Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,703   Posts: 1,482,680   Online: 790
      
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 30 of 30
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Eastern Kansas
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    275
    Images
    1
    Perhaps this may help some of us realize that the film produced by the "big 3" is simply amazing for its quality and dependability.

    I've used Foma R 100 in the past and had good luck with it, and still have some in my freezer. I'll probably wait a while before ordering the new batch, however, based on what has been reported.

    Dave

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Rome, Italy
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    875
    Any news?

  3. #23
    thefizz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Trim, Ireland.
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,013
    Images
    37
    I currently have this film with a slightly different batch number of 17676-2 and expiry date of June 2016.

    Does anyone know if this batch has the same problem? I have not used it yet.

  4. #24
    RalphLambrecht's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    the villages .centralflorida,USA and Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,144
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael R 1974 View Post
    Why am I not surprised. And yet people are still determined to not use Ilford and Kodak products.
    penny pinchers never die.
    Regards

    Ralph W. Lambrecht
    www.darkroomagic.comrorrlambrec@ymail.com[/URL]
    www.waybeyondmonochrome.com

  5. #25
    AgCl4ever's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Canada
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    66
    Quote Originally Posted by TheFlyingCamera View Post

    <SNIP>It also has some spectral response and development characteristics that make it especially well-suited to certain kinds of image-making. <SNIP>
    +1

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,498
    Quote Originally Posted by RalphLambrecht View Post
    penny pinchers never die.
    I don't think the original post had anything to do with penny-pinching.

    Foma R100 is a specialist reversal film, with no dedicated equivalent produced by Ilford or Kodak, which (at least in the UK) is a similar price to "quality" B&W film. Also dr5 is a quality specialist lab, not a cut-price outfit, who were trying to sort a problem and maintain the standard of their service to customers.

    The OP was nothing to do with people's views on the quality, price, etc., of general purpose films from Ilford, Kodak, Adox, etc.

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    UK
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    1,534
    Quote Originally Posted by sandermarijn View Post
    In Europe and for the formats that I use (35mm and 120), Foma films cost about the same as Ilford and Kodak (& Fuji). This may be different in sheet film, I don't know about that.
    Forma 400 is about 15% less than Kentmere in this part of Europe in 135, where I shop. My only problem is it sells so well it is rarely in stock where I shop.

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Rome, Italy
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    875
    However, back to the OP, it would be interesting to know whether is a factory defect or an incompatibility with the dr5.com process...

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    24
    I had a roll developed by DR5 and came across this issue. It was the first B&W film I had reversal processed, at first I thought it might be something to do with the processing then I learned they experienced the same problem with other rolls. Since then I got into reversal processing myself and I had exactly the same issue with this film whereas with ordinary Foma 100 it was fine. The R100 film has fantastic tonality.

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    The Land of the Yellow Box
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    83

    It is not about the money

    Quote Originally Posted by RalphLambrecht View Post
    penny pinchers never die.
    I would gladly buy only Kodak, Ilford, etc. if they made a film that matches the unique tonal range and processing characteristics of Foma films. Kodak just killed Plus-X so that is that much business they lost from me. Agfa was the only first class film that worked for me, and we all know where that went. Foma was the closest and less problematic than the other suitable film, Efke. Ilford Pan-F is my all time fave, but ISO 50 is just masochistic. ORWO Filmotec looks promising but who has time to load their own cartridges, and it does not come in 120. I get called a cheapskate because I would rather take my chances with the cheap stuff (Arista EDU Ultra, exactly the same stuff that goes into the Foma boxes with better finish quality than the OEM package, maybe because it is for export). QC issues with the last few years' batches of negative stock have not been an issue so I think they do care and hope one day they will be as fail safe as say Kodak, etc. The constant issues with Foma R however have made me stop using it altogether for now.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin