Once again: thanks for showing your work as prints. That’s so unusual (compared to YTers showing scans of their films). I’m guessing it’s a huge workload - making these videos. I’m grateful.
If you want really pretty negs, D76 at stock dilution gives amazing results from Fomapan 200. I mostly use 1+1, but stock will give you the nicest tonality as it melts the grain and gives nicer tonal transitions.
I've never tried Forma, but Kodak Super XX @ ASA 200-250 in D-76 or D-76 1:1 made fine 11x14's many years ago. When "improved" Tri-X Pan was debuted about 1963, Super XX was relegated to a "laboratory" film for special purposes. Rollei SFX200 has more than filled a "niche" IMHO, making lovely 16x24 prints.
I've been using d23 stock now for a while and it performs wonderfully with these old school foma films. I would assume very similar results to d76. I started using the formula due to the lovely tonal transitions possible with high solvent activity. Definitely gives fine grain too, not that anyone should really worry about that due to the existence of digital cameras ( if you need the absolute cleanest images )
In case anyone is wondering why I didn't try 1:50. For me personally I like 1:25 ratio. If anyone is interested I show the images on my website post www.rogerlowe.co.uk/fomapan-200-rodinal/
I use F200 with Xtol 1+1 and get full box speed out of it. Nice and sharp, nice straight-line response and tons of highlight headroom. Only issue is that it's so easy to scratch that I can't print through a condenser head, only a diffusion head.
I usually shoot fomapan 200 from a bulk roll. Some5at 160 and sometimes at 200. Standard rodinal time and ratio in the massive dev chart. Simple and beautiful to shoot and process.
Cheers Carmine. Saw that little fellow asleep in the road in the warm sun. As I approached slowly he got up, gave him a tickle and took that photo. He looked old.
Great video thanks just confirming that I am not on my Own telling people to try formapan 200 i keep trying other films and speeds keep coming back i am the one that only uses xtol but I am happy
Definitely XTOL od D76, i'm amazed how many people still use rodinal. Guess people are after the grainy look, i prefer tonality that comes with solvent developers.
Fomapan 200.... Since I went back shooting on film, of course I made great photos with HP5, Double X, etc but the photo that is hanging on my wall was made with this formidable stock. Nice grain, good latitude... I really didn´t expected the good results I got.
I personally feel that Foma films work the best with stand development ... I also feel that Foma 200 is radically different that Foma 100 or 400 ... it's a go to film for me to test camera as well as creative stuff!!!
That's how I process my Foma film. I usually to a semi stand. I usually use HC-110 or Rodinal 1:100 for an hour. I agitate for the first minute, let it stand for 1/2 hour. Agitate for 30 seconds until the film is finished developing. I also use an inexpensive night vision goggle to inspect the highlights in the dark to check if there's enough density in the highlights. I usually shoot it box speed or slightly below.
I've never shot Fomapan, perhaps one day. However, I've never shot my F4 or my F5 without the viewfinder attached. Never even thought of it. Now I am. Thanks Roger
Lovely photographs Roger. Yesterday, being the 1 st day of Spring and our Persian New Year, I had a day off of work and went to Higger Tor in Peak District with my wife and my Daughter who had come up from London. I took my Hasselblad with two filmbacks, one for the Fomapan 200 and the other one for a roll of Rollei RPX 100. The second back developed light leaks, and the first one malfunctioned on two exposures. The Fomapan was developed in 510 Pyro 1+100 semi stand and produced some lovely tones, but with the usual specks all over the place. Mercifully they are not so large as to ruin the photographs completely, that dubious accolade was all mine. As you mentioned the 35mm Fomapan 200 seems to be free of such emulsion faults. In anycase, I think I have sorted out the light leaks. Just have to wait to test the backs again. BTW, Fomapan 200 is not a T Grain as in Kodak T-Max or Ilford Delta. It is a hybrid, where they make use of conventional grain in flatter layers. I believe Kodak some time in early 2000 changed the formulation for TRI-X to this hybrid grain. Fomapan 100 & 200 have an amazing spectral sensitivity curve, with low sensitivity to blue ( watch out for blank shadows ) and good differentiation between Cyan/Green and Yellows, so the use of a filter is not crucial. I think you could see it in a couple of your photographs where it rendered the sky a perfect zone VI.
Yes I was impressed with the Skys in some of the photos. Shame about your leaks. I take my cameras into the darkroom and put a bit of photo paper in and shine bright light through it all with enough time. Fixed my Mamiya back leak that way.
