Gast
I’m very happy with the results I’ve achieved using Fompan 200 (35mm) in X-TOL (stock to 1:2) at 100 and 200 ISO, but at higher speeds (400 ISO) the shadows get completely washed out.
Which developer with very balanced performance could I use to achieve better shadow detail here?
Regards
Elmar
Gast
Hi Elmar,
Tapered shadows don’t necessarily mean a loss of detail in the negative.
- I’ve heard from several people that even with 400-speed film, they only manage half the standard speed at best; that’s my impression too. Unfortunately, I don’t have any experience with 200-speed film.
- The only thing I can think of is a two-bath process, e.g. Emofin, but I fear that with the shadow detail you’ll quickly fall below the sensitisation threshold. And if nothing happens, you can develop until the cows come home. That’s the limit with any push attempt. That’s why most people (who go to this trouble) don’t test for mid-grey, but for Zone 1, i.e. a +1 log D fog. In other words, at what point does anything actually happen.
Any compensating development doesn’t lift the shadows, but dampens the highlights.
If you want shadow detail, you simply need genuine speed or more light.
Regards
Martin
MehmetCati
Hi Elmar!
That’s why I got hold of the Fomadon LQN developer a while back.
(It’s also described in the FOTOIMPEX catalogue)
Unfortunately, I haven’t got round to trying it out yet, as I’m currently experimenting with Lucky and Classic films in all sorts of developers.
According to the catalogue, however, the LQN looks very promising:
(...) and getting a Foma 400 to 400 (...) Full speed with normal subject contrast and nice grey tones (...)
etc.
Might be worth a try!
Regards
Mehmet
Gast
Hi Elmar,
I also use the 200 film. However, I expose it at 125 ISO/DIN.
Then I develop it for 8 minutes in Rodinal 1:50 and get exactly the look I’m after.
Visible grain – but not a sea of grain like you get with the HP5, for example. Lovely shadows and highlights.
Note that the Fomapan 200 isn’t a true ISO 200!
Regards,
Martin
Gast
Hello Elmar,
The Foma 400 has now become one of my go-to films. In ADX A+B, it produces a lovely rich tone with well-defined shadows. If you achieve reasonable accuracy in your exposure (I use the Lunasix with 15° and 7° attachments), the 400 ISO rating is spot on. For larger subjects, however, I would also go down to 200–250 ISO.
Best regards
ThomasN
Gast
I also work regularly with Fomapan 100 and T200 and usually develop them in Fomadon LQN, although this is better suited to the 100 (classic emulsion) than to T200 (T-crystal film). As far as I know, the recommended developer for T200 is Fomadon Excel, which is an exact replica of Xtol.
You should forget about pushing Foma films. They are optimised to have fine grain and be robust, which is why I like to use them; however, they only achieve the specified speed in the reference developer (and also quite well in ATM 49 (dilution 1+2, 13 minutes at 20 degrees), though with less contrast than in LQN), and they won’t go beyond that without the shadows becoming muddy. I’ve pushed a Fomapan 400 to 1600 ASA twice. It worked, but the shadows and mid-tones suffered quite a bit, and it works much better with Ilford or Fuji. One way to get more out of the films than they actually offer is to use LQN at 30 degrees. The emulsion can easily handle this; the negatives become dense and sharp.
Whilst Foma films cannot be pushed, in my experience they are otherwise very robust. That is to say, I have managed to get well-defined prints even from severely over- or underexposed (but normally developed) negatives.
Fomadon LQN is a fairly standard film developer based on phenidone and hydroquinone, which is adapted for Fomapan 100 and 400 (not for 200, which, as mentioned, is a T-crystal film), but also works quite well with other films. I’ve also used it for Ilford FP 4 and FP5 and Efke films (note: 7 minutes at 20 degrees according to the FOTOIMPEX table for Efke 50 is too long!). Full sensitivity utilisation and nicely defined, but not very fine-grained.
Regards
Samuli
