Scratched Fomapan-200 120

[polyglot]

Hi all,

I recently bought 5 rolls of Fomapan200 in 120 on the basis of people here raving about it, and I can see why everyone loves the look. My problem is that the first two rolls I've shot have a nasty scratch right through the middle of the emulsion. I assumed on my first roll that it was my own fault for squeegeeing it so on the second roll, I didn't - I just hung it up to dry without touching it and there are still scratches.

This is what it looks like, at about 2000dpi:

The scratch wanders around the middle half of the frame parallel to the roll and sometimes there are two or more parallel scratches. Their wandering makes me think that it's not a fault with the film back (it was shot in an RZ67, with a back that I've only just bought off APUG).

There are also a bunch of scratches at the film edges, about 6mm in. Nowhere near as continuous as these big long ones but definitely annoying - they're all quite visible when looking at a whole frame.

So, is this something I've done in processing (I really doubt that as I've never seen such a scratch before and did not squeegee this roll... but something else maybe?), is it a mechanical problem with my new back, or is it a manufacturing issue? To say I'm grumpy about it would be an understatement and I'm not real keen to shoot the remaining rolls just yet unless I know the cause.

Edit: I put a few other rolls of known-good film (TMY2) through the same back on the same day but they're not souped yet. I'll get back to you when I see how they come out.

Edit2: there are also these small scratches in both rolls (about 2000dpi again; image here is out-of-focus corrugated iron):

 

[Rick A]

Check the back and clean it thoroughly. I haven't had any problems like that with that film. I did have a minute piece of grit in my Yashica once, causing a similar scratch on a roll of Plus-X.

 

[polyglot]

I've had a good close look at the back and can find/feel no grit anywhere. I found a little black rubbery gunk on the rails that could explain some of the edge-marks but not the big scratch down the middle. Someone please correct me if I'm mistaken but my belief is that in an RZ back, the face of the film touches (at most) the two needle rollers and nothing else; the non-imaging edges of the film also travel along the inner metal rails, resting between the outer rails. Even if I put sandpaper everywhere else in the back, the film shouldn't come out scratched. So if I rub the needle rollers with my fingers to pick up any grit there, that should remove everything that matters, right?

I've now souped & scanned the two other rolls I shot that day, which I think (but am now not completely certain) went through the same back... no scratches. Of course all my backs look basically the same, so now I need to do two or three carefully labelled test rolls with non-cheap film and see what happens to 'em. Think I've got some 400TX and a cat here somewhere...

 

[R gould]

The Fomapan emulsion is soft when wet, did it by any chance curl back on itself when removed from the touches perhaps a bedeveloping tank? this could cause a scratch, also,when you load the tank how do you do it, do you remove the film from the backing paper first, and let the film roll back,or do you load the film with the film hanging straight weighted by the paper,if so it is possible if in loading the film if it touches a bench or anything it could scratch,I use fomapan a lot and these are all ways I have scratched the film,The emulsion, while producing wonderful negatives, is delicate, and needs extra carefull handleing, but it is worth it,Richard

 

[sandermarijn]

Polyglot,

The small scratches that you see are identical to what I have seen in Fomapan 100-120. I started (there was a url link here which no longer exists) >1 year ago.

The problem is the film, not anything you can help. Foma have said (through their distributors) that they would try solve the problem by mid-2010. It seems they have not been successful.

Best, Sander

(BTW, not a clue about that one long scratch; could be anything, from film to camera to processing. Trying that TMY seems like a good plan.)

 

[brucemuir]

I sure hope this is a fluke :/
because I'm currently waiting for T200 (120) stock to show up at Freestyle.

I was supposed to be in on Feb 28 and now got bumped to March 11 or there abouts.

Wonder if it all got scarfed up.

Will anxiously keep my eyes peeled to see if theis issue has indeed been resolved.

 

[ItsReallyDarren]

I has similar problems in a batch of Foma 400 120 I bought about a year ago. Only one roll out of twenty had that problem show up in a few frames. My latest order of Foma 400 120 doesn't seem to show that problem.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Except for the big gouge of a scratch in your top picture, that's exactly the problem I had with a few rolls of Foma 200 a while back, before they temporarily halted production of it.

I used a fair bit of Foma 400 and 100, in both 120 and 35mm, and never really saw any problems with them.

My guess is that Foma is trying everything they can to make sure they deliver quality film without visual defects. But it probably isn't as easy as we might think. Who knows what could be causing the problems you've highlighted above?!

It'll be interesting to see how your TMY-2 films come out. I know they won't feature the fine defects, but I'm keen on seeing if that big deep scratch will be repeated.

- Thomas

 

[Aurelien]

Well, the problem is the film!

They had a big break in the foma200 production (nearly 11 months) and when they produced it again, they were very impatient to put it on the market that they shortened the maturation stage. So, the emulsion is very very soft.

I observed EXACTLY the same in 120 and 135!

My solution, which is not perfect, is to accelerate the maturation by heating, before use, when the film is in its box. One night or more at 40 degrees celsius.

I warned Foma about that. Without any success till today.

 

[Brac]

Wouldn't a hardening fixer be the answer? When I was developing my own black & white film in the past, I used it with all brands of monochrome film in 120, 220, 127 & 35mm and never had any scratch problems. I admit I wasn't using Foma but I did often use Efke, which is known to have a delicate emulsion.

 

[polyglot]

Thanks for all the replies, everyone. I'll still need to test the backs to see if I can figure out where the big scratch came from, but I've not had that issue with the little scratches with any other film, including Efke. Can't say I've shot a lot of Efke but it's way more than I've shot Fomapan; the Fomapan are none-for-two and I've had no issues at all with the Efke...

 

[Leigh Youdale]

My solution to the consistent quality problems I was having with Fomapan emulsions was to stop using it and go back to Ilford!
Cheap film isn't worth it if the shots are ruined by emulsion defects.

 

[polyglot]

The plot thickens: I've just run some 400TX through all the backs... and got no scratches. Back to the Fomapan to see if it's still doing it or whether it's because I removed some grit.

 

[polyglot]

So it's about 2 months later now and I've shot about 30 other rolls (of other films) with zero scratches since this Fomapan issue. This week I put the Fomapan back in again... and it's scratched. Yes, the big ugly gouges. I'm pretty sure the film came out of the factory damaged like that and am highly unimpressed.

 

[R gould]

I strongly agree with Leigh. I don't understand why people use these crap products. It seems to be just because they want inferior image quality and perceive some kind of special tonality which I highly doubt actually exists. Use Kodak, Ilford and Fuji films. If you want an "older-fashioned" look, FP4, HP5 and Tri-X are the best there is.

Micheal,
I have been using Fomapan 400 film for a few years now, not on price, but simply because I like the results I get from it, it is a unique tonality, like something from the fifties, and I have yet to get a roll with any QC problems, and I shoot a LOT of it, in both 35mm and 120, but there were problems because foma wanted to get the 200 on the market as soon as possible, as folk were asking for it,I am told that now any QC issues have been ironed out with the latest run,and in these days when a lot of people are seemingly worrying about films dissapearing then surely they should be congratulated for re formulating their film and bringing it back from the dead, They could easily have just let it die a death, so they should be supported even if only in small measure,
Richard

 

[Luseboy]

I'm sorry to hear about the scratching issue. As of yet I haven't had any issues with 120 film (at all, knock on wood) but with the arista premium 100 (is this not foma 100?), I did have many scratching issues, and in one roll I had some pitted emulsion in some frames. Although I'm not sure it is foma 100 because it doesn't have the blue base like my foma 100 120 has. Personally I really like how with foma 100, the skies always seem to have detail or at least some grey tones. That said though, it is not my favorite film. I far prefer fp4+ for a medium speed.

 

[R gould]

I guess we'll just have to disagree on this one. I don't buy the tonality argument. And as for worrying about film disappearing, this is why I wish more people supported the companies that make the best products, like Ilford and yes, Kodak. If those products go away, I for one am in big trouble.

It would be a very boring world if we all liked the same things, if we all used the same film/developer/paper combination then photography would perhaps be a less exiciting thing, as for film disapearing, I don't worry about it, I think that as long as people use it it will be around for a while yet,
Richard

 

[Роберт]

Micro scratches and a soft Fomapan Creative 200 emulsion.
Well it seems to be that Foma changed their backing paper and put less hurry on their new production films.

Let's hope they can bring back their original specifications without Q.C. issues now.