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss I changed the foam. The foil was on good shape, thank god. Changed the velvet on the back of the retaining plate too. Hope it works. Take care and be safe.
I really like Fomapan 200 in large format although in 120 I get really bad scratches - worse than the ones you showed. I shoot a lot of it in 8x10 and develop in Rodinal 1:50 (or 1:100 for stand development). I could be wrong (Foma’s wed site is down right now) but I believe they state explicitly that it is a T-Grain emulsion. At any rate, I think it is a very versatile film.
Awesome video. That F5 without the viewing prism is another reason I should buy that camera. Those angles really complement automotive photography which I enjoy in the summer time. Some really nice angles and photos here.
Was tricky with the bright sun hitting the ground glass but just cup it a bit with the hand. Some of my comps were hit and miss but close enough Steve.
Love the philosophy to just do what feels good. I have taken a break over the winter and now that spring is coming, it feels right to go back and shoot stuff.
Roger I shot 8 sheets of 5x4 Formapan 100 today, I developed them in Rodinal with my Steerman tank, I used a dilution of 5m of Rodinal and 495ml of water. It was a stand dev of 3 rotations then left to stand for 40 mins, then another 3 rotations, then another 40 mins. Then just did the normal stop and fix. I really like this stand dev way my negs have come out loveley and clear, Formapan is my go to film, but I also shoot loads of others as well.
As you are into printing, you should check out Fomas papers. They have some nice special papers that are cheap. Like retrobrom & fomatone. Though seems their selection has gotten smaller since i last checked. They used to have a really wide range of special papers.
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss Its mostly their warmtone special papers that are interesting, as they offer something a bit different and dot not cost that much. They also have a warmtone developer to go with them. Seems they still have 4 different types of specialty papers : Fomabrom 111, Fomabrom 112, Fomabrom var 113 BO, Retrobrom 151 SP. You might get a kick out of testing them, as you can easily get different looks for yout prints with them. Especially when combined with their warm tone developer.
I saw a video just the other day regarding TMax and how it may not actually be that much T anymore. If it's true that Foma 200 is a true T-grain film, then it may be one of the only (if not THE only) one left in production. Growing up I shot a lot of TMAX for school and personal projects. Going back and scanning those old negs, I'm pretty sure there's a difference between them and what Kodak passes for TMAX today. Either way, love the work, Rog. Well done.
Foma 200 likes lots of light and I personally prefer developing it in Rodinal 1+50, it gives a tonal range that I like. That's the important bit, "that I like". It's each to their own Roger, If we all liked the same films developed using the same processes and times etc photography would be boring. variety is good for the soul.
Off the channel Jim I shoot mostly ORWO UN54 and 510 Pyro Dev. Even for a bit more speed I'll push it to 400 but not for any scapes at that speed. Mainly because I have got used to it and I buy it bulk tins relatively inexpensive. Thats why I don't frown at rebrands (as long as it's not double the price). Puts a bit of sparkle into the shopping area of the community.
The dreaded yips we always get them at various times. I have a shot a fair bit of foma. I like their paper as well. 100 and 400 are a nice cheap bulk roll option here in Australia.
I've really missed your darkroom content! Glad you're back in the shed! You were the main inspiration for me during 2020 to focus on b&w film and darkroom printing. Simply magical. - Cheers from Greece!
Fomapan 200 ist certainly not a bad film, esp. if one rates it at ASA/ISO 100. I am using it as my standard film for 4x5, as it is still so affordable that you don't need to worry about every picture and the slight imperfections don't matter here. Else I prefer Ilford very much.
Very instructive. I’m surprised at the combination of dilution and time, I understand it but such short times could contribute to undesirable irregularities. Never the less, it’s noted and worth a try. Thanks, good video, good demonstration. 👍🏽👍🏽👍🏽
I used fomapan films as like my first 4 or 5 rolls earlier this year but only the 100/21° ISO. It was the cheapest anywere had in stock. Then a place I order from got AgfaPhoto APX 100 and 400 back in stock which was actually *slightly* cheaper and I didn't see any problems with that either. I do however intend to buy a bulk roll soon and may go for the foma 200 since it is basically one of the cheapest bulk rolls which is faster than 100 but not quite 400 which I have heard can be somewhat grainy in 35mm.
