Fortepan or Fomapan: Any Thoughts?

[Max Power]

Evening everyone,
Like many others, I have been using APX 100 and Rodinal over the last little while and it has started to grow on me.

Looking around for something to replace the APX 100 (in 120) I came across both Fortepan 100 and Fomapan 100 on the Freestyle website, but there seems to be little information about these two emulsions out there. (I did to an APUG search and turned up very little).

In your opinion, which of the two, Fortepan or Fomapan, would be a reasonable substitute for APX 100? Are either of them particularly good in Rodinal? (I was/am partial to 1+50).

Any opinions on the subject would be appreciated.

Cheers,
Kent

 

[Foto Ludens]

For the price that Freestyle charges for Fortepan (Arista.EDU made in Hungary) and Fomapan (Arista.EDU Ultra), I'd buy a bit of each and test them out.

For what it's worth, I really like Fomapan 100. Good skies without filters, good response to Diafine (I'm sorry, can't comment on Rodinal). I'll test Fomapan 100 in 510-Pyro as soon as I can (which might be a while, with classes starting tuesday), and I'm sure it will be good on it.

I'd expect both films to deliver...

André

 

[eumenius]

I use both films regularly, and I like both - but they're different, of course Foma is "blacker" and more contrasty, and has smaller grain - Forte is more flat, has bigger grain, but its tonal scale is somehow longer. Both process excellent in both AGFA Rodinal 1+50 or R09 1+60, as well an in other developers (I used Microphen, Diafine, Neofin blau with them). Rodinal give perfect tight crisp grain with both films, but it looks just different. I can recommend both films as a decent and cheap product. One word of caution with Fomapan: don't buy 120 film with emulsion number 09256, the whole batch of it seems to be defective (comets in emulsion). So I recommend you to give them a try - these films are indeed good, you just need to find which one (or both) is to satisfy your need.

Cheers from Moscow, Zhenya

 

[poutnik]

I haven't used Fortepan, only used the Foma in R09 1+60 and like it a lot. It's also quite forgiving to my un-preciousness during exposure and development (not precise light meter and not strict temperature control). I'd recommend the Foma...

Jiri

 

[dustym]

I use the Fomapan 100 and develop in adox aph09 (R09) 1+40 and have had really good results, 2 prints I enetered in club contests came 1st , it has a certain inbuilt tonality which you love or hate when it prints , the film itself has a blue appearance which I feel gives a richness to landscape and foilage I develep in calbe E102 1+4. Cant recommend it enough

 

[Gibran]

APX 100 replacement tests thus far

I'm also a long time APX 100 user and recently have been testing various films to take its place. So far, I have tested the EFKE 50 and 100, the Fomapan 100 and Kodak Plus-x and Tri-x, all in Rodinal. To me, the FomaPan 100 looked closest to APX 100 with the tightest grain but, unfortunately, the quality control of Foma seems to leave a lot to be desired. My roll of 120 had the issue mentioned above and it seems to be a fairly widespread issue. It does come out with a blue base but one really nice thing about the Foma is that its perfectly flat with little to no bow or curl. The Efke 100 is also very nice but may have a little more grain than the Foma and definately tends to curl more. The EFKE 50 is amazing in its tonality but if you shoot a lot of clouds and blue sky you will have to do some burning(or use a yellow filter) as the blue is rendered fairly light. Plus-x did not impress but Tri-x 320 is gorgeous in its tonality but quite grainy. To me, the ideal film would have Tri-x tonality with ASA 50-100 Grain. Thats just what I have found thus far with a few test rolls and I'm still testing.

 

[Max Power]

Thanks all!

Thank you very much everyone for your opinions on this. I've decided to pick up a few rolls of Arista EDU Ultra 100 (Fomapan) from Freestyle in order to give it a try.

Cheers,
Kent

 

[Max Power]

Today I received a nice big parcel from Freestyle with 2 100ft rolls of Arista D-Max 100 (Ilford D-100), 20 rolls of Arista EDU Ultra 120 and a new strap for my M645.

I'm going to go out ASAP and give the 120 a shot in Rodinal 1+50 or 1+25.

Thanks again for the advice.

Kent

 

[Gibran]

Today I received a nice big parcel from Freestyle with 2 100ft rolls of Arista D-Max 100 (Ilford D-100), 20 rolls of Arista EDU Ultra 120 and a new strap for my M645.

I'm going to go out ASAP and give the 120 a shot in Rodinal 1+50 or 1+25.

Thanks again for the advice.

Kent

I'm curious as to your experience with the EDU.ULTRA 100 120. I just received 20 120 rolls of the 200 and 2 120 rolls of the 100 last week. On the first roll of the 100 I processed, the last frame went to the very edge of the roll(the actual film seems to have been cut short length wise!). The 200 speed was better but when compared to the length of a roll of Acros processed the same night, the 200 EDU.ULTRA was shorter in total length. I suspect that not only are these Foma rolls shorter but also that the starting arrow is not always located properly. Yet another quality control problem it would seem.

 

[battra92]

I'm really liking the Fomapan 100 I've been using lately. I also learned that developing in old (like several year) D-76 yields some pretty low contrast photos. I'm sure I can fix it in printing but we'll see what I get for the final image. One of the photos I did is matte and frame worthy.

 

[Jordan]

Today I received a nice big parcel from Freestyle with 2 100ft rolls of Arista D-Max 100 (Ilford D-100), 20 rolls of Arista EDU Ultra 120 and a new strap for my M645.

Wow, I didn't even know they had the D-Max in stock still! If I didn't already have a bin-ful of Efke 25, FP4 Plus and Arista.EDU Ultra 200 I'd snap it up.

 

[SteveH]

I too was the APX100+Rodinal type of guy(in 35mm). Upon moving up to 4x5, I decided to give Fomapan a shot. It really does seem like the closest thing to APX without being APX. It develops great in Rodinal 1+25 or 1+50. The only thing that I have noticed is that Fomapan reacts *differently* to a red 25 filter than APX does...Perhaps this is due to the different base ? Or maybe its just more noticable on a larger negative - not sure. It is just a more dramatic look than apx had with the same filter. I actually kinda like it.

Regards,

 

[Foto Ludens]

Steve,

I've noticed that Foma 100 gives me "yellow filter" skies without using any filters. I suppose that this is due to a lesser blue sensitivity in the emulsion than I'm used to.

In any case, depending on my metering and developing, I can get light gray to very dark gray skies without filtration with Fomapan 100 (in both 35mm and 120).

I'll try to upload an image illustrating the very dark effect, but I already have some shots with "yellow filter" skies in my APUG gallery.

André

 

[Foto Ludens]

Ok, nevermind. The very dark skies frame I had in mind was actually shot with another film (surplus Macophot UP100+)...

 

[ricksplace]

I have shot about 6 rolls of Foma 100 in 120. I agree with all the above comments, except the quality control issues. I haven't noticed any. I develop in HC110 at 1:100 for 18 min. with one inversion only every minute. Very tight grain and good acutance. Very different than fp4 of which I've shot miles, but I like the stuff.

 

[lesdix]

I have been thinking about buying some of the Eastern european films such as Fomapan 100. I have read that they have a thinner emulsion than the likes of Kodak or Ilford and are more easily scratched. Has anyone observed this?

Les

 

[Marco Gilardetti]

I am currently using a lot of Fortepan 100, 120 format. The film is very very thin, much thinner than Agfa or Ilford, and thus extremely annoying to handle and load in the tank.

However, the emulsion is good and rolls are being sell for such a ridicolous price here, that my photograph-taking habits have raised to the stars. I usually reserve it for non-critical situations (like old folders, etc) and I must say that I'm having a lot of fun thanks to the reduced costs.

 

[Phillip P. Dimor]

For the price they are both nice! I've only shot fortepan 400 in 4x5 sheets but I thought that the quality control was great. Each sheet interleaved with a piece of paper, etc. No fogging/streaks/comets.. Grain was there but it looks nice to me.

The two rolls of fomapan 400 in 120 that i've tried are good but the edges are fogged (I thought I rolled it tight..) ah well. I'd say try them both as well..

 

[srs5694]

I have been thinking about buying some of the Eastern european films such as Fomapan 100. I have read that they have a thinner emulsion than the likes of Kodak or Ilford and are more easily scratched. Has anyone observed this?

I've shot a bit of Fomapan 100 and more Fomapan 200 and 400, as well as a bit of Efke KB25 and KB100. The Foma films definitely have thinner bases than typical Kodak, Ilford, Agfa, or Fuji films. I don't know if the emulsions themselves are thinner, though. I've not noticed a greater propensity to scratch, but I can't say with certainty that they aren't more sensitive to scratches. I don't recall the Efke characteristics in this respect, offhand, although I've definitely heard that the Efke emulsions aren't hardened as well as those of Kodak, Ilford, etc.

Oh, and FWIW, I'm using Fomapan 400 as my standard ISO 400 film, and I've recently bought a bulk roll of Fomapan 200 to use as a standard ISO 200 film. I prefer T-Max 100 for an ISO 100 film, though.

 

[Max Power]

I'm curious as to your experience with the EDU.ULTRA 100 120. I just received 20 120 rolls of the 200 and 2 120 rolls of the 100 last week. On the first roll of the 100 I processed, the last frame went to the very edge of the roll(the actual film seems to have been cut short length wise!). The 200 speed was better but when compared to the length of a roll of Acros processed the same night, the 200 EDU.ULTRA was shorter in total length. I suspect that not only are these Foma rolls shorter but also that the starting arrow is not always located properly. Yet another quality control problem it would seem.

I'll let you know how it works out after a couple of rolls. Right now I'm hesitating over whether I should go for Rodinal 1+25 or 1+50. I'm one of those guys addicted to high contrast, so I might go with 1+25 depending upon the lighting outside.

More to follow,
Kent

 

[Foto Ludens]

For what its worth, I developed a roll of EDU.ULTRA 100 120 last sunday, and I got 12 6x6 frames in it, with almost enough room for a 13th frame near the end.

 

[Gibran]

For what its worth, I developed a roll of EDU.ULTRA 100 120 last sunday, and I got 12 6x6 frames in it, with almost enough room for a 13th frame near the end.

So maybe your roll was actually cut to long! I'm processing another roll of the EDU.ULTRA 100 tonight so will see what happens. Just out of curiousity, what camera were you using?

 

[Gibran]

I'll let you know how it works out after a couple of rolls. Right now I'm hesitating over whether I should go for Rodinal 1+25 or 1+50. I'm one of those guys addicted to high contrast, so I might go with 1+25 depending upon the lighting outside.

More to follow,
Kent

I developed my first few rolls of both Foma and Efke 100 for 8:30 shot in full Florida sun using Rodinal 1:64. Agitated for the first 30 seconds, then 3 inversion-rotations in 5 seconds for every two minutes for remainder. Great looking negs for full contrasty lighting. For even more contrast, you might wish to increase the agitation to every minute(10 seconds out of every minute) and knock the total time down to 7 minutes or so. Rodinal 1:25 would probably be way contrasty.

 

[Foto Ludens]

I'm using a Bronica S

 

[Gibran]

I'm using a Bronica S

Not familiar with the S but I'm guessing it has automatic film positioning(you don't have to look through a little red window and line up the numbers on the backing paper). I'm shooting a Fuji GSW690111(6x9) and I have noticed compared to my Hasselblad and Rolleicord(both 6x6) that it uses more of the film length wise than those so the actual start position of the arrow AND the length of the film being exact is more important.