 4x5 for the rest of my film taking career.
Hi Tim,
Yes Tim, we should get together. I don't know when as I have a big plate full "stuff" at the moment. We're selling our house near GR and moving to the cottage in Lake. Slow process at the moment! I have no darkroom anymore, but still hand-develop film in the laundry at the cottage. Now, I will have to get my Nikon 8000LS scanner, Microtek flatbed scanner and A3 Canon printer up and running at the cottage. Oh, and also on that plate of stuff my mother just passed away and I'm left with administering to the selling of her property and dividing of the estate. It looks like Fall would be a good time. Ha-ha! At least the air is clear and the colors are pretty then. JHW

John, if you want to try a few sheets of FOMA 200, after we get moved and everything out of storage I could load a few sheets for you to try out. I like it developed in XTOL straight, 5 minute prewash and developed at KODAK times (6 mins. in my JOBO as I recall).

Developed in XTOL, I shoot it at box speed.

BTW, fall would be a perfect time to meet up, maybe we could shoot the PM 1225 on her fall excursion runs?

 

[Pioneer]

Dan - It was my party that was crashed! One expects film to be dependable. It's not supposed to be a quality gamble each shot. Not an incidental gripe at all. And never in my entire life have I had comparable problems with Kodak or Ilford or Fuji sheets films. Never. Just review some of the previous threads on Foma/Arista films. It didn't happen just to me. So yes, it DOES matter when a specific film or specific manufacturer is involved. It means they need to address the issue and not let it slide just due to price point.

Sorry to hear you have had those type of problems Drew and I really wasn't trying to pick on you specifically. I am sorry you took offense. I have had trouble with Foma film as well, took it to the manufacturer, and was made whole. This happened over three years ago and I continue to use their film. I have had no problems since so I have nothing to complain about. Everyone can have a bad day. In my opinion Foma is a good company. You obviously feel different.

But to be honest I have heard of various problems with Kodak quality control even if you haven't, and at one point it occurred with a film I am particularly fond of and use quite a bit. However they also stepped up and tried to do the right thing so I still use their films as well.

I suspect there have been a number of people who have had problems and issues with films from various other manufacturers as well that we haven't heard a lot about. In most cases I try to work directly with the manufacturer or distributor to resolve the problem.

 

[DREW WILEY]

The only Kodak issue I've heard about is a temporary subcontractor backing paper issue on 120 film, when their prior source dried up. But I never got a bad roll myself.

Otherwise, I'm getting itchy to get back into the mountains, Dan. But between record heat, big fire smoke issues, and me now being in my 70's, timing things is a lot more complicated than it used to be. Usually I could just wait until Sept for cooler weather and fall color, but now the risk of explosively giant firestorms sending smoke far and wide increases even more that time of year. Are you getting any of our smoke there in Elko? The last time I was in the Rubies, there were massive lighting storms, which I truly enjoyed, that is, once I got off the ridges early enough in the day to find some safe sheltered nook down below. One often has to move quickly in the mountains.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Glad you had a break. I stay away from NorCal due to the very high fire risk at the moment, and aim mostly for the high southern Sierra, simply because so darn much has burned down there in recent years that the current risk is slightly diminished. Fire per se isn't the issue above timberline, but inevitable smoke siphoning in from somewhere else. That's alway been a problem; but what were once mega-fires occurring only about every twenty years or so, are now happening dozens of time every year. Since I've survived a few massive fires myself, I am quite sensitized to smoke. But I did work with smokey atmosphere a little while last year, when a bit of smoke haze acted almost like a Godfather movie amber filter effect with color film, but was even more intriguing.

And one year I was photographing a high pinnacle through a deep red filter and pan film, and after printing, came out with a crisp golden eagle perched right atop the summit, which couldn't be seen at all with the naked eye. Fun stuff. I like working with atmospheric effects.

The B&W film I really miss for 8x10 work is Bergger 200. I attempted to replace it with Foma 200, which is the last of the "straight line" films, but was quite disappointed from several angles. In 120 format, the task is harder because I want not only long scale due to high contrast scenes in the mountains, desert, or deep woods, but fine enough grain and detail so 16X20 prints from these won't get embarrassed in the same portfolios containing enlargements from 4X5 and 8X10 film. So I've pretty much had to rely on TMax films plus Acros for my 120 work. Ektar fills the bill for 120 color.

 

[Pioneer]

The only Kodak issue I've heard about is a temporary subcontractor backing paper issue on 120 film, when their prior source dried up. But I never got a bad roll myself.

