Anybody using Fomalux currently?

[Tin Can]

I read some of the older contact printing threads, but I haven't noticed any new threads with Fomalux specifically.

I got three boxes today, 5x7, 8x10 and 11x14 all the same Fomalux product grade 2.

It is working nicely in my 2 old time contact printers. I changed the bulbs in them from 15 or 25 watt to 5 watt frosted and I now have 5 to 10 second exposures, regular enlarging paper wa not working well, simply too fast.

I am just wondering if anyone else is using it.

[andreios]

I do use fomalux from time to time.. simple bulb approach, exposures between 5-10secs. Sort of contrast control then during development..

[Doug Howk]

The paper is great with rich blacks and nice appearance. I work with yellow bug lights as my safelight, and expose with single bulbs ranging from 30 to 100 watts. The times are relatively short when compared to Lodima/AZO. The grade #2 handles negatives with a density range around 1.2. For those with higher DR, I use Moersch Separol Soft, and cotton swab those areas that may need further development. The latter is relatively easy to determine under the safelights.
The only problem is that the price has creeped up to being comparable to Lodima. And, if given a choice, I'd select Lodima.

[Tin Can]

I paid $83 for 100 sheets of 8x10 Fomalux, Lodima is $200. That is not close in my my book.

I do have a nice stack of Azo, but I am using it slowly.

The paper is great with rich blacks and nice appearance. I work with yellow bug lights as my safelight, and expose with single bulbs ranging from 30 to 100 watts. The times are relatively short when compared to Lodima/AZO. The grade #2 handles negatives with a density range around 1.2. For those with higher DR, I use Moersch Separol Soft, and cotton swab those areas that may need further development. The latter is relatively easy to determine under the safelights.
The only problem is that the price has creeped up to being comparable to Lodima. And, if given a choice, I'd select Lodima.

[C_Remington]

How do u dodge and burn in 5 seconds???????

[Tin Can]

You don't, however some contact printers have D&B arraignments and you can use masks.

The joy of using an old timey contact printer is instantaneous prints.

This is a box with light bulbs inside and a glass plate with a hinged cover. Flop the paper and neg on the glass, close the top, which turns on the light, count to 5 and it's done. Magic, I'm pretty sure.

How do u dodge and burn in 5 seconds???????

[andreios]

I paid $83 for 100 sheets of 8x10 Fomalux, Lodima is $200. That is not close in my my book.

I do have a nice stack of Azo, but I am using it slowly.

I think it makes most sense for people in europe. I get it from the factory, 100pack of 18x24 costs circa 50USD, 8x10 some 65 USD. Thats a tiny fraction of Lodima when you start adding shipping and taxes/customs...

[Tin Can]

Also I am using the RC matte is it way cheaper, the Fomalux FB Glossy is very close in price to Lodima. I will also use Lodima instead of Fomalux FB if they are that close in price.

So the next question is for Azo Ladima users, what developers are you using?

I read the M&P Amidol story and quite a few dissenting opinions.

If my fingernails turn black I would actually look more normal in this part of the woods!

[Doug Howk]

Keeping the comparison of apples to apples, Fomalux FB (fiber) 8X10 at B&H is $184 for 100 sheets. Comparable Lodima is $200. When I 1st started buying Fomalux, it was about 1/2+ the current price.
As to developers, I use Ansco PF130 for normal negs (DR of 1.2), and Moersch Separol Soft for higher contrast negs. I have a MAS print of my neg from a workshop, and my version in PF130; and no real difference. The advantage of Amidol is, when developing in a water bath w/o agitation, Amidol keeps working so can get highlight detail. But I can do the same by painting on developer locally after a water stop bath.

As to dodging/burning, its difficult to do for contact prints no matter how long. I prefer use of various masks (eg, grease pencil on mylar)