New film (to me) to play with

Discussion in 'B&W: Film, Paper, Chemistry' started by shadesofgrey, Aug 5, 2005.

  1. shadesofgrey

    shadesofgrey Member

    Messages:
    82
    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2005
    Location:
    Hertfordshir
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Evening all. Been given a couple of 35mm rolls of Fomapan 400 to play with. Been told I'm in for a treat? Anyone out there tried it? If so; pray, do tell all. And for developer I should use...........

    Thanks one and all

    B.
     
  2. Don Mills

    Don Mills Member

    Messages:
    584
    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2005
    Shooter:
    Plastic Cameras
    I purchased some 120 from Freestyle a few weeks ago. Intend to use pyrocat [my favorite developer]. Would be nice to have developing times for not only the 400, but also for the 100 and 200 asa films.
     
  3. jon

    jon Member

    Messages:
    64
    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2005
    Location:
    Toronto
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I got fairly decent results shooting it at 200 and going for 10 minutes in Microdol.

    Supposedly Fortepan 400 has an extra iso 50 layer to help preserve details in the highlights, but I haven't shot enough of the stuff to really see if that helps much.

    There are some development starting points at Eight Elm, the local Fortepan supplier here in Toronto.
     
  4. Dave Miller

    Dave Miller Member

    Messages:
    3,894
    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2003
    Location:
    Middle Engla
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Rodinal if you want to feature the grain. Prescysol EF if you don't.
     
  5. srs5694

    srs5694 Member

    Messages:
    2,725
    Joined:
    May 18, 2005
    Location:
    Woonsocket,
    Shooter:
    35mm
    I've been shooting Fomapan 400 in 35mm and developing it in Gainer's PC-Glycol split-stock developer for 10:00 at 20C. This works well for me. I've also developed a couple of rolls in D-76 with good results, but I don't recall the times offhand (I probably got them off of the Massive Dev Chart and/or the film's box). Something about Fomapan's grain structure appeals to me, but I can't really describe it; it's a very subjective "feel" thing, and as such you might or might not feel the same way about it.
     
  6. shadesofgrey

    shadesofgrey Member

    Messages:
    82
    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2005
    Location:
    Hertfordshir
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Something about Fomapan's grain structure appeals to me, but I can't really describe it; it's a very subjective "feel" thing.

    Understand that: I feel the same way about my Volvo! Thanks for the input guys; some good food for thought. Question! Fomapan is akin to, reminds you of....Pan F.......FP4.....Tri X of old..... or??? Just trying to visualize something I've never seen.

    All the best

    B.
     
  7. jon

    jon Member

    Messages:
    64
    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2005
    Location:
    Toronto
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    OK, I'm a dumbass, I didn't realize you wrote Fomapan and not Fortepan. Must be this stomach flu I've got makin' my vision go all blurry. Sorry!
     
  8. Mike-D

    Mike-D Member

    Messages:
    49
    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2005
    Location:
    Williamsburg
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I've used quite a bit of Fomapan 400. Its decent film but grainier than films like Tri-X. If you are ok with that it makes nice pictures.

    Usual soup here is D-76 straight for this film. Less grainy than 1:1. Expose generously and develop gently. Its a little gritty if you underexpose.

    Mike D
     
  9. hortense

    hortense Member

    Messages:
    612
    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2004
    Location:
    Riverside, C
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    I've found it to be a good every-day film. I dunk it in HC110 dil. H (1:62) for 13-minutes @ 68°. At first didn't understand how to handle the curl. Now I use a weighted bottom clip (lead).
     
  10. srs5694

    srs5694 Member

    Messages:
    2,725
    Joined:
    May 18, 2005
    Location:
    Woonsocket,
    Shooter:
    35mm
    My subjective impression is that Fomapan 400 is slightly less grainy (in terms of grain size) than Tri-X, but the Fomapan grain tends to be more distinct (as in sharply-defined grains). I don't have any quantitative measures on this, though; it's just from me "eyballing" prints and scans.
     
  11. shadesofgrey

    shadesofgrey Member

    Messages:
    82
    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2005
    Location:
    Hertfordshir
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Interesting point, about the grain size I mean. I used Orwo years ago, some said it was I****D under a different badge yet the grain looked wrong, sort of lumpy? Then again, maybe my developing skills were real crap back then compared to being just crap today! Still; forty years of pure enjoyment can’t be bad.
    No problemo Jon, I make the same mistake with whisky and tea; can’t remember now which one makes my eyes go blurry…think it’s the tea!
    Hi Mike. What dev time/agitation do you give it in D76. Is it as sharp a Tri x? The guy who gave me the film said it was “Creamy sharp” “Great for portraits.” Hope so, took a portrait of the wife….need all the help I can get!
    Hi Mac; yeah I’m looking to try HC110 with Neopan 400, normally use ID 11 or Rodinal but that seems to be getting a little thin on the ground of late, I wonder why? I don’t think we get the real (HC110) thing over here, think it’s a watered down version (Pepsi anyone) which is a real pity, guess I’ll have to order some from across the pond before Kodak pulls the plug!. Is the curl that intrusive?

