FomaPan Sheet Film Question

[IanBarber]

Rich I've come pretty close to taming Foma100. I use a semi developing method with xtol 1+2
less is more with this film but I really feel it's a sleeper. another film to try is the 4x5 film from the New55 people. it's VERY nice too and not expensive

Can you explain a little more about your semi stand methods with Xtol and Fomapan please Peter

[Cor]

IMHO the biggest problem with Fomapn100 is it's awful reciproke failure which works even in a "normal" scene. If you make a photograph of say a scene in the woods with lots of shadows, some of these shadow parts simply do not register on film due to the reciproke failure. To overcome you could expose longer resulting in more contrast in the mid and high tones, increasing contrast on an already inherently contrasty film.

Semi stand routes help somewhat, but in my hands this is hard to control, I more than once anded up with images with too much adjacent effect, almost chiselled out images, sometimes this works, most of the times not.

Good luck,

Cor

[Pete Oakley]

I usually use Foma 200. I develop it in D76H 1-1, I use a water stop bath (5 rinses) and an alkali or neutral fix, no problems!

[IanBarber]

I usually use Foma 200. I develop it in D76H 1-1, I use a water stop bath (5 rinses) and an alkali or neutral fix, no problems!

How do you find the contrast and Reciprocity Peter with FomaPan 200 and

[Rich14]

I think the Foma 100 and 200 films are quite different animals. It's not just a difference in sensitivity. The contrast and reciprocity characteristics are not indicative of a family of products.

[IanBarber]

I think the Foma 100 and 200 films are quite different animals. It's not just a difference in sensitivity. The contrast and reciprocity characteristics are not indicative of a family of products.

Ive just ordered a box of FomaPan 200 to try. Comparing the 2 data sheets for reciprocity, the fomapan 200 looks worse than the 100. I was going to start off by using the 100 reciprocity chart as a starting point

[Rayt]

I found a method that works for me and here is mine. Foma 100 is my second film of choice after TMY. When I first started using the MOD54 I was so worried the film would jump out of the slots with the inversion I slowed down the inversion process considerably. After pouring in the developer I invert gently and slowly for 30 seconds and then I let it stand for one minute so at the 1.5 minute mark I invert for 5 seconds slowly. At 2 minutes I invert for 5 seconds. From then on I invert for 10 seconds every minute. In the end I would add one minute to the times but just let it stand, no agitation. I use Rodinal 1:50 using the Massive Film Development times and add one minute. I like how the negs come out so that works for me! Your mileage may vary but do experiment.

[interneg]

Almost all the problems of 'soot & whitewash' are down to insufficient shadow exposure & overdeveloped highlights. It's not an inherent fault of this film, but rather one of your process control when exposing & developing. Altering agitation intervals might be a final refinement, but they won't solve fundamental errors in exposure & process.

The Foma 200 is a wonderful film (tonally speaking, I'd argue it's Foma's best film), but don't expect it to hit box speed - 100-125 at realistic contrast ranges. Again, keep an eye on developing times - they can be quite short.

[David Karp]

I used the Arista.edu version of Fomapan 200 when I first started shooting 5x7. It was a beautiful film. I stopped when they had to reformulate it. Does the new version of look like the old?

For what it is worth, I developed it in a divided developer similar to Divided D-23 and the results were very nice. I shot it at 100.

[Ron (Netherlands)]

'My formula': HC-110, dilution H, i.e. 1:63 for 12min @ 24C and not much agitation, provides lots of detail in the shadows
example (13 x 18 flatfilm): https://www.flickr.com/photos/zorki_...posted-public/