Gast
Hello,
I’ve come across some offers for these Russian films recently.
If you look for information, you don’t really find much. Has anyone ever used them and can say anything about what they’re like?
I’m assuming they haven’t changed much, so even older experiences would be useful.
Regards, Paul
Gast
Hello,
I’m not familiar with Tasma, but as for Svema (FN 64), I can tell you that it produces very nice grey tones and has a relatively wide exposure latitude.
However, I just can’t get it to produce a fine grain, and the processing leaves a bit to be desired.
Roland
Abi
Hello Roland,
I can provide you with the following information for Svema Foto 65:
8–9 minutes in R 09 (1+40), or A 49 undiluted, or A 49 with a dilution of 1+1, in which case the development time must be multiplied by a factor of 1.3.
Processing in complete darkness, or using a Duka ORWO 108 protective filter, indirect light at a distance of 0.75 m, 15 watts.
This information is taken from an old instruction manual for this film published by VEB Chemiehandel Potsdam, and from the booklet Schwarzweißfilm in der Kamera by Hans Edelmann.
Gast
Hi,
I’d be interested in seeing that film too. Where can I get hold of it?
Best regards,
Marwan
Gast
Hello!
I don’t know where you can get hold of these films here in Germany, Marwan, but I can tell you what’s available as ‘Fotoplenka’ (photographic film), roughly how much it costs, and what the film is like.
As I’ve been working in Germany for the past six months and haven’t been to Ukraine, my knowledge isn’t entirely up to date.
Swema currently offers the following in 35mm plastic cassettes: FN 64 (19-20 DIN), FN 125 (22-23 DIN), FOTO 100 (21-22 DIN), FOTO 200 (24-25 DIN) and FOTO 400 (27-28 DIN); this changes from time to time – for example, you might be able to buy either FN 125 or FOTO 100.
All 35mm films cost (in Russia or Ukraine) around 80 cents to 1 euro, with 36 exposures per cassette.
There are also 30- and 60-metre reels; 60 metres cost around 20 euros.
(Svema does also offer a colour film called DS-100, but that is made by FUJI, and their own DS-5 colour film is only available as continuous film for cinematographers.)
Then there is 120 roll film (or, as you might say here, 6x9 roll film), usually FN 64 and less often FOTO 100.
Finally, FN 64 is available as various sheet films ranging from 6x9 to 30x40; off the top of my head, I recall paying around 15 EUR for a 100-sheet pack of 9x12 last time.
Visually, the film looks rather similar to ORWO film, though ORWO was significantly more modern – that’s the main difference. Protection against light diffusion.
What I find positive about Swema is that you can perform quite a lot of overexposure and underexposure and still get usable images.
The images have an old-fashioned look to them, because if the highlights are to have detail, the shadows on the paper become quite dark and the mid-tones remain normal – that’s a matter of taste, of course.
What I also find positive is that the photos have a slightly three-dimensional quality.
The price is certainly another factor, as Kodak costs around four times as much as Swema, even in Ukraine.
What I don’t like is that the films aren’t always manufactured very well; they often have defects, and the development time varies slightly for each emulsion.
Furthermore, as Roland mentioned here, they are quite grainy, but still offer sufficient resolving power when there is sufficient contrast.
The development times listed above for the Foto 65/FN 64 are too long; they only apply according to the old GOST standard (65=20 DIN, pre-1981). Today, the standard development times for Swema developers apply: for ID 11, reduce slightly; for A49, follow the instructions; and for Negafort (my recommendation), follow the instructions or reduce slightly.
There are also other films from Swema, but these are not intended for photography (microfilm, cinema film, aerial photography film).
Perhaps you know someone who can bring you some back, or you could go on a nice holiday and pick up some film whilst you’re at it.
Oleksander Kiluk
PS: Tasma is practically the same, as they have Foto 64 and Foto 125 and a Super 100 (Foma, runs green), but only 35mm film and sheet film; the prices are similar to Swema’s.
(I can’t understand how that English mail-order company ‘retrophotographic’ or something like that manages to charge over £2 per cassette; they also sell Russian photographic paper at a nice, steep mark-up.)
MirkoBoeddecker
Oleksander,
I simply cannot understand how these English suppliers, ‘retrophotographic’ or something like that, manage to charge over £2 per cassette
The prices in these factories’ export price lists are roughly three times as high as the prices for local retailers.
When you ask, you just get a shrug and a comment like: “You lot in Germany are rich, aren’t you!” On top of that, there are delivery issues and significant freight and customs costs for small shipments.
That is why we stock neither Svema nor Tasma nor Slavich.
Retrophotographic doesn’t make much from the 2 GBP per film. Sales volumes are too low, the export price too high and the proportionate freight costs immense.
Furthermore, you mustn’t forget that a Ukrainian retailer, given local price and wage levels, has ever-lower distribution costs and can survive on as little as a 10% gross margin.
That’s impossible here. The overheads are simply too high in the West.
20% is just too little to survive on and too much to make a living from.
The sole reason Retro offers this film is to provide the market with another alternative. At considerable expense, we source and import a range of paper and film products that no one else stocks. That is why the retail price appears ‘fictitious’ to you.
Best regards,
Mirko
Gast
Hello,
If that’s how the pricing situation stands, then I can sort of understand it, but seriously? Who has a better grasp of capitalism: the people at Tasma, who want three times the price, or Retrophotographic, who are paying all that money – supply and demand.
But in case anyone here is still interested, I’ve found a well-developed and enlarged image of the FN64; most of what you find online from Swema is, in fact, technological rubbish.
http://www.shuttercity.com/ShowPhoto.cfm?PhotoID=58886
Oleksander
Gast
A quick update
You can see more photos in the gallery, but not all the black and white ones are Swema; some are T-Max or Fuji.
I think the difference is noticeable, though: T-Max is razor-sharp but also has, in my opinion, a brutal (I can’t think of a better word for it, sorry) reproduction, whereas Swema doesn’t have much in the way of sharpness but has lovely soft tonal transitions. If not, the film type is listed alongside it – I think you know what I mean.
Gast
Oleksander,
this isn’t directly related to the content of this thread, but I’ve just had a look at your gallery and there are some really lovely photos in there (especially the black and white ‘environmental portraits’!)
Gast
Oleksander,
You recommend Negafort for the Svemas; I’ve just received a ‘little’ more from Ukraine.
It produces really good negatives – nicely with a fine grain, at least by Svema standards – and quite sharp; basically, pretty much the best I’ve had so far.
However, the film is a bit too strong; my tests showed that the film (FN 64) with a recommended time of 7 mins developed in Negafort for 6 mins.
19 DIN can be printed on soft paper but is already very dense
22 DIN prints well on soft paper
25 DIN can almost be copied onto standard paper, but then the shadows get washed out
Should I now shorten the time to 4–5 mins, or did your specification refer to a 1+1 solution with 100% dilution, or is it better to copy at 22 DIN onto soft paper – is Russian paper somewhat softer than in the rest of Europe?
In any case, it looks to me as though I’ve overdeveloped it, and not just slightly; though your Svemas apparently get quite hard if you do that, meaning you can’t push them any further – which I wasn’t planning to do anyway.
I’ll give Negafort a go on some other films; it doesn’t seem too bad to me.
Thanks, Roland
PS: Have you seen the new prices for the Tasmas yet? They’re now only 1.30 – looks like your protest has had an effect.
Gast
Roland
If you’ve got a moment, I was wrong – unfortunately, I don’t have my notes to hand.
The film shouldn’t be too steep, otherwise it won’t handle strong contrasts, but our photo paper is exactly the same as yours.
Negafort is very good, but apart from Forte and Swema, I haven’t developed anything with it yet, and everything is written on the Forte packaging.
Forte films are really not recommended, though; they’re even worse than the Swema films in terms of grain.
Oleksander
