Arista sheet film

[monochromeFan]

Yes i know its Foma,, but searching for foma sheet film reviews only seems to yield 35mm results, and companies making foam board and polyurethane in sheets.


I have seen how kodak and ilford package their sheet film. But i have not seen anything for how arista or foma package it.

So does anyone have tips and hints?

[Dugan]

Foma/Arista EDU packages their sheet film in a black plastic bag, inside a two-part cardboard box...not a three-part box.
I've never had an issue, but it is a bit disconcerting.

[Mark J]

I've been using 5x7" Fomapan 200 since December and finding it very good. I keep the box in a dark cupboard at the moment while I'm using it regularly. As Dugan says, it has a two-part box and a black plastic bag rather like the Ilford MG bags but thinner gauge. There's a folded-over cardboard U-shape around the film, inside that. There are no interleaving sheets.
So far, I have seen only one possible emulsion fault, a dark glow around the twig of a tree ( on neg ) that looked a bit odd. Otherwise nothing, no pinholes or scratches.
One of the dozen sheets I've used seemed about 2mm shorter than the rest though !

I have had great results from it in Pyro PMK for about 9 1/2mins at 21°C
Less successful in Wimberley WD2H , but there have been some false starts on that, still trying to establish all the causes of those negs being thin.

[paulbarden]

Not sure why it matters how Foma packages their sheet films, but.... FWIW, it comes in standard packaging: clam-shell 2-part box with heavy black plastic bag inside.

If you want reviews of Foma films, you have to be very specific in searching for a particular emulsion: "Fomapan 400 sheet film review" etc. It's not hard to find good reviews, but you have to ask specific questions. And don't just say Foma, say Fomapan, for example. Loads of useful reviews out there. Not all are speaking about sheet film sizes specifically, but reviews of 120 format still have plenty to offer in terms of discussing the film's traits - they will apply to sheet sizes as well.

Nothing wrong with Fomapan. It's different compared to some other films, but its' perfectly capable of giving excellent results. Some users have had bad experiences with Fomapan because of manufacturing defects (I've only used Fomapan 100 and have twice had sheets of it with minor emulsion flaws on it - nothing much to complain about IMO). I enjoy working with Fomapan 100 and will happily keep it in my arsenal of films.

I have had great results from it in Pyro PMK for about 9 1/2mins at 21°C

Fomapan works beautifully with PMK.

[Drew Wiley]

Do NOT put any film back into those two part boxes without using the inner black plastic sleeve - the corners aren't consistently lightproof! Or else use a 3 part box from Kodak or Ilford instead. And yes, I did learn that the hard way. I'm not guessing.

[DannL-USA]

I suppose I must have been usin' Arista nigh on 20 years, now. That cain't be right. Anyhoo, it comes in a box and a bag. Never had any trouble with either of the three.

[Alan9940]

I've used Fomapan 100 in 8x10 sheet size for many years, developed it in several different formulas, and I've always been pleased with the results. I've never seen any of the quality control issues folks report on. As others have already said, the film is packaged inside a black plastic bag within a 2-part clamshell box. Out of sheer caution, I do slip the 8x10 box into an outer black plastic bag because the edges on these larger boxes seem to "flare" out a bit.

[Drew Wiley]

Dan'L - I see you're a gamblin' man. I ain't. Dern shot misself in the foot thet way once. Never again. I dassn't guessin. Them varmits ain't fully light-tight without the inner bag. Thar's a logical reason most other mfgs use triple boxing instead, n' better ones overall to boot.

My own misery with Foma 200 sheet film quality control has been posted before. I can only hope they've since ironed things out. But jes' like I already stated, I ain't a gamblin' man. 8X10 photography is just too much effort and expense for that.

[jnantz]

I've also never had issue with their packaging in the 20 years off and on I've been consuming it. ...

I have had great results from it in Pyro PMK for about 9 1/2mins at 21°C
Less successful in Wimberley WD2H , but there have been some false starts on that, still trying to establish all the causes of those negs being thin.

I have had fantastic results using D72, ansco130 and caffenol, ( and caffenol mixed with 20cc of either of those print developers ) straight up or split between the 2, its such a beautiful emulsion in all formats .. might be my favorite .

[revdoc]

I've bought both Foma and the Arista rebrand. The packaging is identical, and as described by Mark J. Only the adhesive label is different.

It's a perfectly usable film for a lot of situations. For me, Foma makes LF feasible; I think if I had to pay Ilford prices for film I'd stick to 35mm.