Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,545   Posts: 1,544,447   Online: 1018
      
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 14
  1. #1
    athanasius80's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Huntington Beach, California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    639
    Images
    15

    Efke versus Foma 100?

    Does anyone have any user experiences with Efke 100 versus Fomapan 100 in 120 and sheet film? I'd love to hear people's opinions one way or the other and why.
    Thanks!

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,879
    Images
    11
    I've settled on Efke 100 as my primary slow speed film in both roll film and sheet film sizes up to 8x10. My developer is Pyrocat-HD. My secondary slow speed film is Efke 25, also developed in Pyrocat-HD.

    I have not tested Fomapan 100.
    Tom Hoskinson
    ______________________________

    Everything is analog - even digital :D

  3. #3
    Donald Qualls's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    North Carolina, USA (transplanted from Seattle)
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,845
    I use Fomapan 100 as my standard film in 9x12 cm. I'm very, very happy with it; it has excellent tones, nice fine grain, gives full speed in my process and a solid EI 160-200 in Diafine, and prints onto cyanotype well.

    I haven't tried the Efke -- saw no reason to spend the money on a box, I like the cheaper Foma so well.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Bark, West Hylebos State Park.jpg  
    Photography has always fascinated me -- as a child, simply for the magic of capturing an image onto glossy paper with a little box, but as an adult because of the unique juxtaposition of science and art -- the physics of optics, the mechanics of the camera, the chemistry of film and developer, alongside the art in seeing, composing, exposing, processing and printing.

  4. #4
    Gustavo_Castilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Bryan Texas
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    890
    Images
    143
    ca I ask you guys a question
    I got some holder mixed and ended up under exposing some Elfke 25 ( the other holders had 100) I am planing to develop it on Fryday on rodinal 1: 25 or 1 :50 any tips on what may save the film?
    Gustavo Castilla
    We are not moved by things ,
    but by the views we take of them.
    Epictitus.
    My site
    My flicker page
    Facebook
    Contact

  5. #5
    Donald Qualls's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    North Carolina, USA (transplanted from Seattle)
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,845
    Gustavo, I'll reply on your other thread.
    Photography has always fascinated me -- as a child, simply for the magic of capturing an image onto glossy paper with a little box, but as an adult because of the unique juxtaposition of science and art -- the physics of optics, the mechanics of the camera, the chemistry of film and developer, alongside the art in seeing, composing, exposing, processing and printing.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    44

    fomapan aristia.edu ultra

    this is a link to a photo using fomapan 100.
    this film is sold by freestyle as arista.edu ultra for 1.29 a roll.
    after seeing this I bought 20 rolls.

    http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2471088

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    44

    efke sample photo

    I found this photo on the efke website. it is shot with efke 100.

    http://www.efkefilm.com/Efke-kb100-zagreb.jpg

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    601
    As is sit here looking at the original print of the picture referenced above I can see that they look nothing alike in terms of warmth and tonal value.

    I'd really like to know how anyone can determine the qualities of a film from a web posted digital scan of either the print or negative. Between monitors, scanners editing software etc the number of variables are endless. The one thing that is certain is that the picture you see on your screen is not going to look the same on mine. I can understand looking at posted pictures from a artistic point of view. Trying to distinguish any significant technical detail about how the film itself looks is a waste of time.

    Not knowing anything about how the film was exposed, developed and printed further makes this type of analysis useless. For all anyone knows the film was lousy, developed poorly and then saved in photoshop. Or perhaps the film was excellent and the photoshop stage manipulation made it look worse.
    www.jandcphoto.com

  9. #9
    Donald Qualls's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    North Carolina, USA (transplanted from Seattle)
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,845
    Quote Originally Posted by jandc
    I'd really like to know how anyone can determine the qualities of a film from a web posted digital scan of either the print or negative.
    Bottom line, you can't tell much about the differences from a scan -- even true speed can be disguised by scan exposure/levels treatment, to some extent (especially making the scan appear to have less speed then the film). Grain can look better, because a coarse scan averages it away, or worse, because of artifacting. Tonality and range have more to do with scan settings than what's actually on the film, unless the film's range is terribly narrow or the scanner very poor.

    Unfortunately, it's the only tool most of us have; I've never seen a physical print from Efke 100, and only a couple from Fomapan (my negatives, printed by a custom B&W printer as straight prints, hardly better than a negative scan). The few other B&W photographers I've had face-to-face contact with don't shoot these films; they shoot TMX or Plus-X.

    Honestly, I'm not sure prints will really tell me much, either -- variations in film processing and printing will swamp the differences in the films just as surely as variations in scanning.
    Photography has always fascinated me -- as a child, simply for the magic of capturing an image onto glossy paper with a little box, but as an adult because of the unique juxtaposition of science and art -- the physics of optics, the mechanics of the camera, the chemistry of film and developer, alongside the art in seeing, composing, exposing, processing and printing.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    44
    there seems to be another powerful consideration.

    efke... efke100 ...3.60 per roll shipped
    aristia.edu.ultra .[foma100] 1.49 per roll shipped

    whatever your monthly budget for film is. you would be able to shoot
    more than twice as much film. you would worry less about bracketing expousure . twice as many negatives . twice the chance to get that perfect
    shot.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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