NEW Foma Retropan 320 Soft first pictures

Ricardo Miranda · Jun 23, 2015

I have now developed 2 rolls of Retropan 320 together with one Fomapan 400 shot at EI320.

Link to Flickr album:
https://flic.kr/s/aHskeLkPsf

Here is a picture from a doll. Her hair is red.

Model doll in Retropan 320 by Ricardo Miranda, on Flickr

These films were all developed at the same time, on the same tank with Fomadon R09, 1+100 stand development for about 1 hour. 4 inversions at the start and 2 at the end.
Negatives were scanned by a low resolution (5MP) Ion "scanner". It is like a mini digi camera.

Looking at the negatives, there is a noticeable difference in the negatives from Retropan. They are lower contrast.
The scanner probably picked that up and pumped the contrast.
There is a shot a window dressing doll I took in 2 different days with R320 and F400, but it was the same object.

My personal opinion is that Retropan 320 is a very good film with a lot of tonal range and lower contrast.
I like it a lot.

baachitraka · Jun 23, 2015

Lower contrast is rather good. Foma films have the habit of building the contrast really fast.

MDR · Jun 23, 2015

Is it me or is Retropan a bit grainier than fomapan 400 it also appears less sharp but that could be caused by the lower contrast. The skin tones seem very nice though and have a certain glow about them. Thanks for info and link. Will try the film.

Oscar Carlsson · Jun 23, 2015

It might be good to point out that these are stand-developed which limits any conclusions from this test, at least for those who uses a more conventional development scheme.

Mustafa Umut Sarac · Jun 23, 2015

these are very high contrast images , you cant expect different from 1:100 hour developed film and nikon lens , I remain with tri x or apx or fp 4.

mesantacruz · Jun 23, 2015

Mustafa Umut Sarac said:
these are very high contrast images , you cant expect different from 1:100 hour developed film and nikon lens , I remain with tri x or apx or fp 4.

First, I'd like to thank the OP for the images, I think I'll give 320 a whirl one of these days.

High contrast?! Most definitely NOT high contrast.... Imagine using a 5 filter on these images... then I could imagine these being high contrast. Also, keep in mind that the OP stated that the scanner might have boosted contrast...

Also while development and lens have an impact on the final image . It by no means dictates the whole picture, there are other variables which affect it, especially the relationship between film/contrast.

flavio81 · Jun 24, 2015

Ricardo,

You are a pioneer!! Thanks for giving us the first images!!

I'll take a look. Let's see if they are the same film...

flavio81 · Jun 24, 2015

My comments:

- Retropan 320 looks 1 stop faster than Fomapan 400 (i'd dare to say even more than 1 stop faster!),
- also R320 looks to have less anti-halation properties, i would guess Foma lessened the amount of AH particles to achieve
(a) faster speed
(b) more "dreamy" look
- R320 looks much grainier.

My preliminary conclusions:

- Nice to know R320 is a new film and not a rebadging of F400 !!
- Results look beautiful despite the increased grain, looking forward to try it once it's available here.
- Looking forward to see tests of it at EI 800 and even 1600 !!

Ricardo Miranda · Jun 24, 2015

Flavio,
Remember that I shot F400 at 320, so about 2/3 over.
Looking at the negatives of R320 in Rodinal 1+100 it was obvious they were less dense, greyish if you like.

Today I developed 3 rolls of Retropan 320 in the dedicated Retro Special developer.
Negatives are denser.

6-24-2015_008 by Ricardo Miranda, on Flickr

MDR · Jun 24, 2015

The AH layer seems to be very ineffective I love it. Grain as an apug poster once said is supposed to be there. The film seems to be a very good choice for portraits will try it in 4x5 35mm not yet available in Austria

flavio81 · Jun 24, 2015

Ricardo Miranda said:
Flavio,
Remember that I shot F400 at 320, so about 2/3 over.

Hi Ricardo!!

I'm not sure if I understand correctly. Fomapan 400 is "true" ISO 250 in D76 straight; and it's "true" ISO 320 in the speed-enhancing Microphen developer. The typical quoted times for Fomapan 400 (in typical developers like D76/ID11) aim for usage at EI 400, where the film is a bit "pushed" and thus contrast goes high.

I don't understand why your shots of F400 were "2/3 overexposure". I don't have tables for F400 using stand development with Fomadon R09. Was your target to develop Foma 400 for usage at EI 500 ? That would be 2/3 faster than EI 320 speed.

Ricardo Miranda · Jun 24, 2015

Flavio,
I shot both R320 and F400 at EI320 and developed all on the same tank, Fomadon R09 1+100 1 hours stand.
The idea was to see how different these films are.
And they are different.
I use F400 at his nominal speed of ISO 400 as with stand development any lack of speed on the film is "masked down".

Ricardo Miranda · Jun 24, 2015

MDR said:
The AH layer seems to be very ineffective I love it. Grain as an apug poster once said is supposed to be there. The film seems to be a very good choice for portraits will try it in 4x5 35mm not yet available in Austria

MDR
I like Lucky SHD100 for that same quality. Unfortunately, it seems that SHD100 has been discontinued.
I am so pleased for R320.

Ricardo Miranda · Jun 25, 2015

I have to admit to a sin when I developed this last batch of Retropan 320 in the Retro Special developer: I didn't check the temperature, so I know it was over 20C as the tank felt warmer. That's when I realised i hadn't check the temp.
Sorry!

Here is one more. I think many people would know how red these Post Office boxes are:

6-24-2015_004 by Ricardo Miranda, on Flickr

Xmas · Jun 25, 2015

flavio81 said:
Hi Ricardo!!

I'm not sure if I understand correctly. Fomapan 400 is "true" ISO 250 in D76 straight; and it's "true" ISO 320 in the speed-enhancing Microphen developer. The typical quoted times for Fomapan 400 (in typical developers like D76/ID11) aim for usage at EI 400, where the film is a bit "pushed" and thus contrast goes high.

I don't understand why your shots of F400 were "2/3 overexposure". I don't have tables for F400 using stand development with Fomadon R09. Was your target to develop Foma 400 for usage at EI 500 ? That would be 2/3 faster than EI 320 speed.

Think the fraction is 1/3...

And Rodinal 1:100 stand will develop a high toe speed but with a lower than normal toe contrast.
You would need to step wedge to notice 1/3 of a stop.

Roger Cole · Jun 25, 2015

Interesting results, and I'd like to try it when it makes it to this side of the pond but the lack of 120 is a severe lack for me. I shoot very little 35mm black and white anymore, and that mainly when I need fast lenses along with Delta 3200. I'll probably try this stuff in 4x5. I could see it being really nice for some old style portraits.

Xmas · Jun 25, 2015

MDR said:
The AH layer seems to be very ineffective I love it. Grain as an apug poster once said is supposed to be there. The film seems to be a very good choice for portraits will try it in 4x5 35mm not yet available in Austria

If the UK were not so expensive you could order from our shops, while we are still in the EU, there may only be bulk loads.

This film may be a first run on their production coater, so they have no cassette labels... 120 would need a different base and new paper...

I hope they keep the 400 for near IR, I've only got 300 foot in store, as ready to use, I'd have to reclassify as IR if they stop.

MDR · Jun 25, 2015

The lack of 120 is a problem while 35mm is the most used format I believe that those interested in using such a specialised film are more likely to use 120 and LF film I hope they will introduce the film in 120 size in the future. For the time being I will use it in 4x5.
One should ad reduced red sensitivity to the films characteristics which is weird when one compares the results to the sensitivity curve of the film.

I too miss Lucky pan for it's lack of AH layer but this film seems to be a good substitute

Ricardo Miranda · Jun 25, 2015

1- The lack of 120 for Retropan 320 is due to them not believing it would be successful.
In other words, bean counters saw they are not selling enough 120 on the other Fomapan films.

2- Fomapan 400 is a different film and it is part of their normal offering.
Remember that Retropan is billed as a "Special film".

Flavio
I don't like pushing film.
But, the datasheet for R320 has the times for 640 ISO with the Retro Special developer.
That will be my next few rolls.
And hoping there will be some cloudy days.

MDR · Jun 25, 2015

Ricardo I am astonished to say the least I believe a not so small part of the Foma film sales comes from the toy camera users and they have to mostly use 120 film also if it called special and retro it becomes even more interesting to people who are after an alternative look like Holga and Diana photographers. Bean counters never understood them they also rarely understand the market to be honest.

Ricardo Miranda · Jun 25, 2015

Well, that was what I read in another forum.
I'm also a bit astonished as I know that Fomapan 100 in 120 is doing well with Dianas.

My "man from Foma" didn't have any news of the availability of 120.

cl3mens · Jun 25, 2015

It kind of makes sense in a way, but not when considering that they are already producing 120 film. Was thinking about the need for backing paper and reels. The bulk should be the easiest to produce. But at the same time they are coating it on a diffrent base for sheets. Hmmm.

I am not overly thrilled with weak AH layers, but I might try it in 4x5 for portraiture some day.

Lachlan Young · Jun 25, 2015

quick question: are the perforations KS or BH?
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/42/35mm_sprockets.png

The reasons for it emerging in in 135 & LF may be simply down to the fact that they are the cheapest finishing options to test the market response. Furthermore, the scanner may have created far more halation than exists on the negative owing to the nature of the light source.

Ricardo Miranda · Jun 25, 2015

The perforations are what I would call standard 35mm still. About KS.
There is no info on rebates. In fact, there's nothing on the rebates and that is normal for Foma bulk rolls.

I believe what you said above about halation to be correct.

Lachlan Young · Jun 25, 2015

Ricardo Miranda said:
The perforations are what I would call standard 35mm still. About KS.
There is no info on rebates. In fact, there's nothing on the rebates and that is normal for Foma bulk rolls.

I believe what you said above about halation to be correct.

Cheers,

Was half wondering if it had originally been made as a special purpose cinema stock or something like that.

May pick up a box of 4x5 & see what it does when run at the EI640 times.

NEW Foma Retropan 320 Soft first pictures

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency