Odd grain pattern on efke 100 film, little white dots

[jvuokko]

It is always a good idea with any Efke/Adox purchases to immediately shoot and develop a sheet (and possibly an unexposed sheet) just to make sure that the film has no quality control issues that would require you to have the film replaced. It is my experience that pin holes, density banding, or any other emulsion defect are usually not random events that could only have an impact on a small number of sheets in a box.

That is a good practice. Especially when taking sheets from top, bottom and centre of the pile.

When Adox/Efke was cheaper, I used to take always backup shot with a bit different emulsion too. Often that saved a good photograph. But it also meant that I lost the cheapness of the film.

[patrickjames]

I have been using Efke 100 too lately and so far haven't had any problems with it. I love the tonality of Fomapan 400, but I don't use it because of all the little annoying problems with it. If I scanned film instead of printing it I would use only that. Any problem though is fatal to the image if you are going to print it in the darkroom. Never had any problems with Ilford films, ever. I am probably going to go back to Ilford anyway since right now there is almost no cost savings with the second tier films. Efke 100 and FP4 are basically the same price right now.

From my experience with these things, I would avoid using that film on your trip (unless you scan film, then it is only an additional pain). When you are traveling, film is the cheapest thing. Not worth messing around with it.

[mentalcrisis00]

I'm going to go to my local hunts before i get to the bus station tonight and pick up a box of Kodak TMAX 100 because thats the film I'm familiar with. Even under the worst of conditions I seem to get good results with kodak. I'm sure I can get good results with the efke as well but I just haven't had enough time to experiment.

Hunts sells 50 sheet boxes of tmax 100 4x5 for $70, only $10 over B&H prices so it'll have to do.

[jp]

I have been using Efke 100 too lately and so far haven't had any problems with it. I love the tonality of Fomapan 400, but I don't use it because of all the little annoying problems with it. If I scanned film instead of printing it I would use only that.

I tried Fomapan 400 in 120 and observed the problems many describe for 120, but it was otherwise nice. That was apparently due to the 120 specific things like the backing paper or something. What sized film had you observed issues in? I'm curious to try it again now that it's in 4x5 as it might not have that same issue. I use fomapan 100 in 8x10 and consider that to be very high quality in that format. Of course a couple little specs in an 8x10 won't show up like a small film magnified to 8x10.

[jp]

I'm going to go to my local hunts before i get to the bus station tonight and pick up a box of Kodak TMAX 100 because thats the film I'm familiar with. Even under the worst of conditions I seem to get good results with kodak. I'm sure I can get good results with the efke as well but I just haven't had enough time to experiment.

Hunts sells 50 sheet boxes of tmax 100 4x5 for $70, only $10 over B&H prices so it'll have to do.

You mentioned in your original post you'd been using tmax 400. That is quite a bit different than tmax 100. If you are familiar with both, you'll be fine.

If you are getting one as a substitute for the other or to save a couple dollars, there's a lot more differences than two f stops if you are a fussy printer. Their curves are different and I find they render green foliage differently, especially coniferous. They will both be top quality films in terms of sharpness and overall quality.

[mentalcrisis00]

You mentioned in your original post you'd been using tmax 400. That is quite a bit different than tmax 100. If you are familiar with both, you'll be fine.

I have used both before, I liked the Tmax 100 more because it seems a bit less contrasty than 400 and it is more forgiving with exposures. Usually I just shoot it at it's given ISO just so I don't have to do anything too complicated when I develop. My negs were much more consistent with Tmax 100 as apposed to the 400 stuff I did. Figure I can get away with a lower sensitivity film because it's going to be pretty sunny in DV all week.

I've only been doing large format for 4 months now steady so I haven't had a lot of time to experiment. So I just shoot what the meter gives me and use the Dev chart from digital truth to tell me the development times or see what people on the forum are doing.

[Lungeh]

That interesting--I printed some Arista EDU (4x5) this week that showed some similar "texturing" in about half the batch--which was all developed together...