I've done a little in Foma 400 and Rodinal - but found it a bit too grainy for my liking. I've however heard that the 200 is a very different to either 100 or 400. In The Flim Developing Cookbook (2nd edition 2020), Foma 200 is described as a mixed conventional plus tabular emulsion. They also noted that whilst " in the past there were occasional quality control issues, they seem to have been solved in production at the time of writing." I've heard very good things about Foma 200 - So, I went out and bought a 30.5m tin. Haven't shot it as yet as I've still got a couple of tins of Kentmere, Ilford and Rollei, but am interested in seeing how it turns out. I think that the 200 speed is also quite usefull when doing street photography in London as it's often overcast, so the extra stop helps a bit.
I might have been unlucky but on my Fomapan 200 120 I’ve got loads of black, small lines on my images. Everything was developed following the data sheet with a fresh ID-11. Went online and seen that there was nothing wrong with development. Just a common issue on Foma 200. Considering the number of forum threads open about quality issues on the film looked a bit more than just occasional! But it’s nice to hear that apparently 135 isn’t affected by that
@@ivandimarco2004 Long black lines sound like scratches, the emulsion is really soft and scratches easily. This might be something that happens during your development process. The issues with Fomapan 200 were dots, like small dust particles.
@@ivandimarco2004 I can't comment from personal experience with the 200 as I haven't shot it as yet, but have just heard good things abut it. Some have said that it's better than the 100 and 400. At the moment, I'm shooting Rollei 80s, Kentmere 100 and HP5 in 400 using either Rodinal or ID-11 depending on the situation. I might have some foma 100, but haven't shot it in a while. I think that I've read somewhere that the 120 and 35mm are a bit different. When searching quickly online regarding spots/marks on foma 200, it seems to be mostly 120 articles/posts which come up suggesting that there might be some difference. I think it's at least worth a try in 35mm given the cheap price - When bulk loading, I it works out to around £2.30/roll which is cheaper than anything else.
@@Nobody-Nowhere I read that the dots might have been caused by a strong acidic stop bath - As you said emulsion is apparently quite soft. The suggested solution for these issues were to either dilute the stop bath or to just use water.
Great video, Roger. Fomapan is my favorite film. Both 35mm and 120. For important projects, I use 100 , as it is a replacement for using 4x5. I de velop in D76 or Ilfosol 3, what ever I have in stock. I've really gotten to know that film. That Pyro 510, I can't seem to get, as shipping is high, because it's a dangerous chemical. Great work. Ken
Yep 120 are often f***ed. Ruined a couple of shooting because of the imperfections on the emulsion. Nice to see 35mm doesn’t look to be affected. Still cheap like peanuts so I’ll try in a point a shoot and see what happens! Thanks for your video
use this all the time in 35mm and 120 - have been trying in 5x4 recently (learning) due to cost. It can be a bit mottled sometimes but I like the traditional look it has - not keen on T grain films. Might be in my head but feels like its better if stored correctly i.e. fridge....
Seems like the drama around Foma seems to come from the film equivalent of pixel peepers. I'm not going to stress about 1/3 stop deviations and all that. I love Foma. It's a nice grainy look. It's not as sanitized looking as Tmax, and it's a little temperamental. Once you get the hang of it, it will give you great results.
Thanks Roger! Nice to see another perspective there. Intersting you like it in 35mm for instance, since I quite like it in large format. To your point I have had some emulsion issues - most notably purple dots which turned out may relate to the anti-halation layer, solved by giving the film a quick wash in some hypoclear. Apart from that, I've had lovely results with it! I'm thinking I prefer it most in 510 but have developed it in Xtol, XT3, Microphen, and D76/ID11. Oh and I think D23. I got prettty good results in all of them but find I like the look best in 510, at least lately.
Great job Roger. I've been shooting it for years under the rebranded Arista EDU. It makes your used developer green! It's nice stuff to me. However, it has horrible reciprocity. :(
However if you are new to very long exposures it saves you many times from burning your negative. It's my own experience. But I know that standing minutes exposing is frustrating.
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss I did read somewere (and I don't know where) that someone said they actually preferred it because it was easier to for example time 35 seconds than 7 seconds somewhat accurately since 1 second off is a lot more with 7 seconds than 35. These are just random numbers btw.
