Well, I wouldn't say the Kodak variants are better. I am one of the few people on earth who really cannot stand the look of Kodak films...not sure why, hence my go-to has been Acros and Neopon 400 forever. That said, I find the Foma 100 (Arista.edu Ultra) does a fine job at a cheap price and has it's own look that I appreciate.
I may not have put that very well. If you like the look of the Foma (and I do, but not for all my work) by all means shoot it. I just meant that, in 35mm, the cost argument isn't very convincing to me, at least in pre-loaded rolls, when the rebranded Tri-X costs only about twenty cents a roll more.
Originally Posted by Klainmeister
Shoot it because you love the look - absolutely yes! Shoot it to save twenty cents a roll? Not so convincing, to me at least.
This goes completely out the window in 120 and sheets, though. I still shoot 120 Tri-X because it's my favorite film ever, but I do shoot some Foma/Arista for the look. In 4x5, much as I say that the price of film isn't that much in the overall scheme of things, Kodak is about to price themselves completely out. I'm arguing with myself whether to buy any more TMY-2 when my current box is done, or just switch to HP5+.
After developing I usually hang it to dry in the office. It usually hangs there a couple of days before I get around to sleeving it and contact printing the negatives. I have very little trouble with the Arista EDU 100 or 400 curling, no more then my Kodak TriX anyway. I do use a glass negative carrier for my Beseler and I always tape it down when I am enlarging, but mostly to ensure maximum sharpness.
On the other hand, my Efke 25 120 certainly does have to be sleeved and flattened and it can take quite some time before it flattens out.
I am not sure if humidity has anything to do with it or whether the process of developing influences it.
I have noticed that things curl wayyyy worse here in the desert than back where I'm originally from (Orygun). I switched the RC printing since I moved here because it's too much damn work flattening fiber when it dries in 1 hr hanging.
I tried the 4x5 Foma and found that it didn't stain at all very well. Maybe a 16min development time is in order.
I shoot this stuff (freestyle's) in 35mm, 4x5, and 5x7 . . . primarily because it's cheap, and also because I'm so accustomed to it's behavior. But, sadly my desire to use roll-films has fizzled. There's just enough bang for the buck . . . even at today's price for a 100' tin. But overall I have no complaints with the film and will probably continue to use it in sheet form.
More too curly
I have used the 100 and 200 and found the curl to be a pain.
I tried carefully reverse rolling the film after processing and leaving it sitting for a week; that straightened things out for me.
I just shot a fresh roll of this (Foma branded version however). It is a very nice film. I have read many times of people having issues with curl and this film, but for me it dried flatter than anything else I have shot recently. I live in the desert, so I steamed up my shower before hanging them and let them hang overnight. In the morning they were paper flat, perfect. Developed mine in Rodinal. Grainier than most 100 films, but with gorgeous tonality and detail. Great look to it.
Here's a 5x7 print (sanded edges on the 35mm holder) from a roll shot during the Santa Fe Century bike ride. This is a straight print. I guessed the exposure and didn't touch the contrast dials. Also, from the little Olympus XA...
This has been a good thread, thank you Klainmeister for starting it.
I've never used this film in 35mm or 120 but I have used it in 4x5 and I really like the negatives I got with it (in D-76 1:1). May have to get some in 35mm.