Want to try Foma 400

TheToadMen · Oct 25, 2014

For what it is worth, info from www.macodirect.de:

FOMAPAN 200 Creative is a panchromatically sensitized, black-and-white negative film designed for taking photographs. The film meets high requirements for low granularity, high resolving power and high contour sharpness.
http://www.macodirect.de/films-blac...ormat-films-foma-fomapan-creative-p-2221.html

FOMAPAN 400 Action is a panchromatically sensitized, black-and-white negative film designed for taking photographs under unfavourable light conditions or using short exposure times. The film meets high requirements for low granularity, good resolving power and good contour sharpness.
http://www.macodirect.de/films-blackwhite-films-medium-format-films-foma-fomapan-action-p-791.html

FOMAPAN 100 Classic is a panchromatically sensitized, black-and-white negative film designed for taking photographs. The film meets high requirements for low granularity, high resolving power and contour sharpness and a wide range of halftones.
http://www.macodirect.de/films-blackwhite-films-medium-format-films-foma-fomapan-classic-p-787.html

Did anyone compare and notice this kind of differences?

georg16nik · Oct 25, 2014

Peter Schrager said:
the 200 is NOT a tabular film...that's a myth and not true at all
best,peter

The 200 is neither T not cubic, its a hybrid breed if I am not mistaken. Its a very good film, plays well with various developers.
I personally prefer all Foma films in Rodinal 1:50 @ 16°C to 18°C, also Neofin Blau on occasion.

andreios · Oct 25, 2014

The 200 is extremely nice in staining developer, I like it particularly (in 8x10) in Moersch Tanol.

NB23 · Oct 25, 2014

I've only heard very good things about the 200. I never used it but will have to.

I personally love the foma 100. It is just great all over. The grain is perfect and the tones are fantastic.

I dislike the 400. I have to finish the 7 rolls (120) I have left and after that it's adiooooos.

flavio81 · Oct 27, 2014

NB23 said:
I've only heard very good things about the 200. I never used it but will have to.

I personally love the foma 100. It is just great all over. The grain is perfect and the tones are fantastic.

I dislike the 400. I have to finish the 7 rolls (120) I have left and after that it's adiooooos.

Why you dislike the 400? I'm curious. The spectral sensitivity of the 400 is very similar to the one in the 100-speed, but with less extension on the deep reds.

About the foma 200: I have seen a photomicrography of the 200 film, posted I think by Foma, and yes, the tabular grains were there.

TheToadMen · Oct 27, 2014

What is "tabular grain"? I'm not familiar with this term.

Bert from Holland
http://thetoadmen.blogspot.nl

miha · Oct 27, 2014

Hi Bert, have a look: http://www.harmantechnology.com/Technology/CrystalGrowth/tabid/180/Default.aspx

Ricardo Miranda · Oct 27, 2014

Bert,
Tabular grain or T-grain is a Kodak term. Ilford has a similar technology they call CCG, Control Crystal Growth.

TheToadMen · Oct 27, 2014

miha said:
Hi Bert, have a look: http://www.harmantechnology.com/Technology/CrystalGrowth/tabid/180/Default.aspx

Nice to read, thanks!

Thomas Bertilsson · Oct 27, 2014

Foma 400 is very nice film. It appears to me that the film is a bit sensitive grain wise depending on what developer you use it with. You have to make sure not to overexpose the film, highlights block up pretty quickly, and antihalation is not as effective as in Tri-X or HP5+, so highlights tend to bloom a lot in bright/dark adjacent areas.

With PMK Pyro I have gotten very grainy prints, with negatives that had perfect exposure and contrast. Grade 2 prints with almost no darkroom manipulations.
With replenished Xtol and Edwal 12 I have gotten very fine grain even from 35mm film, to the point I was actually very surprised.
With Pyrocat-HD I got normal grain and printed pictures from Foma 400 and Tri-X side by side and it looked fairly consistent.

Normally films are not this sensitive to developers, but that's one thing to consider.

flavio81 · Oct 27, 2014

BTW, for anyone who thinks Fomapan 100 is some sort of very inferior, cheapo film, i dare you to look at the actual results:

http://www.pirate-photo.fr/pages/viewpage.php?f=51&t=41

Of course, the higher contrast but finer grain tells to me that this is perhaps an actual ISO 64-80 film in D76 (the FOMAPAN 100 datasheet support this), which is slower to some of the other films which are true ISO 125. And of course, for portraits it isn't the best choice in this test, in any case not at ISO 100.

But nice sharpness and grain from the Foma!

Xmas · Oct 27, 2014

Yes but ISO is done with a 'hot' D 76 and in Microphen is close to 125 and safe at 100 for 0.65 gamma.

TheToadMen · Oct 27, 2014

flavio81 said:
BTW, for anyone who thinks Fomapan 100 is some sort of very inferior, cheapo film, i dare you to look at the actual results:

http://www.pirate-photo.fr/pages/viewpage.php?f=51&t=41

Of course, the higher contrast but finer grain tells to me that this is perhaps an actual ISO 64-80 film in D76 (the FOMAPAN 100 datasheet support this), which is slower to some of the other films which are true ISO 125. And of course, for portraits it isn't the best choice in this test, in any case not at ISO 100.

But nice sharpness and grain from the Foma!

I agree on Fomapan 100 being a good and cheap film, if used for the right occasion (as with any film).
It is also very suitable for developing in Caffenol-C-M.