Very good photos, good contrast and the grain is nice. You can try a fine grain development if you feel the grain is too pronounced. Recently, I mainly use the Fomapan 200 and I am satisfied, and it is clearly cheaper than the Rollei Superpan 200 and Rollei RPX 100 and 400 I have used before. Regards
Спасибо. Хорошая фотопленка. Только сейчас она в России подорожала. Я вместо фотоувеличителя использую сканер и лазерный цветной принтер canon lpb 7015c...
I use Fomapan 400 in Rodinal 1+25, 18°C, 7:30. That "cold development" is to tame a bit the grain, but it is still very prominent. Nonetheless, I like the classic look although the blacks are a bit mushy and the whites a bit chalky.
Love the photos and defiantly going to get a couple of rolls of foma 200 and try 1-25 aswell ! I have gone into creativity slump but now I have another 35mm camera coming I've got back into it massively
Damn, your prints are quite inspiring and thanks for giving your thoughts on this film. I'm thinking of what film to shoot in 120 and Rodinal (stand dev usually) is my jam.
I love foma 200 as 35 mm it's my most favorite 35mm. But I had some bad expiriences with 200 in 120. However even though you will accuse me of herecy, I prefer foma 100 in 120 than Ilford FP4. Somehow I like more the contrasts and it's "colours". Once I read an article where some people prefer foma slides for large format over Ilford's. I have never shot a large format, but I've seen some great results of people shooting it. So maybe you should also try them, they are cheaper than Ilford's and are sold mostly in larger quantities.
love this one too! just bought myself a nikon f90x and was looking for a cheap film be able to shoot a bit of everything without much thinking. My first camera was f501. was reviews on both of them on your channel 👍🏻 So I think I'll get a roll or two of this Foma and see what it does.
I've just bought a couple of cheap russian cameras and the place I bought them from (in Greenwich), has a bunch of expired Foma 200 for £3 a roll. This is my first time shooting film (other than as a child), so it seemed like a good option to burn through a few rolls (especially because one of the cameras is a bottom loader and I'm fully expecting to destroy a couple with no actual end result).
I have actually had a lot of success with stand development for Formapan films. I used mostly 100 and 400 but also have a number of 200 rolls. I was trying to figure out what the purpose of 200 was but I still haven't discovered it. But--stand development seems to work as well for it as the 100 and 400. I will say that I haven't found the issues you have with Forma for 120 rolls but since I used those mainly for testing, perhaps I was just not paying attention. Sad to hear if it is inconsistencies in the emulsion. Enjoyed some of the shots you had in this video.
Great video I normally use Foma 400 using stand development with Rodinal, but the grain is terrible. Can I be cheeky and ask you how much Rodinal to water in a Paterson for one roll of 35mm film you got the best results from. I’ve been using 5ml of Rodinal to 500ml of water. I just can’t get my head around dilutions even after years of photography. Keep up the videos, fantastic as usual. Cheers Anthony
I've had the same issues on Foma200 in 120 format: long straight line, tiny random scratches...I also wrote to Foma but they did not seem to be that bothered by my issues. It's a shame as this film is quite interesting (a mixture of traditional an tabular grain) with good contrast...
I just bought a MPP Micropress 5x4 with a 135mm Schneider Xenar 4.7 lens. Just waiting for a Lupe to come from Amazon. I got 25 sheets of 5x4 Fomapan 200 for £28 from Bristol Cameras. I an going to open dish develop it in Rodinal 1 to 25 in my darkroom. Not sure how to time the development. I have a luminous watch?,or a timing clock.
I'd only risk that on ortho film! Good luck Neil. You could try pulling a bit of film out that hasn't been exposed, place it on the side where your trays will be and put a coin on top then see if your timers fog there film over time. (obs after fixing)
Foma jest fajna z taka klasyczną emulsja tylko czadami złe ja wylewaja.... Mialem juz klatki gdzie bylo brak emulsji a także takie gdzie w emulsji zelatyna sie zbryliła. Ale poza takimi wypadkami to bardzo fajny film. (Choć wole go w 4x5 a nie w 135)
I do not understand the modern enamoring with Rodinal for EVERY film! It, like Kodak HC-110, tends to accentuate grain since neither have any sulfite content to dissolve silver halide. Both Rodinal and HC-110 are very high accutance developers and give full emulsion speeds, but at a price. Kodak D-76 1:1 or Illford ID-11+ 1:1 are far better 35mm format developers (single use) in my 55+ years of darkroom experience, for grain, sharpness, accutance and emulsion speed with MOST B&W films. If you wish to "roll your own", Kodak formula D-23 1:1 was the late Ansel Adams "go-to" roll film developer, that is very similar to D-76, but a simpler formula, said to give more brilliant specular highlights. Any of these developers should give excellent 11x14's from most films.
