Pushing Fomapan 200 Creative to 400

District Photo · Feb 23, 2016

I am planning on doing some night shooting with Fomapan 200 creative and was tossing around the idea of pushing it to 400. However, the only thing the Foma site says about pushing is:

"Its wide exposure latitude allows exposures in the speed range from ISO 100/21° to 800/30° without change of development time."

I am having a hard time wrapping my head around that bit of info especially when the technical data sheet doesn't address pushing or pulling that I can find. I am assuming they are speaking to keeping the development time consistent and changing the developer temperature. The massive dev. chart has a few development times for 400, D76 which I have, and others that I don't such as HC-110.

Also, how does one account for reciprocity failure when pushing film? Does the information on the info sheet hold true when pushing one stop? Would I be better off, in this instance, taking night shots at 200 and dealing with very long exposure times?

ic-racer · Feb 23, 2016

"Push Processing" of b&w negative films only increases negative contrast so you don't have to print the underexposed negatives on high contrast paper. Try your standard negative development and see how the negatives print. If you can't get enough contrast with #5 paper, then increase development 20% for the next roll.

Konical · Feb 23, 2016

Good Evening, DP,

My own admittedly limited experience with Fomapan Creative 200 is that it is inherently a rather contrasty film. I think that trying to "push" the film would quickly lead to extremely high-contrast negatives with any general-purpose developer. Since night scenes are generally high-contrast already, Foma 200 probably would not give optimal results. Such scenes typically involve lengthy exposures with a tripod-mounted camera, so fast film isn't really needed. My best results have come with TMX (good reciprocity characteristics) and Technidol developer. (Technidol is now hard to find, but a similar low-contrast developer would be a good choice.)

Konical

MattKing · Feb 23, 2016

Push Processing doesn't change the sensitivity of the film (much). If shadow areas are under-exposed, they will still be under-exposed if you increase the development.

Near shadows, mid-tones and highlights will tend to be more dense when you push process, and as a result the negative will be have more contrast - which may make a slightly more pleasing print.

But nothing will save those under-exposed shadow areas.

District Photo · Feb 23, 2016

ic-racer said:
"Push Processing" of b&w negative films only increases negative contrast so you don't have to print the underexposed negatives on high contrast paper. Try your standard negative development and see how the negatives print. If you can't get enough contrast with #5 paper, then increase development 20% for the next roll.

That makes sense to me. I never really messed around with pushing or pulling, other than shooting Pan F+ at asa 25 and developing with Accufine but that was years ago. I always thought that fiddling with exposure times would pull more, or less, not only in terms of contrast out of film that hasn't been shot at the suggested speed. Now I know!

Konical said:
Good Evening, DP,

My own admittedly limited experience with Fomapan Creative 200 is that it is inherently a rather contrasty film. I think that trying to "push" the film would quickly lead to extremely high-contrast negatives with any general-purpose developer. Since night scenes are generally high-contrast already, Foma 200 probably would not give optimal results. Such scenes typically involve lengthy exposures with a tripod-mounted camera, so fast film isn't really needed. My best results have come with TMX (good reciprocity characteristics) and Technidol developer. (Technidol is now hard to find, but a similar low-contrast developer would be a good choice.)

Konical

I will be using a tripod and such. I've never shot black and white at night but years ago I shot a very large amount of Ektachrome 160T and 64T at night. No pushing, pulling, or development experiments with that though as I took all of my slide stuff to the store for development. My only purpose for fiddling with shooting speed was to cut down 2-4 minute exposures to 1-2 minutes. The only developers I have access to right now are D76 and Ilfotec DD-X. I don't need to process the negatives right away though so I can always order something else.

I'll just stick with shooting it at 200 and go from there!

MartinP · Feb 24, 2016

Have a look at the section of the datasheet where it mentions reciprocity compensation, and then test it before shooting anything valuable. You could do that with just a few exposures snipped from the end of the film, then use the rest in accordance with what you find. A huge amount depends on how you decide to measure the near-darkness exposure -- highlights under streetlamps, or partially lit walls, or mid-shadows, or . . . etc. etc. Relating your personal exposure measurement technique to the published reciprocity data is what a few frames of testing will establish.

Gerald C Koch · Feb 24, 2016

It's far better to use a faster film than to push a slow one. Used to be taught in Photography 101 when photography was taught.

Xmas · Feb 24, 2016

Gerald C Koch said:
It's far better to use a faster film than to push a slow one. Used to be taught in Photography 101 when photography was taught.

My photo book said don't underexpose and overdevelop.
But that was before scanners or VC paper.

The hype says latitude the data sheet says 160 ISO...

It is nice film at 125!

Ricardo Miranda · Feb 25, 2016

District Photo said:
I am assuming they are speaking to keeping the development time consistent and changing the developer temperature.

No, they aren't.
You are wrongly reading Foma's statement.
If you have been in photography for more than 30 years, do you remember the DIN degrees?
That's what the /21 and /30 refer to on that sentence.