    Thanks guys; for the info and your time.

    B.
     
  12. srs5694

    srs5694 Member

    Messages:
    2,725
    Joined:
    May 18, 2005
    Location:
    Woonsocket,
    Shooter:
    35mm
    I've not noticed particularly objectionable curl from Fomapan 400 in 35mm. I normally dry it by taking it off the spool, hanging it from a hangar with a clip on it, and putting a clip (similar to a clothespin, but it came with a kit of developing hardware) on the bottom of the long strip as a weight. I then let it dry for at least two hours. Perhaps the curl would be worse with some other drying regimen, or in another format.
     
  13. Mike-D

    Mike-D Member

    Messages:
    49
    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2005
    Location:
    Williamsburg
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    It seems that I was using 5.5 minutes at 75f in straight D-76. Probably 8 minutes at 68f, 20c. My usual agitation is ten seconds/minute, but for short development times I agitate every thirty seconds. I tried a few other developers but they were mostly M/Q variants that I mixed up myself and none were much improvement over D-76.

    I can't quite disagree with this. I never did get the Foma to be as smooth as the Tri-X.

    Mike D
     
  14. eagleowl

    eagleowl Member

    Messages:
    127
    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2004
    Location:
    UK
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I like Foma 400.
    When I first got my c33,I bought a pack of tri-x and a few rolls Foma,to see which I preferred.
    There was just something about the tri-x which didn't appeal to me-but then,I simply don't like ANY Kodak film.
    I develop the Foma in Fomadon(basically Calbe under a different name)R09,and the grain looks fine to me.
     
  15. gchpaco

    gchpaco Member

    Messages:
    98
    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2004
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    The 400 layer is not totally opaque, so if it has that extra layer it will show up. Which is not to say that said highlights will necessarily be easily accessible, and they will be dense.
     
  16. gchpaco

    gchpaco Member

    Messages:
    98
    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2004
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Disclaimer: I do not have any idea whether Foma 400 has this extra layer. However, I maintain that it would still be useful if it existed. The idea being that if the 400 layer blocks up, then it represents a constant density that the 50 layer adds to. Even "bulletproof" negatives are still transparent, after all.

    Mathematically: if the 400 layer blocks up at, say, a density of 0.6, the 50 layer is only three stops slower than that and is already into the midrange of its curve; additional exposure will push the 50 layer up its curve but not alter the 400 layer's density at all. Conversely if there isn't enough light to expose the 50 layer but is for the 400 layer, the 400 layer will be a little thin but retain shadow detail.

    Of course there are unsharpness problems involved in doing this with actual physical layers and there are a bunch of technical tricks to get around them but as I understand it the pictorial value is similar to what it would be if they were distinct layers.

    This is not a new technique. Ilford, for one, has been known to use layers differing by two stops in its Delta films.
     
  17. Paul Howell

    Paul Howell Member

    Messages:
    2,806
    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2004
    Location:
    Phoeinx Ariz
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I don't have any information about an extra layer for the highlights, but I shot at a Rodeo with Forma 400, TriX, and Tmax 3200 rated at 1600 and developed in HC110. It was midday and very bright, the cowboy hats cause deep shadows, Forma 400 developed in Microdol X stock gave the best tonal range with good hat shadow detail, while the Tri X gave the best grain, the Tmax had good grain and sharpness but poor details in the hat shadow. I am experimenting with Edwal 12 and Defender 777 and I plan to shoot a few rolls of Forma 400 in the fall.
     
  18. shadesofgrey

    shadesofgrey Member

    Messages:
    82
    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2005
    Location:
    Hertfordshir
    Shooter:
    35mm
     
  19. gchpaco

    gchpaco Member

    Messages:
    98
    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2004
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Oh, make no mistake, these layers look plenty weird on their own. It's not like the film suddenly shifts over from being ISO 400 to being ISO 50; even before the 400 hits its shoulder the 50 is being exposed, and if you make the 400 layer so it shoulders off gradually it's not like hitting a brick wall. You have to tweak the curves of the two layers so you get a straight line, of course.