I suspect that the super unexposed green filter photo is a result of multiple factors. 1) Foma 200 is not very sensitive to green wavelength when compared to yellow/red. 2. The winter light is different and needs to be compensated when using green filters. See this bit of text from Ilford's spec sheet for FP4: "The exposure increase in daylight may vary with the angle of the sun and the time of day. In the late afternoon or the winter months, when daylight contains more red light, green and blue filters may need slightly more exposure than usual."
I ran all my filters through the light meter so I could note how much transmission loss is there. Made it a lot easier for compensating for filters moving forward
Yes indeed Roger I do have that same Cokin dark green filter as the one in your video, I use it daily as a coaster for my Gin and Tonic, yellow or red filters for this film guy..Peace from MANHATTAN
Foma need lots of light, I expose them at like 100 asa @ 50, the 200 that I rarely use @ 125 and the 400 @320. I prewash them for at least 1 minute before development! Then I develop them preferably in fx39, 1:9 dilution, the 400 e.g. for 14 minutes, agitation for the first 30 seconds then every minute for seven seconds. Crispy and contrasty negatives. Very happy with them fomas, as with ilford or rollei. And for the filters: I stay with the yellow filter for plants/woodland as it separates the different greens more subtly and doesn’t darken them so much. Always good light!
Hi Roger, that was again a very interesting video. In my opinion, the Foma 200 does not reach ISO 200, but is rather a 100/125 ISO film. Exposed to those values, but developed with the times for ISO 200, you actually get good results with the film.
Good going Rog. A green filter lightens green but darkens blue. Darker Evergreens do emit a lot of blue light, more than we can see in particular during winter months and under a blue sky. One of the reasons that you get ' unexpected ' results. On top of that Foma films have a very pronounced dip in the cyan/green region of their spectral response curve, and are quite insensitive to blue light, which doesn't help the matter. A green filter such as the one you used requires about 3 stops of extra exposure to render the tones correctly. I much prefer a yellow green filter. Also, Fomapan 200 has a true speed of about iso 100. If you expose @ 200 you are already underexposing by one stop. I have had decent results with it exposed @ iso 160 in Atomal-49, but it works much better @ iso 100 with development times adjusted. And yes, the 120 and even the 4X5 do suffer from emulsion imperfections. People say it is a cheap film. It once used to be, but no longer. It is for sure cheaper than Kodak or even Ilford but you also do get emulsion problems with it, a lot more than the others. Fomapan 100 seems to be less prone to emulsion faults.
It’s interesting that Fomapan 200 works better for you at ISO 100. I usually shoot it at box speed and develop in Rodinal 1:50. I’m pretty happy with those results. With Fomapan 100 I usually rate it at 200 and push it in Rodinal 1:50 to get a bit more contrast. It might just be differences in preferred negative density and gamma. I have had troubles with Fomapan 100 where the antihaltion backing did not clear adequately (soaking it in vodka for 45 minutes clears it) but I’ve never had technical issues with 200. Most of my experience with these films is on 5x7 and 8x10 sheet film. Also I’ve only started using it a lot in the past 3 years and the qualities of the emulsions might have changed recently.
@@larsbunch It really depends on how much shadow detail one is looking for. At box speed, if the shadows are placed on zone III ( deep shadows with a hint of detail ), it seems to fail to show the onset of detail, it is more like a Zone II. It also depends on what developer is used. As I mentioned, I do get reasonable results using Atomal -49 @ 1+1 and iso 160, but even here the shadows are hard work. I have used it @ 125 with Adox HR developer and the tonal range was beautiful with strong shadows, albeit one has to keep an eye on the highlights. I would rate it @ iso 100 if used with HC 110 1+47 or 1+63, and ID 11/D76 1+1. I am not really one to buy into this fad of ' High Contrast ' malarky, if I want high contrast, I will do it in post, sadly I no longer practice wet printing, perhaps in the future.
I have a Y/G but not for that lens. Hardly ever used it anyway! I did notice the dip in the Cyan/Green on the data sheet. Foma 100 and 400 are also similar. I just ran another roll through 510 pyro at 100 on George. Two more rolls to play with!
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss Most panchromatic films exhibit that dip to a certain degree. In the early days, they used to emulsions to coat the base with and make a panchromatic film. Not too sure what they do now.
Nice video. And yes it's a great combination... walking and photography. My missus used to get a bit p##t of with the stop start, get the tripod set up, take the shot, walk on. So to cure her annoyance with me, I purchased a Mamiya six Automat, and a bumbag to put that, and my Zeiss Ikophot light meter in. Job done 😆. As for the green filter, I use Hoya filters to lighten up the greens, can't fault them. I also do tree's and close up foliage, but take an incident reading. Also a mid green in a landscape will give you a middle grey to work from.
I think that when it comes to Fomapan one should distinguish between 135 and 120 a sheet film. The first is on triacetate the seconds on PET. And this makes a lot of difference. Fomapan 200 135 I had to pushed @400iso in rodinal 1 + 25 without problems and with a sharp but not excessive contrast.
Howdy, I discussed with Foma factory representatives a few year ago. I had bought 10 rolls of 120 Foma. All scratched. The representative said especially in medium format Foma 200 is maybe even too fragile emulsion. A medium format camera is more demanding on film than 35mm (sprockets take the load) or sheet film (no transport needed). They compensated me nicely and I continue using Foma 200 in 35mm (bulk) and sheet. Pushed a bit it is very nice!!
Good thing if people are waking up to fomapan 200, its one of the best cheap films out there. A bit fiddly in how it can be scratched, but also extremely flat for scanning. At 100-160iso you can really complain at the price. In my opinion it competes with the stuff from large manufacturers. Most people don't know that the 200 stuff is a totally different type of film as the 100 & 400 are. Quite resent design on that film.
Totally agree with what you said about taking your camera for a walk. For me it makes a nice change from sitting in front of a computer screen all day long, especially with using film, slows you nicely down. -- I don't know why you use a spotmeter and a grey card, when your subject is just a few metres away? I'd just use incident light metering then, like with portrait photography...
I just like to mix things up a bit. I did measure a couple of scenes with incident and got same reading give or take a smidge. It was more fiddly though lol
Always entertaining and instructional videos Roger. Specially because you show the great and the mistakes, which teach all of us. More times than I admit I went out with a camera and came back with no photos to show, but had a great time outside, so it's always a positive experience.
Enjoy your channel. Keep seeing you taking a grey card into the woods and taking a spot reading off of it. Yes this is correct...but...save yourself some work. You have an incident disc on that meter...use the incident disc in the same way you are using the grey card and you should have exactly the same results without dragging around a grey card. You can also check the incident and spot readings of the meter by using a proper grey card take reading of the card then take an incident reading from the same position should have the same readings. Spot readings are for far away objects or when you are using the zone system and want to take readings of various reflectances and decide where to place them. Keep shooting.
We were taught in college that green grass was 20% grey like a grey card or you can even use the back of your hand if you’re light skinned. If you have a darker skin take a reading from a grey card and your hand compare the two readings and you’ll know in future how much you have to close the shutter up by.
Roger I use Forma 100 and like it, I shoot it at 50asa, Like you have said its a very fragile film and marks quite easy. I have just started to use it in my 4x5 Snapshot as well and got good results.
Omg metering for light with aperture and speeds-hate it !! Loved when I went with Hasselblad, it is metering with Exposure Value. So much easier. You already have an idea what aperture you want, so set the EV value and shoot away.
I use a Tiffen #58 green filter that calls for 2 2/3 stops compensation (or 3 depending on who you believe). (I also use a Blue #47 - 2 2/3 stops and a Red #29 4 1/3 stops). Another issue alluded to in other answers is that the color temperature of the light will require different compensation for different filters. In tungsten light, the Red #29 needs only 2 stops and the Blue #47 needs 3. Green #58 does not require adjustment for tungsten.)
On another site that used foma in 120 size; their opinion was that the mottling and staining on the negs was an artifact of the paper backing. The mottling wasn't evident when shooting 4x5.
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss The site said that Kodak also,at one time, had an issue with the backing paper. Issue doesn't manifest with films that have no paper backing.
I just bought a pack of half plate Fomapan 100 for my first go at LF photography. Interesting to see your experience with the 200. Fun and informative as always, Roger.
