Fomapan 100 Base + Fog?

[paulbarden]

Can anyone tell me how the B+F of Fomapan 100 compares to either Delta 100 or FP4?
I'm interested in finding an alternative to FP4 for making negatives for salted paper printing. FP4 has gotten to be SO expensive, and I'm curious if Fomapan 100 is a potential alternative. But I need a film that has a very low B+F.

For that matter, has anyone used any of the other Fomapan sheet films (200, 400) for making alternative process negatives?

Thanks,
Paul

[Andrew O'Neill]

Can anyone tell me how the B+F of Fomapan 100 compares to either Delta 100 or FP4?
I'm interested in finding an alternative to FP4 for making negatives for salted paper printing. FP4 has gotten to be SO expensive, and I'm curious if Fomapan 100 is a potential alternative. But I need a film that has a very low B+F.

For that matter, has anyone used any of the other Fomapan sheet films (200, 400) for making alternative process negatives?

Thanks,
Paul

I can tell you when I get home from work today, if you like.

[paulbarden]

I can tell you when I get home from work today, if you like.

I'd appreciate that, thanks Andrew!

[Andrew O'Neill]

I stuck it in my calendar so it should remind me around 5. I can check FP4 as well as Delta 100.

[Scott Davis]

In response to your follow-up question, I have used Fomapan 200 (aka Arista.EDU Ultra 200) for printing palladium with much success. I've shot multi-hundreds of sheets of it. It does have a little base fog, but it is so easy to build contrast with it that a little base fog should not be a problem.

[paulbarden]

In response to your follow-up question, I have used Fomapan 200 (aka Arista.EDU Ultra 200) for printing palladium with much success. I've shot multi-hundreds of sheets of it. It does have a little base fog, but it is so easy to build contrast with it that a little base fog should not be a problem.

Thanks, Scott! When you say "a little base fog", would you say its more than FP4 base fog, or more like HP5 Base fog? HP5 is unsuitable for salt printing because its got too much base density, but FP4 has far less.

[Andrew O'Neill]

Thanks, Scott! When you say "a little base fog", would you say its more than FP4 base fog, or more like HP5 Base fog? HP5 is unsuitable for salt printing because its got too much base density, but FP4 has far less.

Have you tried developing HP5 in an unconventional develop, such as DK50 or D-19? I've used both of them diluted 1+3, and have been able to make Kallitype and Carbon Transfer prints. Conventional developers just won't do it.

[paulbarden]

Have you tried developing HP5 in an unconventional develop, such as DK50 or D-19? I've used both of them diluted 1+3, and have been able to make Kallitype and Carbon Transfer prints. Conventional developers just won't do it.

I haven't, no. The issue is that I am making negs specifically for salted papers, and based on my own findings and what Ellie Young wrote about the subject, PMK is the optimal developer for getting an appropriate negative. So I'm not really at liberty to test other developers, since I've already established a method that works for me. HP5 in PMK builds to much base density to make a good salt neg. But I appreciate the suggestions, Andrew.

[koraks]

Foma 100 has low b&f, comparable to FP4+. It's very suitable for making salt prints and other alt process prints. It's my default film for this purpose. It also develops to salt print densities in non-staining developers like XTOL with ease.

[paulbarden]

Foma 100 has low b&f, comparable to FP4+. It's very suitable for making salt prints and other alt process prints. It's my default film for this purpose. It also develops to salt print densities in non-staining developers like XTOL with ease.

That is excellent information, thank you very much Raphaël! Exactly what I was hoping to find out. I really like FP4, but I'd really like to find a less costly alternative. I'm hopeful now that Fomapan 100 will do the job. Have you ever processed it in a staining developer like PMK? Does it take to PMK alright?

I've read reports that the antihalation dye is difficult to remove from the film - do you have anything to say about that issue? Some people have reported presoaking the film for up to half an hour before development, to get ride of the dye!
Again, thanks.

[Andrew O'Neill]

Fomapan .21 (Xtol-R)
FP4-Plus .18 (510-Pyro)
Delta 100 .11 (Xtol stock)

[paulbarden]

Fomapan .21 (Xtol-R)
FP4-Plus .18 (510-Pyro)
Delta 100 .11 (Xtol stock)

Excellent information, thanks very much Andrew! It seems Fomapan is a candidate for what I want to do.

[koraks]

Paul, not in PMK, but it works great in Pyrocat. I've also developed it in 510 pyro, but that developer tends to rather quickly generate overall stain which adds to b+f, so I don't prefer it for this purpose. In any case, Foma 100 does very well in staining developers; in fact, for alt process prints I prefer it that way. Let me know how you get along with it and how it does in PMK.

As to the anti halo dye: I find it's easily removed from this film; much more so than from Kodak tmax films. I usually krst let a sheet soak in a tray of water for a few minutes after the fix; by the time it hits the fix, most of the dye is already gone anyway, but there's always some remaining that the final wash takes care of. I've never had to do anything special to get rid of it. The normal processing & wash routine is sufficient.

[Drew Wiley]

You're not going to get much below .15 density fbf unless you switch to something expensive like TMY400, which I've routinely gotten down to 0.04 !!. And TMax films are the easiest to remove to all the residual antihalation dye from if you switch to an alkaline TF4 fixer. FP4 is one of the hardest. A reasonable compromise film price-wise would be Delta 100, but it's awfully slick and newton-ring prone.

[lenshustle]

Well ever try eco pro from freestyle? i use the foma/arista in ecopro, and i can get the 100 iso to look very close to XP2. Close enough that i actually have to read the labels on the film.

thats in 35mm though.