Otherwise, I'm getting itchy to get back into the mountains, Dan. But between record heat, big fire smoke issues, and me now being in my 70's, timing things is a lot more complicated than it used to be. Usually I could just wait until Sept for cooler weather and fall color, but now the risk of explosively giant firestorms sending smoke far and wide increases even more that time of year. Are you getting any of our smoke there in Elko? The last time I was in the Rubies, there were massive lighting storms, which I truly enjoyed, that is, once I got off the ridges early enough in the day to find some safe sheltered nook down below. One often has to move quickly in the mountains.

Heavy haze all the way to the Utah border, maybe further. Was along the border north of Wendover (Pilot Peak Range) with the 35mm and my Deardorff. Took a number of 35mm shots close up that came out all right but packing the Dorff was a waste of my time. It didn't even clear up on top of Pilot Peak. I might have been able to get something by using some filters to cut the haze but I just didn't bother. Even glassing for Elk was difficult through the smoke.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Youch. Rangers on loan from Rocky Mtn NP have been filling in over here at Pt Reyes on the coast, and told me how bad the fire conditions have been in Colorado even early season. Smoke all over the West. Pine beetle activity again it seems.

Back to film, the long-scale 120 film that really made a difference for me was Efke 25. It had orthopan sensitivity like Acros, but with even better resolution and distinctly longer scale way down into the shadows. Slow speed, of course. That filled a niche for me awhile, until the factory neared the end of its life, and the last batches of film were miserably contaminated with bits of grit and loose gelatin. Nothing is permanent but change.

 

[Pioneer]

Yes. I love Efke 25. That was the film that got me started in large format which seems only yesterday. I have never found a decent replacement. Fortunately I still have a reasonably decent stash in 35mm, 120 and in 4x5. It seems to store very well in cool storage. I keep hoping that someone will begin making it again. For awhile I thought maybe ADOX CHS Art 50 was a replacement but I did not have time to really work up a process with it and that film also exited into the dustbin of history like so many good films. It appears that once my stash of Efke 25 is gone that will be the end of it.

I have been planning a project with my 4x5 to revisit some of the places in Nevada that I have enjoyed in the past to try and capture one last set of views of our wonderful back country. Of course some of what was once easily visited no longer even exists, so not everything can be rediscovered.

I am knocking on the door of 70 myself and though I am still in relatively good shape I doubt I am up to some of the walks I once made into our backcountry with impunity. However, with age comes better planning skills, a little more time, and a lot more stubbornness. That should help make up for some of the loss of physical stamina. I hope!

To start I'll be headed into the Snake Range east of Ely, Neada in a couple of weeks. I'll pack my little Intrepid, my Symmar convertible, a decent tripod and a few film holders with some Efke 25. I hope some of that country is still as beautiful as I remember.

 

[Doremus Scudder]

The Foma 100 I have is not out of date. I processed it in PyroCat-HD 1:1:100 semi stand. Fixed in Ilford fixer for 5 minutes. Washed for 20 minutes. It also got a 3 minute pre soak. The negs as far as density etc look wonderful but the heavy magenta colour of the substrate will cause issues with split grade printing using a colour head. Generally you use full magenta for contrast and full yellow for highlights. Since this substate has so much magenta I will have to see how this will work out.

The film itself is very thin and curly and on the rebate is says Ultra 100.

See this image below.

View attachment 280177

I've had similar (ongoing) problems with TMY, but even worse. The solution (pun intended) was to soak the film in an alkaline solution for several minutes and then re-wash. Now I just add the alkaline soak before the wash. I've used sodium carbonate, sodium bicarbonate and the used developer as soaking solutions. All worked fine, it just took a little longer with the weaker solutions (bicarbonate).

Hope this helps,

Doremus

 

[DREW WILEY]

Dan, I spent a little time in the Snake Range a couple years ago returning from a Wyoming backpacking trip. I lucked out with rather good air quality, and was mainly interested in long lens distance shots. The National Park itself, Great Basin, has seen quite a few improvements in terms of official camping areas along the stream amidst aspens, with only the highest campground being somewhat crowded. And except for those upper trailheads into the cirque, it was like having the whole thing to myself. Not much has changed in the tiny towns down below, except better road maintenance. Ely has developed quite a bit. Right at the edge of it, there's a gas station and combined mini-Mart called Gas and Grass, as if I hadn't seen enough crazy things in my life. Fill your gas tank, and instead of a free car wash you get a 10% discount on weed next door. Not what I'd expect in rural Nevada. They have a Starbucks and McDonald's nearby too. Time to simply drive on. I like Austin a lot better.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Doremus - I get zero residual magenta dye stain with TMax films. It washes right out. I use alkaline TF4 developer.