Doremus, yes to all. While it was a matter of concern -- and perhaps others' results vary, in our chock-full-of-variables medium (why lead a boring life?) -- I am content to have the paper as an alternative to Ilford WT when it may seem appropriate for one reason or another. My use of the high-contrast filters is generally very limited anyway, and for the portraiture I wish to make my primary subject, I have weighted my testing toward dealing with very high-contrast and holding low values, hence my adoption of SLIMT.

However, I did just test some HP5 in very flat light to see if I could approximate the sort of tonality that Deardorfuser is able to get shooting Fomapan 200 at EI 800 on 8x10, in flat light, naturally. I didn't go as far as he, but I did find that doubling my development time gave me an EI 800 negative with substance and texture in dark clothing while keeping a textured white towel in bounds even in an unmanipulated Gr. 1 1/2 print. An extra stop of shutter speed under heavy overcast or similar (I usually shoot at box speed in such flat light and 200 in "normal" and longer subject-brightess-range situations) can cut subject-movement blur potential when I need DOF.

And there is always selenium toning of the negative, which I would likely use before bleach and redevelopment, for simplicity, if for some reason I were adamant on using the Foma.

Soave sia il vento.