You'll need to read the datasheet.
It shows that Fomapan 200 even when developed in Microphen is no more than EI160 for a gamma of 0.6.
As F200 is a mixed technology film, you can use Fomadon Excell. It is probably more appropriate to it.

mnemosyne · Feb 25, 2016

District Photo said:
I am planning on doing some night shooting with Fomapan 200 creative and was tossing around the idea of pushing it to 400. However, the only thing the Foma site says about pushing is:

"Its wide exposure latitude allows exposures in the speed range from ISO 100/21° to 800/30° without change of development time."

I am having a hard time wrapping my head around that bit of info especially when the technical data sheet doesn't address pushing or pulling that I can find. I am assuming they are speaking to keeping the development time consistent and changing the developer temperature.

The quote refers not to "pushing" but simply to the exposure latitude of the film (one stop over two stops under from box speed) without changing development (neither time nor temperature). Exposure latitude in practice depends on the lighting/contrast range of the subject and the way you meter. Latitude is usually wider with flat subjects and narrower with high contrast subjects.

Now, "pushing" is something different, as it generally means you underexpose (in relation to box speed) and (partially) compensate for that underexposure by prolonging development. This will (depending on film and developer) lead to a slight increase in usable film speed at the expense of increased contrast, which can show as burnt out highlights and loss of shadow detail when dealing with high contrast subjects. You would for example set the meter at 400 instead 200, push development, and as a result get midtones about where they would have been with 200 and normal development, some loss of shadow detail (depending on contrast range of subject, slightly offset by increased development) and higher densities in the highlights with possible loss of highlight detail (depending on contrast range of subject)

The curves in the Fomapan data sheet give a very good idea of how the film reacts to prolonged development in a variety of developers. They show the contrast (gamma) and practical film speed (and base fog) in relation to development time.

For example, look at the Excel/Xtol curve. It tells you that at 6 minutes (20 C), you will have a speed of EI 160 and a gamma (= contrast) of about 0.6 ("normal"). When you follow this curve to the right you will see that when prolonging ("pushing") development to 7, 8 or 9 minutes, the gamma continues to rise (9 minutes = 0.8), but at the same time the film speed will not improve very much (about 1/6 of a stop), as the speed graph ("S") flattens. So you can deduct that "pushing" this film in this developer will not lead to any speed gain, just an increase in contrast.

Now, for comparison, look at the Microphen curve on the same data sheet. At 6 min (20 C), again you get a practical speed of EI 160 and a gamma of about 0.6, quite similar to Xtol. However, the film reacts differently to pushing in this developer. When you follow the curves to the right you realize that prolonged development not only raises the contrast curve, but also the speed graph, which means it gives a slight boost in film speed. At 9 minutes you have reached EI200 (1/3 stop speed gain) at the expense of contrast, of course, which has risen to 0.8

You can also see from the curves that D76/ID-11 does not give the best speed for this film. A contrast of 0.6 will yield only EI 125.

District Photo said:
Would I be better off, in this instance, taking night shots at 200 and dealing with very long exposure times?

Yes. You can find info on the reciprocity behavior of this film in the Foma product catalog (it is available on the web in PDF format).
I will quote the data from the table here for your convenience:
200 Creative 1 s: 3x - 1,5 (stops); 10 s: 9x -3 (stops); 100 s: 18x -4 (stops)

As always, YMMV, so some testing is advisable before doing important work

District Photo · Feb 26, 2016

Ricardo Miranda said:
No, they aren't.
You are wrongly reading Foma's statement.
If you have been in photography for more than 30 years, do you remember the DIN degrees?
That's what the /21 and /30 refer to on that sentence.

You'll need to read the datasheet.
It shows that Fomapan 200 even when developed in Microphen is no more than EI160 for a gamma of 0.6.
As F200 is a mixed technology film, you can use Fomadon Excell. It is probably more appropriate to it.

30 years ago I was still in diapers! I may have touched a camera at some point back then but nothing serious.

I never received any education on DIN degrees, film gamma, and how to read film tech sheets back in school. The program I was in didn't offer instruction on those aspects of film processing. I am playing a bit of catch up and self-teaching at this point.

mnemosyne said:
The quote refers not to "pushing" but simply to the exposure latitude of the film (one stop over two stops under from box speed) without changing development (neither time nor temperature). Exposure latitude in practice depends on the lighting/contrast range of the subject and the way you meter. Latitude is usually wider with flat subjects and narrower with high contrast subjects.

Now, "pushing" is something different, as it generally means you underexpose (in relation to box speed) and (partially) compensate for that underexposure by prolonging development. This will (depending on film and developer) lead to a slight increase in usable film speed at the expense of increased contrast, which can show as burnt out highlights and loss of shadow detail when dealing with high contrast subjects. You would for example set the meter at 400 instead 200, push development, and as a result get midtones about where they would have been with 200 and normal development, some loss of shadow detail (depending on contrast range of subject, slightly offset by increased development) and higher densities in the highlights with possible loss of highlight detail (depending on contrast range of subject)

The curves in the Fomapan data sheet give a very good idea of how the film reacts to prolonged development in a variety of developers. They show the contrast (gamma) and practical film speed (and base fog) in relation to development time.

