it’s certainly recurring, which is a better description than temporary in this case
Comunque per come la vedo io, continuate pure a gettare fango su Foma
I'm not throwing mud on Foma. I'm highlighting an unresolved issue with one of their products.
The rest of their stuff is great, and in the right hands just as good as Ilford and Kodak.
First, thanks for replying in Italian… just in case you thought I’d not understand you. Maybe check forum rules.
And it‘s nice that you assume things without checking first. I really like Foma films. As I’ve stated before. All of them. Especially the Foma 400, which has been flawless for me over years.
However, Foma200 in 120 has not.
I have tested 3 different batches over the years. None was flawless. And looking at albireo’s posts anyone knows that he likes Foma films. So if he reports something negative, it is certainly not to denigrate them.
But if you prefer to blindly defend someone, go ahead.
I've found not appropriate to publicy rant and state "I'm done with Fomapan 200".
I don't care about it, I'm not easily influenced by negative rants about a manufacturer.If you feel a post violates forum rules, please report it and we'll look into it. However, someone stating that they no longer want to buy a certain product does not violate any forum rules, so in this case, you can save yourself the trouble.
The forum rules should be modified in that it's forbidden to write negative opinions about problems you may have with any manufacturer.
I don't care about it, I'm not easily influenced by negative rants about a manufacturer.
This is unlikely to ever happen.
I'll bring this under the attention of the other moderators. And with that, it's time to go back to discussing Fomapan 200 and not forum rules in this thread.
If this is turning into e request thread
it's time to go back to discussing Fomapan 200 and not forum rules in this thread.
Fomacitro Stop 1+19 as per leaflet, third use
[...]
Washed in AP/Kaiser tank using AP hose connected to tap
In my case, several years ago, I excluded all factors you mention before contacting Foma, and then sent them physical samples of my negatives. The black spots (in the positive) turned out to be coating defects, as evidenced by what Foma told me, which effectively summarized as "the problem is on our side". They graciously sent replacement rolls that exhibited the exact same problem. Since then, I've seen the same issue pop up regularly online, as it does here once again. It's a systematic problem but it apparently only affects a certain percentage of the rolls, and the severity of the problem seems to vary from roll to roll. This may have something to do from which part of the master roll a finished film is cut.At this point it's hard to say where the spots came from.
It's not pertaining to the problem. Whe have white spots, not black spots.The black spots (in the positive) turned out to be coating defects, as evidenced by what Foma told me,
Once again, and for the last time, it was not a negative rant about a manufacturer.
It was a rant about A PRODUCT by a manufacturer who is otherwise capable of excellence.
It was a rant about A PRODUCT that in the past has given me, with some batches, outstanding results and that is, sadly, INCONSISTENT in terms of QC.
When it works, it is outstanding. When it doesn't, it spoils images of my children I won't be able to make again.
I have several times attempted to address the issue with the manufacturer. It hasn't taken me anywhere, given the inconsistency is still there. I am posting my experience, and I'm not hiding my exasperation, in the hope that someone at Foma reads this and realises people care about this product of theirs and want it to be fixed once and for all.
At this point it's hard to say where the spots came from.
The stop bath was reused, maybe that's the source?
Thank you for this. I would have thought it unlikely the water and/or the reused stop bath are the issue here, as I've developed all my rolls using water from the same tap for years, and other 2 rolls within 1 day of this (a Ferrania P33 in 35mm and a Rollei Retro 400S in 120) using water from the same tap and stop solution from the same bottle - with no issues.
However, I thought it would be interesting to exclude these variables in a test to really make sure operator error is not responsible for the 2 types of defects I'm seeing.
Therefore I decided to expose another roll in controlled conditions, as follows.
Materials
Methods
- Film: Fomapan 200 in 120
- batch number 05 2027 / 014256-6 purchased from https://fomaobchod.cz/ Order date 29. 6. 2024 23:39:31.
- Film kept in dark storage at 20-25°C since purchase.
- Roll unwrapped yesterday few minutes before loading in a Rolleiflex 3.5F III entirely overhauled by Magicflex (Germany). Camera is in as new condition (no issues with rollers, pressure plate, lens etc)
- Fixer: Fomafix used 1+5 as per manufacturer's recommendations.
- Bottle purchased together with the Foma 200 rolls above
- Bottle unsealed 2 weeks ago. No cloudiness, no unusual smells.
- I discarded the old fixer solution bottle and its contents (I tend to reuse it a few times, normally). For this experiment, I prepared a fresh new bottle (still water bottle, washed and dried in distilled water) of stop bath 5 minutes before processing the film.
- Stop Bath: Fomacitro used 1+19 as per manufacturer's recommendation.
- Bottle purchased together with the Foma 200 rolls above
- Bottle unsealed 2 weeks ago. No cloudiness, no unusual smells.
- I discarded my old prepared stop bottle and its contents (I tend to reuse this until the indicator colour starts to change). For this experiment, I prepared a new bottle of stop bath 5 minutes before processing the film.
- Developer: Fomadon R09 used 1:50 20°C as per manufacturer's recommendation.
- Bottle purchased earlier this year. Bottle had been opened 2 weeks ago, and used to process other 120 and 35mm film without any noticeable issues.
- Distilled Water:
- I purchased a 5L bottle from a local chain of home products.
- Bottle was sealed up until 5 minutes before processing
- Tank: AP/Kaiser tank with Kaiser reels. Tank and reels had been cleaned one day before with distilled water and a fresh toothbrush to ensure no residues of any kind might be left. Tank and reels left to dry overnight.
- All steps of the procedure employed distilled water from the same bottle.
After loading the film in the tank, I opened my sealed bottle of distilled water at 20°C and poured 600ml in the tank. 10 inversion, followed by 10 inversions every 10 minutes, for a total of 25 minutes.
I then poured the prebath (which as expected was of a very dark emerald green) out and started the processing proper.
- Development: 9 minutes, continuous inversions first minute, followed by 2 inversions at the beginning of every minute + 3 raps of the tank to dislodge bubbles
- Stop: 30 seconds, continuous inversions
- Fix: 4 minutes, same inversion pattern as development
- Wash: Ilford wash:
- pour 600ml distilled water in tank. 5 inversions - discard water
- pour 600ml distilled water in tank. 10 inversions - discard water
- pour 600ml distilled water in tank. 20 inversions - discard water
- pour 600ml distilled water in tank. 50 inversions - discard water
- Wetting agent: Fotonal 1:250 in 600ml distilled water - agitate gently for 1 minute.
- Remove roll from tank. Gentle shaking. Hang to dry. The wet negatives were not touched with anything.
- Dry in closed dedicated cabinet overnight. The cabinet is empty, dustless, used for all my negatives and no dust issues affect any of my development.
- Scan frames with a dedicated film scanner at 4000dpi resolution - linear raw 16bit/channel scans followed by gamma correction and inversion and black point trimming via histogram - no edits of any kind afterwards.
Sample images from roll. For each frame shown, first image shows the full scanned frame, resized for monitor consumption, followed by one or more samples from the same scan at 1:1 resolution.
Frame 1 in the roll
Frame 4 in the roll
Frame 8 in the roll
Conclusions
All rolls I have developed from this particular batch of Foma 200 in 120 show consistent issues with spotting. The defect appear to be of 2 types:
The issues are not dependent on issues with the tap water used and/or improper home storage of the film and present themselves without any appreciable change in distribution and magnitude even when distilled water is used for the entire processing chain, including prewash, developer, stop bath, fixer bath and wash cycles. The issues are not due to mechanical interaction with the wet emulsion, as there was none.
- the first results in white specks distributed uniformly throughout the frame. The specks are visible both at 1:1 magnification via a 4000dpi scan, as well as standard monitor visualisation size and presumably standard print sizes.
- the second results in black specs distributed non uniformly throughout the frame. These specs seem to cluster in places as shown in some of the samples. These spots appear smaller in size than those above, and might be less of an issue depending on final print size or chosen monitor visualisation size.
The issues are not ameliorated by a 25 minutes prewash, so this temporary workaround, suggested to me years ago by a Foma tech rep for a mildly problematic batch of Foma 100 in 120, is not helpful with this particular batch of Foma 200 in 120.
To summarise, this particular batch of Fomapan 200 in 120 shows emulsion defects that are consistent and cannot be ameliorated by carefully controlling processing variables in a pretty standard amateur developing chain like the one I perform. I stand by my earlier observations that this batch is affected by significant QC issues, and it is defective and unfit for (my) use.
If you're not sick of testing yet, and if you have more film you could cut off a piece and fully fix it in a clean tray. It would be interesting to see if the spots look the same regardless.
Do you think the spots are in the film base?
Another developer might give another result, but with that careful development you shouldn't have problems with Rodinal either.
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?