It is not a problem of a certain batch but a property of the film itself. In some cameras you don't have any trouble at all
It is not a problem of a certain batch but a property of the film itself. In some cameras you don't have any trouble at allThe following are from older (2018-2019) batches which were IME not affected by the soft emulsion problem described in this thread.
It is not a problem of a certain batch but a property of the film itself. In some cameras you don't have any trouble at all
Positive thinking, I'll keep that in mind for the rolls I have left.All these defects in Foma films could be turned to advantage with the right subject matter, maybe along the lines of Walker Evans' shots of things in the gutter and other such rough matter.
With 120 film paper backing issues, I never did get a bad roll of any variety, from either Kodak or Ilford. This is probably because the sources I was dealing with were responsible and promptly pulled any rolls of suspect batches, once the problem was identified. I was also working to a considerable extent with older inventory out of my freezer, prior to such issues. That was a brief subcontractor problem.
Sheet-film wise, Foma 200 is the only product I've ever had a quality problem with. But one has to be careful with the clamshell boxes any EU film comes in. They tend to be 2 pc with corners not completely light tight. So once you take the sheets out of the inner black poly bag, you want to put them in a three-part truly light tight clamshell from someone else, like Kodak or Ilford.
The third complaint with Foma sheets is that the edges and corners are downright sharp, so one has to be more careful in shuffle tray processing. There's no resistant overcoat either like with TMax sheet films. I remember back when FP4 (prior to FP4 plus) came with interleafing paper sheets between the film sheets due to emulsion fragility.
Still, Foma 200 is a unique film for this day and age, and I'd be willing to try it again in sheets if they ever do get the quality control consistent.
Hahaha I get itIf some scratches and zits are suitable for certain kinds of subject matter, why not just stomp on the film with a muddy boot instead? Steel wool? Actual shotgun holes? I wouldn't use any film like that if it was free. But maybe if one awakes from the gutter on Skid Row and sees something at the same eye level as a rat, no telling what kind of creative instincts might arrive.
Thanks for that Ekfe observation, Lachlan. I heard from someone who visited the factory around then that it was in such a state of disrepair that "cleanroom" conditions around the coating line consisted of hung sheets of black polyethylene. But random embedded tiny fragments of unfiltered gelatin do exist on my sheets of Efke dye transfer matrix film, far less visibly of course than when enlarged from a tiny frame of 120 film, where it could look like the Goodyear Blimp in the sky.
The issue with Foma 200, on the other hand, was mainly fine cracking predictably parallel to the edges. This was rumored to be due to the emulsion not being fully cured when it was cut down to sheet sizes off the master roll. It apparently needs to aged awhile just like cheese. There were also little pinhole "zits" creating white spots in the print. It is possible that neither of these issues would be a deal breaker to an 8x10 contact printer, but even modest enlargements made them unbearably obnoxious. In fact, very fine hairline cracks are the hardest to retouch out.
Pretty much the whole roll looks like this.
RO9 one shot 1:50 68c 8 minutes continuos rotation (Lab Box) (Fresh Bottle)
Eco-Pro clear Stop bath 1:32 2 minutes
Cinestill F96 Fixer 2 minutes
Bessa 46. Never seen anything like it with either Ilford or Kodak films in same camera.
Clarification: Never seen anything like it with D76. Could it be the acidic stop bath? Pinholes?
Any thoughts?
Did you read the thread at all?You could take it to a professional lab and see if the film is faulty
Did you read the thread at all?
Did you read the thread at all?
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?