For example, look at the Excel/Xtol curve. It tells you that at 6 minutes (20 C), you will have a speed of EI 160 and a gamma (= contrast) of about 0.6 ("normal"). When you follow this curve to the right you will see that when prolonging ("pushing") development to 7, 8 or 9 minutes, the gamma continues to rise (9 minutes = 0.8), but at the same time the film speed will not improve very much (about 1/6 of a stop), as the speed graph ("S") flattens. So you can deduct that "pushing" this film in this developer will not lead to any speed gain, just an increase in contrast.

Now, for comparison, look at the Microphen curve on the same data sheet. At 6 min (20 C), again you get a practical speed of EI 160 and a gamma of about 0.6, quite similar to Xtol. However, the film reacts differently to pushing in this developer. When you follow the curves to the right you realize that prolonged development not only raises the contrast curve, but also the speed graph, which means it gives a slight boost in film speed. At 9 minutes you have reached EI200 (1/3 stop speed gain) at the expense of contrast, of course, which has risen to 0.8

You can also see from the curves that D76/ID-11 does not give the best speed for this film. A contrast of 0.6 will yield only EI 125.

Yes. You can find info on the reciprocity behavior of this film in the Foma product catalog (it is available on the web in PDF format).
I will quote the data from the table here for your convenience:
200 Creative 1 s: 3x - 1,5 (stops); 10 s: 9x -3 (stops); 100 s: 18x -4 (stops)

As always, YMMV, so some testing is advisable before doing important work

That makes sense to me. As I said elsewhere, the photography program I was in didn't teach us a whole lot about some aspects of developing film.

I did read the technical data sheet and the 18x for 100 second exposures is what got me. I'd rather sit there with the shutter open than lose DOF by changing F stops especially because most of what I'll be doing is landscapes.

This is just a personal project with shots that can easily be replicated after doing test rolls. Fomapan 200 is cheap, too so it won't break the bank to shoot a few rolls to get things right. I've been tossing around the idea of using Caffenol C-M(rs) as I've read it is a low contrast developer. I came across a few example shots of Fomapan 200 developed with it that looked good.

mnemosyne · Feb 27, 2016

District Photo said:
This is just a personal project with shots that can easily be replicated after doing test rolls. Fomapan 200 is cheap, too so it won't break the bank to shoot a few rolls to get things right. I've been tossing around the idea of using Caffenol C-M(rs) as I've read it is a low contrast developer. I came across a few example shots of Fomapan 200 developed with it that looked good.

Just to avoid any misunderstandings, the table is read in the following way:
You meter (box speed, or whatever you determined is "your" practical speed for the film). When the result is 1s at the f stop of your choice, the compensation factor is 3x (1,5 stops), which means that instead of the 1s that is shown on your meter you expose for 3 seconds. If your exposure meter says "10 s", than you actually have to expose for 80~90 seconds (3 stops) etc

Generally, the reciprocity failure of the Fomapan films is not exactly "best in class". If you are really working a lot with exposure times longer than 1s, you might consider switching to a film that has better characteristics in this regard which could save you a lot of headache and also time/expense for testing etc. Acros 100 comes to my mind, according to the data sheet it will not require compensation for exposures up to 120 s.

Ome Kees · Feb 27, 2016

Last winter I had great results with Fomapan 100, 6.5x9 developed in E76.
20°C, 1+1
Asa Dev.time
100 12
200 20
400 45
800 75
1600 90

This is the formula for one liter in grams.
Phenidone 0.2
Sulfiet 100
ascorbic acid 8
borax 10

District Photo · Feb 27, 2016

mnemosyne said:
Just to avoid any misunderstandings, the table is read in the following way:
You meter (box speed, or whatever you determined is "your" practical speed for the film). When the result is 1s at the f stop of your choice, the compensation factor is 3x (1,5 stops), which means that instead of the 1s that is shown on your meter you expose for 3 seconds. If your exposure meter says "10 s", than you actually have to expose for 80~90 seconds (3 stops) etc

Generally, the reciprocity failure of the Fomapan films is not exactly "best in class". If you are really working a lot with exposure times longer than 1s, you might consider switching to a film that has better characteristics in this regard which could save you a lot of headache and also time/expense for testing etc. Acros 100 comes to my mind, according to the data sheet it will not require compensation for exposures up to 120 s.

For sure. I was surprised at the shutter speed reciprocity failure needs to be accounted for with Fomapan. Outside of many rolls of Ektachrome 160T (which is not recommended for shutter speeds over 10s) and 64T (which is only a +1/3 stop(!) at 100s) I've only shot 2-3 rolls of T-Max 100 which is only a 1 stop change at 100 seconds.

I mainly decided to try Fomapan 200 due to price because I tend to blow through a lot of film. I have also seen some shots that I really liked. However, if I'll have to shoot more Fomapan 200 to get acceptable results, thereby spending more time shooting and processing for a potentially equal film cost it would probably be best to try Acros or T-Max instead.

Thanks for the help everyone!

Pushing Fomapan 200 Creative to 400

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency