Fomapan 200 (Arista.EDU Ultra 200) - scratches from Hasselblad back?

[jspillane]

I recently shot a bunch of Foma 200 (Arista rebrand), mixed with other films, through a Hasselblad. A large number of the Foma rolls have a thin line along one side of the negative. It's not horrible and can be cropped out, but it is quite obnoxious. At first I feared an internal issue with the camera/back, but all of my non-Foma negs (HP5+, Tmax 100, etc.) have no lines. Should I suspect this is a batch QC issue, or does anyone else know if the emulsions are just to soft to be run through a Hasselblad back?

I like the tonality (and the price) but if this is going to be a permanent problem, i'll stick to Ilford/Kodak/Fuji in medium format. It's a shame as I was hoping this film could replace FP4+ for me in general use. I shot a lot of Foma 100 and 200 in 35mm at the same time, and it all turned out great, no scratches or QC issues to speak of.

Does anybody have a similar experience running this film through a Hasselblad (or other medium format camera)?

 

[chip j]

I had speckling in gray skies using Foma 100 in my C330., & also frame numbers appearing in the picture. I've also used Foma 100 in 35mm, with too many defects to suit me.

 

[gone]

The frame numbers on the film reminds me of what happened when I tried Ultrafine film. I think your decision to stick w/ Kodak/Ilford/Fuji is about as smart as you can get. Those manufacturers have strict quality control standards, and their films are the best in the business. After a problem I had w/ the Arista Premium 35mm film (rebadged Tri-X) I sold that stash and am now back to shooting Tri-X from here on out. That's the trouble w/ inconsistent film quality, you never know when it will crop up, and life being how it is, it will usually crop up on shots that are not easily duplicated, if at all.

 

[Regular Rod]

I recently shot a bunch of Foma 200 (Arista rebrand), mixed with other films, through a Hasselblad. A large number of the Foma rolls have a thin line along one side of the negative. It's not horrible and can be cropped out, but it is quite obnoxious. At first I feared an internal issue with the camera/back, but all of my non-Foma negs (HP5+, Tmax 100, etc.) have no lines. Should I suspect this is a batch QC issue, or does anyone else know if the emulsions are just to soft to be run through a Hasselblad back?

I like the tonality (and the price) but if this is going to be a permanent problem, i'll stick to Ilford/Kodak/Fuji in medium format. It's a shame as I was hoping this film could replace FP4+ for me in general use. I shot a lot of Foma 100 and 200 in 35mm at the same time, and it all turned out great, no scratches or QC issues to speak of.

Does anybody have a similar experience running this film through a Hasselblad (or other medium format camera)?

Yes. The emulsion is very delicate. It can be scratched easily when loading into the spiral; even more easily when removing it from the spiral, it is best to take the spiral apart and carefully remove the film from one half; it cannot take any form of squeegee not even wet fingers, it is best to simply hang it dripping wet; when it is dry it will still easily scratch if you try removing dust with anything other than a very soft anti-static brush or better still a puff of compressed air, cotton darkroom gloves will scratch it like sand paper. The tonality and price are both excellent but I think I have bought my last rolls of it, when I finish the roll I am halfway through now, that will be it for me. I still use FOMAPAN 100 in 8x10 sheets and have nothing like the bother experienced with the FOMAPAN 200 in roll film...

RR

 

[Neal]

Dear jspillane,

It might be a film issue, but I would still clean and inspect any camera back involved. My only experience with Foma is in 35mm and there were no issues.

Good luck,

Neal Wydra

 

[R.Gould]

I would check any cameras and backs, I have used Fomapan 400 for a few years now in both 35mm and 120 and I have yet to have any form of QC issues, Yes it does need careful handeling but for me the results are well worth the tiny bit of extra effort involved

 

[jspillane]

Well, a roll through a Rolleiflex shows no lines, so I believe I am correct in that it is the Hasselblad back that is causing the scratch. I'm going to try it with other backs as well to see if the issue is universal or limited to this back.

Disappointingly, on the Rolleiflex roll, the image hits the frame numbers occasionally. I want to love this film (and I DO love the quality of the images) but so far it seems to be incompatible with the cameras I want to use it in! It is fantastic in 4x5, zero problems there.

 

[R.Gould]

Check everything carefully, I use Fomapan in a variety of old cameras, from a 1938 Baby Bessa though a variety of folders and both my Rolleflex, Rolleicord , also a Weltaflex and Microcord TLR that I use, and I have yet to see the image hit the frame numbers, if you don't carefully line the film up it can run crooked, I have done that, but that is me not the film, and even then the frame numbers got close but did not intrude on the negative

 

[miha]

It's a very well known problem that has been discussed here in the past. I got micro scratches from exposing the film in my Mamiya C330. Fabulous film otherwise.

 

[dosilverhalide]

I shot a 100 ft roll of Foma 200 ,35mm about two years, It had multiple scratches almost the entire roll. I shot it in different cameras, loaded in different film cartridges and loaded from two different film loaders. I ordered a second 100 ft roll and it had scratches out of the can, never having been loaded in anything. I like the film, I shoot it at 125, but it wasn't useable in 100 ft roll. I have shot a roll of 24 .frame 200 since then and it was without scratches J

 

[Xmas]

Hi

I've used several cans of bulk Formapan 100 as well as oodles of 135.

No problems and it seems to be a real 160ISO in Microphen.

Noel