Not blaming the film. But I would like to get good shadows with HC110 and the massive dev chart recipe didn't work out. Next roll I will cut in half and try Paranol S and HC110 with the dilution / time mentioned in the thread and se how it goes. I've taken duplicate shots - one at EI100 and one at EI200 so I can compare.
Makes sense. The following thread over at rangefinderforum might be of interest - Foma 200@400EI in 35mm from the perspective of a Tri-X user:
www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=171421
There's a few people chiming in with HC110 recipes if you scroll down. Good luck!
Sorry to dig up such an old thread - but I don't suppose you can remember this thread? Rangefinder forum links don't seem to work at all these days and I cannot find this thread for the life of me.
By any chance could it be found using the Wayback Machine - Internet Archive?Sorry to dig up such an old thread - but I don't suppose you can remember this thread? Rangefinder forum links don't seem to work at all these days and I cannot find this thread for the life of me.
Let us know if you find something that works. I've given up on the 200. The 100 and 400 are beautiful films in 35mm, and I actually like the grain. But the w/ the 200, nothing I've tried will give shadow detail, and it's so much easier to shoot the other 2 films.
It may be that I actually don't like the look of the 200. Every example on the web looks different, and none of them look like my prints.
That doesn't sound too promising to be honest...largely gone
I've never been brave enough to try Fomapan 120 film.That doesn't sound too promising to be honest...
So... I've just bought 10 Fomapan 200 films. I've deleloped two. The first one I shot at EI200 but I think I used too cold water. The second one I shot at EI160. I used HC110 with dilution 1:63 for 9mins. Agiated during the first 30 secs and then for 10 secs every minute. The first one lacked a lot of shadow detail (unusable), the second one lacked contrast and was grainy.
Should I expose it at EI100, use another dilution / time? Dont use HC110 at all? I am far from impressed... I am comparing the Fomapan 200 to HP5+ and FP4+ which I use regulary - I get waaaay better results with those films.
Well, the 100 and 400 are OK in terms of QA. The 200 has always been a mess AFAIK, which is a pity given that it's the most promising one. It's quite good in sheet film format.I've never been brave enough to try Fomapan 120 film.
Well, the 100 and 400 are OK in terms of QA. The 200 has always been a mess AFAIK, which is a pity given that it's the most promising one. It's quite good in sheet film format.
Next shot was processed in D-76 1+1, 5.5 mins at 24C. Better tonality and grain. Test shoot for Fujica ST605N Super Tak 55mm f1.8 that I'm prepping for sale.
Have to bear in mind the different lighting conditions, slightly overcast in the Luna Park shot. I'm about to make up some Perceptol and I'll shoot one of my last Foma 200's and process in this for comparison purposes.I do like the tonality of this image. I'll have to try a roll, and have it developed it in D-76.
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?