Mainecoonmaniac · Oct 27, 2014

A quick note. Though I love Foma film, but in general, the film has horrible reciprocity response for long night shots. Long night shots I use Fuji Acros.

marciofs · Oct 27, 2014

Mark Crabtree said:
You might want to try some Kentmere 400 also. A nice traditional film with Ilford quality, and quality control, at something like Foma prices IIRC. I've been shooting a fair bit of the 100 and plan to get some 400 again soon.

I really like Kentmere 400. It has a beautiful stony look and I have shot it at 3200 with great results.

Gerald C Koch · Oct 30, 2014

Before I would commit to buying a 100 ft roll of Foma, or any other film for that matter, I would try a few 24 or 36 exposure rolls. You may not like it and then be stuck with 100 ft of it. Try it in a couple of developers. A post like yours generates a lot of conflicting information. Only you can really decide.

Roger Cole · Oct 30, 2014

Gerald C Koch said:
Before I would commit to buying a 100 ft roll of Foma, or any other film for that matter, I would try a few 24 or 36 exposure rolls. You may not like it and then be stuck with 100 ft of it. Try it in a couple of developers. A post like yours generates a lot of conflicting information. Only you can really decide.

This. I shoot a bit of it in 120 and 4x5 and agree with most of what's written here: decent film, softer than most when wet, builds contrast quickly (but this can make it good for zone system manipulations) best at EI 200-250 for most normal contrast, odd spectral response that looks good for some stuff, horrible reciprocity failure characteristics for longer exposures, a real bargain in the Arista brand from Freestyle.

It's fun to play with but I'd try a few rolls before committing to 100 feet.

Thomas Bertilsson · Oct 30, 2014

Roger Cole said:
This. I shoot a bit of it in 120 and 4x5 and agree with most of what's written here: decent film, softer than most when wet, builds contrast quickly (but this can make it good for zone system manipulations) best at EI 200-250 for most normal contrast, odd spectral response that looks good for some stuff, horrible reciprocity failure characteristics for longer exposures, a real bargain in the Arista brand from Freestyle.

It's fun to play with but I'd try a few rolls before committing to 100 feet.

I agree with this, Jerry and Roger. 100 feet is a lot of film to shoot if you end up not liking the results.

I found that with Foma films it's a bit more critical to find the sweet spot in its contrast than with other films. At first it can look a little flat if it isn't developed enough, but it turns quickly and it's easy to over-develop, which gives way too much contrast.

Over the years I found that PMK Pyro was a very good developer for it, because not only does it keep those highlights in printable range a bit easier than other developers, it also hardens the emulsion a bit, making it less sensitive to physical damage in the process.
My current film developer, Harvey's 777 Panthermic, appears to harden the emulsion during processing also. I don't know how else they could develop film at 90 degrees with it back in the 1930s, when emulsion could readily lift off the film base at 75 degrees. I've had some Forte and Foma film to play with in that developer, and it is as scratch resistant as anything else.

So, the developer could play a role in making the film less volatile to work with, and also keep its more precise developing requirements in check.

Over the years I've also had luck with Foma 400 in replenished Xtol for high contrast scenes, Edwal 12 for low contrast scenes, and Pyrocat-HD has been a really great allround developer, especially when slowing agitation down a bit and developing longer.

NB23 · Oct 30, 2014

marciofs said:
I really like Kentmere 400. It has a beautiful stony look and I have shot it at 3200 with great results.

"stony" look
Pushing a film to 3200 with "great" results

Aren't we exaggerating a little bit?

Xmas · Oct 30, 2014

Excellent film, down load the manufacturers data sheet, this confirms the 250 ISO in D-76 and the reciprocity. Though I use MICROPHEN or Rodinal.

Real nice grain even at 8x10.

It is not prehardened like Kodak or Ilford so needs care like in '50s.

no prebath
plain water stop safest
non carbonate developer
hold all processing to fixer to 1C

but I can use a squeegee no problem

It does not have the dynamic range of Trix or HP5+ so you may get more highlight bleed than normal.

Most of my photography is on Foma 100 and 400.

Some of the bulk is not edge numbered.

baachitraka · Oct 30, 2014

Try few rolls of Foma 200 and 400 before you go for bulk order.

400 with Rodinal 1+50 is not a bad combination but you may need to sacrifice some speed.

* I rather get them in rolls instead of bulk roll to save from the troubles.

Roger Cole · Oct 30, 2014

I use a pre soak with Foma in my Jobo without a problem.

Sent from my iPhone via Tapatalk using 100% recycled electrons. Because I care.

removed account4 · Oct 30, 2014

Peter Schrager said:
the 200 is NOT a tabular film...that's a myth and not true at all
best,peter

hi peter

im not sure what the creativ200 is or was but i loved it.
i shot it for a while and it was a really special film,
liked it so much i have 100 feet in a fridge ..
im thinking of shooting it as movie film when i can find
a camera that won't break my bank ( or be plastic )

Xmas · Oct 30, 2014

Roger Cole said:
I use a pre soak with Foma in my Jobo without a problem.

Sent from my iPhone via Tapatalk using 100% recycled electrons. Because I care.

softens the emulsion a bit more and unnecessary? Every little risk is addative.

Roger Cole · Oct 31, 2014

Well my film isn't damaged so that's good enough for me.

Jobo recommends, or did, the pre-soak as the reduction in development offsets the increased agitation from rotary processing. The result is that you can use the same times as per inversion.

Want to try Foma 400

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency