View Full Version : Arista 400 not on reciprocity app

3-Nov-2014, 21:03
Hi all. I've done some searching on the Arista-labeled 400 ISO film in 4x5 size (or probably any size, really) but I can't find what I'm looking for.

I've got the reciprocity app and whether I look for Foma 400 or Arosta EDU 400, it's not on there. I see 100 and 200. I'm guessing it's horrible like the 100 and 200, but I'm like some more accurate numbers.

Let me be clear, this film, maybe 5-8 boxes of it, was nearly given to me. I do have some 100 and 200, but even if I have to shoot it at ISO 200, that'll probably be faster than what I have to shoot the 200 at. Looking at using it for low light portraits.

Any info or resources is appreciated.

Thank you!

3-Nov-2014, 21:08
Is this accurate?


3-Nov-2014, 21:47
dropbox link doesn't work

3-Nov-2014, 21:51

Let's try a screenshot.

Neal Chaves
4-Nov-2014, 17:57
When I first started LF and trying the Zone System, I found that using the Kodak tables for reciprocity failure correction was giving me overly dense negatives. Since I was testing everything else, I made a test for reciprocity failure as well and found none out to 30 seconds with TXP rated at 100 and developed in HC110B for 5:00 at 68*. After more testing, I found I could rate the TXP (or now the HP5+) at 400 if I develop for 7:30 in HC110B at 68* and the negatives are nearly identical to those rated at 100 and developed for 5:00. More film speed and the freedom to ignore reciprocity failure in the 1/2 to 10 second exposure range greatly improved my abilities with the LF camera. You need to test and verify things for yourself.

4-Nov-2014, 21:00
Ok, cool. Yes, give me the dough to buy all the film so I can test, and the density meters, or densitometer, or whatever.

Or, since I have limited time and resources, I could have fun shooting and printing, and receive help from others who have more experience.

So far, all of the reciprocity numbers I've found on my app have worked really well. I'm going to depend on them until I have the money and time to "nerd out."

I'll also note that FP4+ is my main film now, but if I have Arista, I'm going to use it, and not have all my time spent testing what somebody may have already done.

4-Nov-2014, 22:05
... You need to test and verify things for yourself.


4-Nov-2014, 22:10
I found a really cool reciprocity formula for ilford film and so far it has worked for all of them from delta up to hp5+, my exposures have been up to an hour so far and it was dead on accurate, metered time multiplied by 1.7 take that result and add it to the result of metered time squared multiplied by .12, works like a charm. example meter says 4 seconds....4 x 1.7=6.8 round off to 7
16x.12=1.92 round off to 2
corrected time 9 seconds

4-Nov-2014, 22:17

So, did you not read the fact that I have too little time and funds to test this film that I don't use as my main film?

"Don't ask for help, test it yourself like I did," is all I got from those posts.

Jeff Dexheimer
4-Nov-2014, 22:33
You sound very entitled. This is a public forum where you get free advice. The advice given was to test your film for best results. If you don't like that advice, move along. No need to be rude.

If testing yr film is not within your means, I believe the reciprocity timer app has a generic emulsion you can use, if not, choose a typical emulsion film like HP5+. That should get you within the ball park.

Quite frankly, I have not been overly thrilled with any numbers that app gives. I find my negatives are too dense when I use the suggested times from the app. Others here love the app. Notice how you can get a different answer from just about everyone you ask? Thus the best suggestion is to test your film. Going back to that point, if testing with LF is too expensive, try testing the film with a 35mm camera and roll film. You should get the same results at a fraction of the cost. You can get a 35mm camera for under $20 and roll film is cheap.

4-Nov-2014, 22:41
So, did you not read the fact that I have too little time and funds to test this film that I don't use as my main film?


I hate to be the bearer of bad news... But 'Large Format' Photography takes 'Effort, Persistance, Time and Money'.

“Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.”
~~ Aldous Huxley, Complete Essays 2, 1926-29. ~~


4-Nov-2014, 22:43
I like the 35mm idea. I'll have to buy some 35mm though and get it shipped to me before I can do that.

Apparently I've been failing on my 35mm developing. I'm guessing there's a leak in my developing canister because my film base has been a little darker than I'd like it, still, that probably won't matter too much.

With 35mm, would I basically just take a shot of a flat surface at a shutter speed that isn't affected by reciprocity failure and then take more shots for the same EV at what? Random guessed exposures and then compare on a contact sheet?

Does anybody have an idea as to why this Arista edu 400 film is not on the chat but so many other films are?

Anybody actually use this film that would like to share what they usually do?

Neal Chaves
5-Nov-2014, 06:59
For those who may be interested:

It only takes two sheets to accurately test for reciprocity failure. As density will be lost first in the shadow areas, pick an appropriate scene for your test. I use my old white pick-up truck flatly illuminated in full sun. The exposure for film rated at 100 would be about 1/60th at f16. No danger of recipricity failure with that exposure, so I make a reference negative. I have lenses that close down to f128 and I can add a polarizer for two more stops of neutral density. So now I am at 4 seconds, and according to the charts should see obvious reciprocity failure.

For the seond sheet, I pull the slide out on the 8X10 and expose for four seconds. Then I put the slide back in about three inches and expose for one second. Now I move the slide in an inch at a time and expose for one second each time, like a test strip. I will have exposures from four seconds to nine seconds

After both negatives are processed together, I make a "proper proof" contact print of each negative. I look at the shadow area underneath the truck and find the exposure on the test strip that most closely matches the 1/60th second exposure negative. If you have good continuous lighting conditions on a heavy overcast day, you can extend the range of the test much further.