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss was a nightmare, being in the woods on an overcast day with a Pinhole camera and Fomapan 100, fastest exposure time 67 minutes 🤣 So had to push it to 800, seems ok
I do a lot of Foma film since i'm broke. Mostly Foma 100 in 120. For 135 i use all of the line (except for the Retro which is impossible to find these days). For me it's a great film but you have to develop it into Rodinal or fomadon LQN for getting the best result. I always have well exposed negative and cannot understand why your image was so underexposed. Bear in mind, this is an easy to scratch film. I was used to scanning it with my Pixlr Latr and get bad surprise with a scratch on all the photos. I'm now using the Essential Film Holder and have no problem at all.
I dont really understand this rodinal obsession, i have had great results with D76 1+1 and in stock solution you actually get the best tones with Fomapan 200. Rodinal creates so exaggerated grain that it the tonal look really suffers.
Hello Roger. Great video, glad to see your out having fun. It's cold as he'll here. When I got back into shooting film last year, I looked at the cost of film and chemicals. Kodak & Ilford too expensive. Tried Fomapan 400 (120) and have shot 29 rolls, no issues. And 1 or 2 rolls of 100 and 200. Develop in ilsofol 3 . Also shoot a lot of Fomapan 400 135mm. I do prewash all film for 1 min. I use the same Cokin filter but only the yellow. KB
Do you think the underexposed negatives had to do with bellows extension factor? Not something you have to normally worry about with most cameras but I think Mamiya RB/RZ67s and C series TLRs have bellows that allow them to go closer in. Also, looks like Borut Peterlin was doing some forestry work out there in his Range Rover ;-)
I quite like Foma 200 but I rate it at 100 also. In the past I've used Xtol and XT-3 with it but quite like it paired with 510-Pyro. I will say though I only shoot it in 4x5 and lately I've had to add a hypo clear step as I found I was sometimes getting purple dots on my sheets (apparently that's part of the anti-halation layer) which the hypo clear takes out. I'm not sure I'd shoot a wedding on this stuff as a result of some of the QC issues but it's quite a lovely film otherwise and I do find I like the results quite a bit. It doesn't look quite like anything else.
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss I do it in distilled water for about 5 minutes with constant agitation (rotary). I also get a bit of a green/blue tint though most comes out in my water stop step. Some ends up in my fixer but since I reuse my TF-5 across developers, it ends up brown anyway from the 510 and I also use it for T-Max films. So it's an amalgamation of color :) The one step I'm a fan of with Fomapan is a hypo-clear. I'm using Heico Permawash but will likely mix up my own once I'm through the bottles I have. I've been starting to use this as a general wash-aid for other films too.
I started using Arista Edi 200 a rebadged Foma 200. Likes it. I watched a Naked Photographer video on shooting it at 125. Now I love iI. I processed the rolls with Cinestill df96 but am looking at a different developer. Thanks for the video. Cheers.
I’m a newbie, never tried a grey card. But I’d have tried spot metering in the shadows and bumped up 2 stops (i.e. zone metering for shadow detail). Or used the incident metering on the light meter.
Usually that's a good method to use Alistair (metering the shadow area). Shooting on the grey card generally gives a similar reading as incident. Try it out
I love foma films but you have to treat them so gently as even breathing on it causes scratches 😆 expose 200 at 100ISO and 400 at 200 ISO for best results
Don’t think you can go wrong with FP4 I tend to use fomapan in my Holga as I don’t mind the imperfections I have some 200 and 100 fomapan and a couple of rolls of 400 action I am worried about using it for anything decent so I tend to put it through my Holgas beautiful images looks like you had a great day out taking pictures
Hi Roger, it seem that you are using a deep green filter and needs a lot of light to be useful. I like to use an Nikon xo filter that is a yellow green filter and it is superb as a all arround filter, it darken the sky in very same as the yellow does and also lights up the greens to, so it is a great compromise in between the two colors. And by the way you dont like the incident reading of your lightmeter? Its a pretty good tool i think. Best regards!
I have a love/hate relationship with Fomapan 200 ... I have had amazing and sad results!!! I think it's really finicky about development ... the best results I have had was stand developing in Rodinal 1:100!!!
Foma seems to rate their films quite optimistically, I have not shot Fomapan 200 (yet, I do have a few rolls in the fridge, must give it a try) but I have used a lot of Fomapan 400 in 35mm, 120 and 4x5 and it took me quite a few badly underexposed rolls and sheets to realize I need to shoot it at about ISO 125, or even 100 in low light, to get reasonable density. The light meter I use is an old selenium type so maybe not the most accurate (i guess I should invest in a better meter) but it does give good results with HP5+ at box speed so I guess it's not too far off. Also, both of my Pentaxes (ME Super and KM) with built-in meters give the same results so I'm quite sure it's the film, not the metering. Good to know the 200 is similar in that it needs to be exposed more than the box speed, will save me some time and film when I get to try it. I find Foma 400 ok in 120 and 4x5 but in 35mm it's just too grainy and "harsh" for my taste for most occasions (though I have had some cool "artistic" pictures with it) so I've decided not to buy it in that format anymore and I think I'll use Ilford in 120 too after my current stock of Fomapan is exhausted as there's really not much difference in the price and Ilford seems to be much more forgiving and consistent. In 4x5 I will keep shooting Fomapan for economical reasons because it costs about half the price of Ilford per sheet and the graininess is not a problem in the large negatives now that I've got the exposure and development nailed. Also, the Fomapan 400 in 120 is so thin and flexible I can't get it on the spiral of my cheap and, admittedly, quite poorly made Russian development tank. I can get HP5+ in it but even that is quite fiddly. Fomapan works ok in the AP tank (the easiest, most fool proof spiral I have used, even better than Paterson) but the Russian one, being 120 only, uses just 260 ml of chemistry while the AP, being an universal tank so bigger in diameter than necessary for 120, needs 590 ml, more than twice the amount, which matters now that I have moved from Cinestill Df96 to Pyrocat HD which is a single use developer, though not very expensive. The Mamiya RZ67 seems to make really nice pictures, I'm getting the older RB67 (still in the mail from Japan, should arrive next week) to supplement or maybe replace the Kiev 88 I currenly have. Looking forward to learning to use it, I have read a lot about the Mamiya cameras and lenses being some of the best around especially for the price and I hope to get some good results.
Enjoyed the walk in the woods. Have you tried running your filters in front of your digitals? Easy way to get a good feel for the number of stops. Do it in bright sun and incandescent. Do you note/document each photo? Thanks for another fun video...
I have used Formapan 200 although I can't really see its main target. For cheap film when I want to test camera or lens, I will use formpan 100 and formapan 400. I'm not that fond of Formapan generally. It is a bit to grainy and contrasty for me. I prefer more evenly distributed greys. I have not had any problems with developing it, however. Wonder if something was up with the roll of 200 you had. As always I enjoyed the outing.
It has pretty much the same tonal characteristics as trix 400. You can check this out on the naked photographers film comparisons. Its totally different film than fomapan 100 or 400, its a hybrid T grain film.
Good to hear. I have successfully processed it in XTOL 1:1 and in Cinestill DF96 one chemical process. Both worked fine although the grain was bigger with the ones processed in DF96. @@ShootFilmLikeaBoss
I was interested in the emulsion damage with Fomapan you were displaying in the close-up shot. I presume you meant the dark speckles? I have had this particularly noticeably with 120, not so much with 4x5, although that was the 100 speed version. I haven't noticed the problems with lack of shadow detail, but my scan process is different as I am using an Epson V850 and Silverfast (awful program) with NLP. What this setup does do is multiple exposures, so I am wondering if it is worth trying the same on your DSLR with bracketing. On the positive side, it's not as if these were your best pictures (IMHO) A polariser might have been a better option than the dark green filter you used?
Hello Roger, i bought few rolls of foma 100 in 120 format. Will use Xtol for developing(Foma Excel). Do you pre wash the film before developing or not? and or how long? i heard about dye color coming out of film. I dont want it to get into my developer( use stock, reuse it 10x). Thanx, regards from Austria
I prewash all Foma films. Clean water, 2x1 min inversions. Should come out green-ish if I remember. Im moving to Agfa APX so dont have any Foma no more.
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss I didn't even know there are 6*6 backs, the 67 backs are reasonable priced? Or don't you want 67 because you have to upgrade the enlarger then?
