Gast
Question: Has anyone else had problems with scratches on the emulsion side of Fomapan 200?
I’ve now noticed this on two rolls of film. I assume that the damage is most likely not caused by mechanical handling during processing.
Does Foma have a quality issue here that needs to be factored in given the low prices?
MirkoBoeddecker
Martin,
Threads like this pop up regularly on all forums.
Unfortunately, they’re often just propaganda on behalf of the competition against Foma, as these films are becoming increasingly popular and taking market share away from the ‘big players’.
I think it’s too silly to react in a similar way, but there are other films that get scratches too...
If you don’t belong to this group (which I don’t want to accuse anyone of, but the emulsion number isn’t given, there’s no such thing as a Fomapan 2000, and it doesn’t say whether it was 35mm or roll film...) and you’re genuinely looking for advice, here are my standard tips:
No matter which film you buy – you can’t be 100% sure there won’t be any scratches with any material that runs through rollers, is wound into cassettes and has a coated base.
So simply check the start of the film for scratches BEFORE loading it – if they weren’t there before but ‘appear’ later, it must have happened somewhere in your setup.
Foma, Efke and Forte films are softer than Ilford, Agfa and Kodak black and white films, and these in turn are softer than colour films.
It is therefore quite possible that a camera or reel might not scratch an Ilford film but would scratch a Foma film.
It’s always best to rule out all possible sources of error – that’s the only way to be sure.
If the cause of the scratches cannot be eliminated (e.g. repairing the camera is too expensive), the only options left are a fully loaded roll of film or colour films....
I’ve shot thousands of Foma and Efke films myself in my lifetime and have had a total of 11 scratched films so far. I’m not sure about 8 of them; in one case it was the cassette, once it was the new AP spirals with the wide spline, and once I found a grain of sand in my camera.
Best regards,
Mirko
FrankJBeckmann
Hi,
So far, I haven’t noticed any particular sensitivity to scratches in Foma’s 35mm films. The new Tri-X, on the other hand, is a real delicate flower. In my experience, it’s very sensitive to scratches and is very prone to crease or pressure exposure.
Personally, I’m not too keen on the Fomapan 200, but I really like the 100 in terms of its tonal range and fine grain. However, there are three things about the film that bother me:
1. the very short leader at the start of the film,
2. the numbering corresponds to half-frame format,
3. the film loses a great deal of speed in my favourite developer.
But I’ve never had any mechanical issues with the Fomas, whereas I’ve had plenty with the Tri-X.
But if anyone has a bad feeling about a particular film, luckily there are plenty of other types and brands to fall back on.
Bye
Frank
fotohuisrovo
We’ve also processed plenty of Fomapan films.
The T200 does indeed have a lower speed. Even with AM74, it only reaches ISO 160.
Foma’s emulsion is hardly any softer than that of Fuji, Kodak, Agfa or Ilford. We haven’t had any scratches so far. We received one complaint about a roll film where a small piece of the spool had broken off.
You can achieve lovely results with a T200 at ISO 100 exposure and HRX (2). Xtol works well too, and furthermore, all Fomapan films can be processed without any problems in AM74.
Most defects can be traced back to incorrect processing. Genuine defects are rare with all films, and just as rare with Foma from Hradec Králové, Czech Republic.
Best regards,
Robert
Gast
Hi Mirko
Thanks for your thoughts. I really don’t want to be a killjoy. I’ve got no reason to be, financially or otherwise. I’m just an amateur who enjoys beautiful black-and-white photography and am happy if I can keep the costs of my hobby under control.
I was/am just a bit unsure, as I still have nearly 30 rolls of Fomapan 200 in the fridge and would love to expose and perform the development on them all, but I don’t want to take too big a risk of losing some great shots.
So, the two films with the scratches are labelled Fomapan T200 0059
Developed in a Jobo 2400, Rodinal 1+50 developer, fixed in Agefix and bathed in Agepon.
Thanks to your assessment, Mirko, and the other threads, I’m feeling reasonably reassured and will now expose one roll after another. I hope there are no more scratches and, if there are, that they’re ones I’ve caused myself.
I like the Fomapan 200 as a film. And as I’m now exposing it at ISO 125, the negatives are fine by me. I’m assuming that the film doesn’t actually have a true ISO 200.
By the way, I think your service and FOTOIMPEX’s customer friendliness are brilliant.
Have a lovely evening from Switzerland
Martin
Gast
Hello,
The problem is that when you buy a lot of film, you usually get it in sealed packs of 10, and often the rejects end up packed together because they’re packed one after the other.
But on a slightly different note: FOMA is good to very good; I really like it. Scratches are certainly an exception, but since when can you say that about FORTE? I’ve had packs of 10 roll films where each one had several holes half a millimetre wide in the emulsion, and with 18x18 prints you could see that the emulsion was uneven.
Perhaps with FORTE it depends on who the films are sold to?
cfb_de
Guys,
I’m really sorry, but last year I brought back some Fomapan-200 from Prague instead of buying it from Mirko.
But: Today I’m having a Duka day, and tomorrow too. So far, I’ve shot through four out of five rolls of KB-200 (my ‘new’ M605 is a brilliant bit of kit; the Fujinon-ES is highly recommended) and haven’t had any problems with the film at all. It does indeed only deliver 80 ASA in HRX (now a thing of the past thanks to HRX-2), but the results are very nice.
I could get used to this film. On the other hand, I still have 30m of Fomapan-100, which I like almost even better.
Best regards,
Franz
Most frequently used films:
- 120: Efke R50, Ilford HP5+ (200–1600 ASA), APX100
- 35mm: Foma-100, HP5+ (200–1600 ASA), the occasional Delta/TMax
Gast
Hi Martin,
I’ve probably had the same experience with the T200.
When examined under a microscope, none of the cases (3 out of 5 rolls of 120 film, each with around 2–3 defects) were due to mechanical damage to the emulsion layer. You can clearly distinguish this with a good binocular microscope.
When I enquired with FOTOIMPEX, I was told that it is apparently linked in some way to the chemical processes involved in the development process. I can’t recall the details off the top of my head, though.
Regards, Thomas
MirkoBoeddecker
Thomas,
Scratches cannot be explained by chemical reactions during the development process.
Emulsion detachment can occur during the process.
Contributing factors include: developer that is too warm and highly alkaline developers followed by a highly concentrated stop bath (gas formation = explosive ejection of emulsion fragments).
This results in irregular spots without emulsion on the film.
This sort of thing cannot actually happen during casting – the machine runs smoothly. Quality defects are therefore always streaks or bubbles.
Bubbles are circular.
This sort of thing happens with all films during production. The trick is to ‘spot’ the defects and create a defect matrix.
These are then cut out again during finishing.
However, there is never 100% certainty, as that would require inspecting 100% of the film and thus destroying it.
As a rule, approximately 10% of the material is used for defect inspection and removal.
The remaining defect rate is usually less than 0.5%.
Best regards,
Mirko
