Fomapan 200 problems

sevo said:
It is not that easy to test a film for ISO if you don't own a transmission densitometer, and it is even likely that you prefer the results at 200 to those at 160 even though a proper test would give it a 160. Many films perform quite well when under- or overexposed, some even better than at box speed. For example no ultra-fast film ever got past a proper ISO 1000-1200, but they are (or were) labelled and marketed for their one or two stop underexposed speed.
Click to expand...

Thanks. I will experiment and see what I like best.

Cheers - John
 
I rate it at 160 and run in HC-110 B and get full shadows and open highlights. Im using this in shert film for platinum printing which requires a bit extra contrast and density. It may be that it's not suited for stand development.
 
Running these tests with e.g. Fomapan 400 and their new Retropan 320 soft I came to the conclusion that e.g. in HC-110 (B=1+31) (also a popular developer) Fomapan 400 reached iso 200 and their Retropan 320 indeed (almost) iso 320.

So not so strange that people don't like FP400 in push to iso 800 because the reality is an iso 200 film pushed to iso 800 which means +2F stops, severe loss details in the shadows and hardly usable negative for the enlarger prints.

In fact: FP200 is better to push to iso 800 then the FP400 film. About their Retropan 320 I did some tests on iso 640 with still a lower Gamma but that has to do this film is especially made for low contrast, hence the "Soft" name of this Fomapan film.
 
Quote:
*Be sure to use at least 6 mL of syrup per 135-36 or 120 roll of film, even if this requires you to put more than the usual amount of liquid in the tank.
http://www.covingtoninnovations.com/hc110/


Why? Here's a sample using 4ml HC-110 in 640ml (or 5ml in 800 if I did two rolls together, I can't remember which is was). It looks ok to me, am I missing something?

Sept15_Foma200_HD_FM3A_50_100_7 by Ben Sandler, on Flickr
 
test roll

test roll

Jerevan said:
Do the work, do the tests and find out by yourself.
Click to expand...

I have done a special test. I rated the film as ASA 400 and I shot several frames down with 1/2 EV stops difference (ASA 300, 200, 150 etc.): I gave a half EV after each exposure. The same topic, same light conditions. This is the so called "exposure bracketing".

Then I developed the negative in Fomadon R09, 1:50, following the instructions (time, agitation). I diluted 6 ml of developer.

I mean that the real speed of Fomapan 200 in Fomadon R09, 1:50 is about 75 ASA, but the results were acceptable between 50 and 150 ASA.

The instruction manual does not give exposure curves regarding Fomadon R09 so I had to do this test.

I appreciate your opinion and comments.
 
Depending of developer, dilution you can get different results. Bracketing 1/3F stops is already pretty acurate. Next step: iso 125-100-80-64-50 and when YOU come on iso 80 it is possible.

When I am doing Acros 100 in R09/Rodinal I have iso 64 with this film. But when using then a (dark) Yellow filter you are close to iso 32 which depending of what type camera and subject, it can be a problem then.

So many choices .......

I would suggest: Xtol 1+1, Fomadon Excel W27 1+1 at E.I. 160 and if the lifespan of these Ascorbic Acid type developers is a problem: PC-TEA (Pat Gainer). It works like Xtol 1+2 when diluting 1+50 but the lifespan is over 1 1/2 years. And yes I know: A tick more grain.
 
I'll add my two bits. I love Fomapan 200. I regularly shoot it at box speed and develop in HC 110 dil. h for 7 mins, w/ 30 secs initial agitation and then three inversions every minute thereafter. I like the rich dark greys. Since Plus-X is no longer around, I turn to Fomapan 200 when I want a more "vintage" look. Lots of examples over at my flickr.
 
Fotohuis is the master so use his input. At first I thought you were just going to tells about another worthless attempt a 'stand development.' So throw the stand stuff away, and do what Fotouis says.
 
Fotohuis is the master so use his input. At first, I thought you were just going to tells about another worthless attempt at 'stand development.' So throw the stand stuff away, and do what Fotouis says.
 
Fotohuis is the master so use his input.
Click to expand...

Well Fotohuis is the Dutch Foma distributor since a long time even when Foma was not known at all in the Netherlands. My business started professional in 1997.

So changes in the emulsion or other news I am normally informed by Foma in Hradec Kralové, Czech Republic.

Since Plus-X is no longer around, I turn to Fomapan 200 when I want a more "vintage" look.
Click to expand...

You can also try Kodak Eastman Double-X but it is as 5222 only available in bulk 35mm perforated. (122m/400ft or S/E).
 
Bingley said:
I'll add my two bits. I love Fomapan 200. I regularly shoot it at box speed and develop in HC 110 dil. h for 7 mins, w/ 30 secs initial agitation and then three inversions every minute thereafter. I like the rich dark greys. Since Plus-X is no longer around, I turn to Fomapan 200 when I want a more "vintage" look. Lots of examples over at my flickr.
Click to expand...

I tried shooting the 120 version at 200 developing as above and the negatives were way too thin for wet printing. I have obtained decent results exposing this film at 100 developing in HC 110, Rodinal, and Diafine.
 
pschauss said:
I tried shooting the 120 version at 200 developing as above and the negatives were way too thin for wet printing. I have obtained decent results exposing this film at 100 developing in HC 110, Rodinal, and Diafine.
Click to expand...

I scan my negs, so that may explain the difference in results.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom