Spots on Foma 200 (120 roll)

[silverhalide45]

Hello everyone,

I have recently developed a B&W 120 roll of film (Foma 200) and it has come out with spots all over the roll. Its border is diffuse and it seems they don't follow a defined pattern o something similar. I'm considering that the cause is humidity but I'm not sure, as is the first time i have this issue. About chemistry, I followed my habitual proceedure and the chemicals are relatively fresh and works well. However, I would like to point out that:

1. When I was unrolling the film in total darkness, I noticed that the film made a noise when it separeted from the paper. It wasn't stuck, though.

2. The camera I used has oxid where the film rolls up, but the spots caused by this issue are usually more defined and transparent.

3. I shoot this roll a year ago and then I saved it. I have done that with other films and I have never had any issues with humidity. However, I don't have a lot of experience with 120 film.

I would appreciate your opinion on this matter.

P.D.: it is also possible that is a manufacturing defect?

 

[John Wiegerink]

How old was the roll of film and where had it been stored? That's the question everyone who reads this will ask.

 

[Dusty Negative]

Foma 200 (in 120 format) is notorious for wrapper offset (likely what you're seeing), (overly) soft emulsion (it scratches very easily), and other QC issues. There are many threads here on Photrio that attest to this.

It's a shame, too. It's my favorite B&W film to shoot with, and I still do in 135 format, which suffers much less often from these issues. I gave up on the 120 a few years ago after a string of defective roles.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Welcome to Foma 200. There have been numerous past threads on its intermittent issues, on at least two forums I'm aware of. Hard to say if mfg defect is in play in your case or not; but I sure wouldn't rule it out.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Backing paper issue rears its ugly head yet again... That's what can happen when you let 120 film sit around for a year, out of its protective wrap.

 

[AZD]

The only two rolls of Foma 200 120 I ever used had all kinds of QC problems. Spots and weird regular patterns. Not a single usable frame on either roll. This was fresh film developed relatively soon after exposure. Haven’t bothered with it since.

The 100, 400, and Retropan were fine (well, the Retropan was still Retropan…).

 

[koraks]

The failure pattern shown here is atypical for the usual emulsion defects we see on Foma 200 in 120 format, and it's also not the usual backing paper offset problem. It can still be the latter, but it's different from what we usually.

The linear patterns as shown here are remarkable for sure.

The camera I used has oxid where the film rolls up

Well...clean it! It's asking for trouble, so why not solve the problem?

 

[loccdor]

Agree with others who have posted - experienced a similar problem with very fresh Fomapan 400 in 120. Known issue... I no longer buy Foma films or their rebrands in 120.

 

[koraks]

Fomapan 400 in 120. Known issue

I'm not aware of any structural issues with any other Foma 120 film except 200.

 

[Dusty Negative]

I'm not aware of any structural issues with any other Foma 120 film except 200.

I haven’t seen problems with Foma 120 outside of their 200 ASA either, but others have posted here. I have basically stopped shooting Foma in 120 altogether out of fear.

 

[Dusty Negative]

I believe @Donald Qualls has a great deal of experience with all manner of Foma / Arista in 120. He is probably the best person to consult.

 

[silverhalide45]

How old was the roll of film and where had it been stored? That's the question everyone who reads this will ask.

The film it's one year old and I stored it in an apparently dry cupboard with the rest of my films. I have to say that the only cover it had was its carton box.

 

[silverhalide45]

Foma 200 (in 120 format) is notorious for wrapper offset (likely what you're seeing), (overly) soft emulsion (it scratches very easily), and other QC issues. There are many threads here on Photrio that attest to this.

It's a shame, too. It's my favorite B&W film to shoot with, and I still do in 135 format, which suffers much less often from these issues. I gave up on the 120 a few years ago after a string of defective roles.

Welcome to Foma 200. There have been numerous past threads on its intermittent issues, on at least two forums I'm aware of. Hard to say if mfg defect is in play in your case or not; but I sure wouldn't rule it out.

The only two rolls of Foma 200 120 I ever used had all kinds of QC problems. Spots and weird regular patterns. Not a single usable frame on either roll. This was fresh film developed relatively soon after exposure. Haven’t bothered with it since.

The 100, 400, and Retropan were fine (well, the Retropan was still Retropan…).

I didn't know anything about this issues related to Foma 120 format. Now I am aware I will try more reliable films for 120. It's a pity because when Foma works the results are really beautiful. Overall, I think the problem could be a combination of humidity and a bad emulsion as well.

 

[silverhalide45]

Backing paper issue rears its ugly head yet again... That's what can happen when you let 120 film sit around for a year, out of its protective wrap.

Yes, I also think it's one of the reasons of this bad results. Next time I will develop it as quickly as possible. Besides, a specific box to protect exposed 120 films would be useful.

 

[silverhalide45]

The failure pattern shown here is atypical for the usual emulsion defects we see on Foma 200 in 120 format, and it's also not the usual backing paper offset problem. It can still be the latter, but it's different from what we usually.
View attachment 404310
The linear patterns as shown here are remarkable for sure.


Well...clean it! It's asking for trouble, so why not solve the problem?

I need to add that the backing paper has no marks or spots on it. I don't know if in that cases the paper it's worn off.

Regarding the camera, I have recently solved the oxid problem and the negatives don't have marks on it. However, I shooted some rolls before and the only issue I had was transparent spots because of the oxid but I didn't had this kind of marks. Overall, I think it could be a combination of humidity and a bad emulsion

 

[silverhalide45]

Agree with others who have posted - experienced a similar problem with very fresh Fomapan 400 in 120. Known issue... I no longer buy Foma films or their rebrands in 120.

I haven’t seen problems with Foma 120 outside of their 200 ASA either, but others have posted here. I have basically stopped shooting Foma in 120 altogether out of fear.

By now, I have read that Foma film has a lot of issues with 120 format but specially with 200ASA. Thanks for sharing your experience on this matter.

 

[koraks]

I need to add that the backing paper has no marks or spots on it. I don't know if in that cases the paper it's worn off.

You generally can't tell much from the backing paper. The 'offset' problem is virtually always a chemical interaction between constituents of the backing paper and the photographic emulsion that touches it. This is accelerated/facilitated by heat and moisture. Image-wise effects do not necessarily show up on the backing paper itself, although sometimes you can recognize the inherent pattern of the paper itself in the image defects. But this is not so much 'damage' to the paper as such; just its inherent structure. Btw, one of the reasons I have my doubts about this being a backing paper problem is the lack of this apparent structure in your images.

I have read that Foma film has a lot of issues with 120 format but specially with 200ASA

It's exclusively the 200 speed product, and the defects are virtually always sharply delimited minus-density marks. Yours are more fuzzy, so not the typical problems we see on this film.

 

[Donald Qualls]

I believe @Donald Qualls has a great deal of experience with all manner of Foma / Arista in 120. He is probably the best person to consult.

I've only use Foma 100 and 400; never shot or developed a roll of their 200.