Fomapan/Arista.edu Ultra 100-120: Pattern of small scratches, looking for culprit!

[Aurelien]

Yes I understand. I am like you I usually never discard my neg. But if you have some very uninteresting, then, you can send, I will compare. And send back.

 

[RobertV]

So far the official reaction from the Foma factory in the Czech Republic:

I would like to inform you that we thoroughly investigated the sent samples and we tried to find the cause of resulting defect.
We didn´t find explicit cause in our production process, the defects occur randomly and very rarely.
As the cause appears a combination of our material with certain types of cameras (in some cases only).
One of the causes could be probably some minor impurities, whose rise by cutting wrappers (backpaper)
We made preventive measures to minimalize the possibility of recurrence of defects.
We believe that a coincidence, which caused these problems, wouldn´t negative affect our future cooperation.

So it seems to be that on the short termin there is no solution. Finding out if to much stress or bending of the combination of backing paper is the cause on some specific camera loading is difficult. However some additional test will be done.

So in this way we can not speak of a defective emulsion of a certain batchnumber because the problem can occur on iso 100-200 and 400 (120) roll films with a specific type of camera.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Has anybody seen the problems in the ISO 400 film? I have been using it for a while in 35mm and haven't seen it yet.

I really don't think the backing paper is the issue, and Sanders (Rolleiflexible) has proven it to us with his example.

To me it looks like Foma is taking measures, but wish they could sweep this problem under the rug. Kind of like Toyota and their intermittent unwanted acceleration problems on their cars. The only way to buy me back to purchasing Foma film is to get to the bottom of the problem, find out what it was, tell me what it was, and explain how it has been corrected.

- Thomas

 

[mikebarger]

If you read previous posts it also includes 35mm film. I don't think they have a very good grasp of the scope of the problem.

Mike

 

[mikebarger]

Thomas

Since this isn't the first thread of this nature concerning Foma products, I suspect the public will have to accept some defects with Foma products at the current price point. They must not have the ability/resources to correct QA issues

Mike

 

[Andrew K]

Hi all

I've just come across this thread - it reminds me of a problem we had with Agfa film maybe 15 years ago. We were getting scratches on films for no reason - in both 120 and 5x4. We even axamined an unexposed film in daylight prior to processing to see if there were any scratches on it (there were none).

However the moment the same film was loaded into a darkslide, or run through a camera you could see small marks on the surface. These marks were quite deep. This was driving a group of us crazy (with a combined experience of maybe 80 years actually working in the photographic industry none of us had seen anythink like it before..).

I would suggest the scratching you are experiencing is quite deep as they are coming up as black on your scans, so they are going through the actual emulsion....

Perhaps you can try the above test - sacrifice a roll, and look at it in daylight. Then run it through a camera and see if there are any marks on it?

And no - we never did get Agfa to admit there was a manufacturing problem, or replace the films in question.....

 

[Andrew K]

forgot to ask - do you use a hardening fixer? this can help with scratching problems, but you will need to wash the films for longer....

 

[Rolleiflexible]

I would suggest the scratching you are experiencing is quite deep as they are coming up as black on your scans, so they are going through the actual emulsion....

It would be interesting to see if someone could put a
negative under a microscope (which I lack) and have
a look at the marks -- it might suggest a cause that
is not apparent to the naked eye. My guess is that it
is a check or fissure in the emulsion that opens after
the soaking and drying during processing. A scratch
might show marks in the emulsion at either end of
the visible part; a fissure might not.

 

[Aurelien]

Well I just analysed my three respooled films (remembre: I respooled three fomapan100 with a fotokemika backing paper and shot them with my rolleiflex, then developped at once).

There are No scratches at all.

 

[AgX]

With all these backing paper issues it is time for type 120 to go.
Let us keep it as some small scale conversion only for those who use a type 120 camera with red window.

It's time for type 320 as proposed by Gigabitfilm years ago (like type 220, but in the lenght of 120).

 

[Aurelien]

just to gather: (there was a url link here which no longer exists)

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

I hope you're wrong, Mike. I really do.

Thomas

Since this isn't the first thread of this nature concerning Foma products, I suspect the public will have to accept some defects with Foma products at the current price point. They must not have the ability/resources to correct QA issues

Mike

 

[mikebarger]

me too

 

[Ian Grant]

Well I'm in the middle of my first printing session in three & a half months and the Foma 100's & 200's (120) are looking excellent, no issues at all.

Ian

 

[Rolleiflexible]

Well I just analysed my three respooled films (remembre: I respooled three fomapan100 with a fotokemika backing paper and shot them with my rolleiflex, then developped at once).

There are No scratches at all.

Well I'm in the middle of my first printing session in three & a half months and the Foma 100's & 200's (120) are looking excellent, no issues at all.

I hate to keep repeating myself but no one
can test a few rolls, find no defects, and then
make a conclusion about the problem based on
the test. Aurelien, I appreciate your efforts but
you've proven nothing. These marks are the
exception in my negatives -- they happen only
on occasion, not all the time. I can run through
a number of rolls without problem before running
into them again.

The only thing my experience clearly DOES prove
is that it cannot be the backing paper because
135 has no backing paper. Beyond that, we are
without meaningful information to judge. I offered
the idea of putting negatives under a microscope
to see if there is microscopic evidence that the
marks appear to be caused by abrasion, or not.
Does anyone have access to a microscope?

Another thought: What are people doing after
they rinse the film? I squeegee between my
fingers before hanging the film to dry. This has
never caused any problems with my other films
and I don't know what abrasive agent in the water
could account for the marks, but, still, I suppose
this is a possibility. Further thoughts?

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Sanders, I use a windshield wiper in combination with Sprint 'End of Run' to get my films dry. Works perfectly fine on all films, including the Foma that doesn't have the mystery marks.

I agree with Sanders. It is an intermittent problem that cannot be exclusively traced to either camera model or backing paper. So any attempt, as good intentioned as they may be, in finding a better backing paper, or a camera model that works, is not going to address the issue, because it does not span the entire gamut of the problem.

 

[Aurelien]

I konw I did not prove anything scientifically. But it's a point.

I had always these scratches, except when I change the backing paper.

I never touch negative when wet. I dry them without squeegee it's terrific for films.

So last rinse with distilled water and ilfotol.

 

[fotch]

...... I offered
the idea of putting negatives under a microscope
to see if there is microscopic evidence that the
marks appear to be caused by abrasion, or not.....

Does anyone have access to a microscope?...

Further thoughts?

I have a couple of microscopes and a didital microscope camera. I will be glad to take a look and try to describe what I see. I also could try and photograph it so it may be posted for inspection by others. PM me if you want to send a sample to me.

 

[RobertV]

Another thought: What are people doing after
they rinse the film? I squeegee between my
fingers before hanging the film to dry.

For people who are touching any wet emulsion and try to justify scratches on any XX brand of film I even do not want to see any evidence at all.

All actual 35mm Fomapan 100 and 400 emulsions are without any problem.

For 120 Roll film: It seems to be that cameras with a tight loading system can have a problem. The scatches are very thin and a lot of people won't even noticed them.

Hasselblad 500CM, Mamiya RB and Rolleiflex TLR seems to be most sensible for the problem.
If there is any link between the type of backing paper it will be searched out. All reports are send to Foma and behind the curtains a lot of things are checked out now.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

For people who are touching any wet emulsion and try to justify scratches on any XX brand of film I even do not want to see any evidence at all.

Why not?

I just told you that I have not a single scratch on any film, even the Foma 100 films that are all right. The only films I have trouble with are Foma 200 and the odd Foma 100 in 120 format.

 

[mikebarger]

Hasselblad 500CM, Mamiya RB and Rolleiflex TLR seems to be most sensible for the problem.
If there is any link between the type of backing paper it will be searched out. All reports are send to Foma and behind the curtains a lot of things are checked out now.

I bet the above was supposed to have a smiley face behind it, or do you really mean Foma films are not compatible with these cameras?

Mike

 

[RobertV]

Fomapan Creative 200 can not be checked out anymore due to the fact the film is out of production since November 2009. It's even not sure on this moment if or when the film can be produced again.

About Fomapan 100 and 400 in 120 roll film, this whole thread is going on these emulsions.

Due to reports from distributors (worldwide) and mentioned camera type there maybe seems to be any possible connection.

 

[Rolleiflexible]

For people who are touching any wet emulsion and try to justify scratches on any XX brand of film I even do not want to see any evidence at all.

Oh. Okay. I'll go back to Kodak.
Sorry to have troubled you.

 

[mikebarger]

Must be a language gap??

 

[RobertV]

Must be a language gap??

No a lack of experience how to treat a regular film. I am not pleased with these kind of interferences on serious attempts to solve a film problem for one of our manufactureres.

I am filtering data to solve a problem in such a way that all Fomapan 120 roll film users will be satisfied with the specification and Q.C. of these Czech films.