I enjoyed my first rolls of fomapan, then I followed the trend and with tmax and other Ilford. I must admit, this is not my favourite part of shooting film, I am more interested in the photo taking one. And recently been enjoying (and struggling also) with printing my 35mm negs. Now that's the final results and that's what count, to me at least :)
Guau!!ª!! yo creo que ghfjisk y además hjkloiu cuando tú ternhsnder. Es impresionante la cantidan y calidar de friusds y unidas todes musculo jinasio entonces!!!!Tú sabes eso?????
I've noticed you're not playing with your leicas too often, maybe you use them behind the scenes? Or are you not vibing with them? I do find range finders a bit underwhelming compared to my Nikon f and my om1n.
You saw me using the Nikon F5 Dav. All the other photos you saw from the other foma 200 rolls I experimented with was shot on the Leica MP. That was my way of enjoyment. Taking that camera for long walks and having fun. I'm still hit and miss with my compositions with it. And loading them both is still a mission!
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss awesome! It's a different set of limitations and advantages regardless of which way you go. But it is nice to see someone on RU-vid shooting a camera that's not a leica or mamiya 7 😅 Always love your vids brother. Keep those prints coming ❤️
I liked Fomapan 100 in 120 film and did very well in Rodinal 1+50 . But I'am sorry to say that Fomapan 200 in 120 film allways have been a "lost effort " for me . Now I just pay that 3 Euro's more for Ilford Delta 100 and have peace in my darkroom . But I still like the Fomapan 100 in 120 film .
I like the tonality of your photos in this video. What do you think of Fomapan 100? I have a bulk roll of it and haven't shot it much. I seem to get crushed shadows and white faces. Been shooting a lot of kodak 5222 double-x lately and Orwo UN54 'cos I am lucky to have bulk rolls of both. Like them both a lot
I'd never even considered the leader when it comes to development. I shoot my HP5+ at 320 ISO and develop in d-76. From what I've read this is ideal for good shadows and minimal grain. I guess for best highlights you want the leader to be less than maximally black?
First thing I look at is the leader usually. I learned this from a bad development stock once. Negs were this. Did I under expose? No, the leader was very transparent like brown sunglasses.
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss - I’ve had dead developer ruin rolls before so I “developed” the habit of clipping a bit of the leader and dropping it into the developer in room light to make sure the developer still works. One can also use as a guide for timing with a film or developer new to you.
How did you remove the pentaprism on the camera?! Can you do that with all SLR's? I had a bit of a slump in my photography. It actually took me a few years to get over. Part of me wishes I just fought through it, the other part is glad I took the break.
Really interesting, enjoyed this. Just wanted to say I accidentally pressed the dislike button, I have no idea if it reports it to you but it was an accident, quickly pressed like afterwards so sorry about that.
How would you rate foma 200 against foma 100? I feel like they're so close in speed not sure I'd have a use for one over the other, both can probable tackle same situation with similar results.
They are totally different type of films. Foma 100 has really poor highlight separation, so it gives the classic 30s look. While fomapan 200 has better highlight separation, and more modern look & tonal curve closer to trix.
I have some 100 here to play with next. I'll do the same, just shoot in similar conditions and see how they look for me. As Gregory said, different emulsions it seems.
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss Thanks for the reply! Yea that would be great to see. I'm starting to shoot the 100 speed and really enjoy it. The funny thing about foma films is that they're true speed is often not the box speed,. Foma 400 is probably the worst offender, really a 200/250 speed film in my experience. Interested to see how a foma 200 might fit into my workflow considering.
Dear Roger, is the film exposed to nominal sensitivity? I ask why I have frequently read that Foma films have a real sensitivity lower than the nominal one. If you have exposed the images that I see are perfect at nominal sensitivity, one more reason not to believe all the nonsense that you read on the net. Thanks.
I believe many people say to rate a film this and rate a film that but never mention their development technique. I always go what's on the box and then work out best development for me. If I have to nudge the exposure then I find my speed for that development.
I don't like Fomapan 200, it has real speed 125 iso rather than 200 and the emulsion is dogshit - delicate layer and has those imperfections like holes. Bruh
