Just Developed My 1st FomaPan 100

I

Ian-Barber

Admin
Registered User
Joined
Aug 6, 2016
Messages
1,586
Thought I would try some of this Fomapan 100 mainly because its in-expensive and you get 50 sheets.

The box is only a single box unlike the Ilford which is double. The thing that struck me the most was just how thin the film actually felt when I removed it from the black bag.

Setup a quick still life and took an incident meter reading which gave me 1 second @ f32.

Ive just developed it in HC110 for 10 minutes at 1:63 dilution. The negative is hanging to dry, first thoughts are "it looks very thin".

This could be down to the lighting conditions I used I guess but we will have to wait and see when its dry.
 
Fomapan 100 is notorious for its reciprocity characteristics and requires more correction than other films. From the chart I found online a 1 second metered exposure needs 2 seconds actual so you may be underexposed.
 
Bill Martindale said:
Fomapan 100 is notorious for its reciprocity characteristics
Click to expand...

Having looked at my first negative, your statement at a guess is spot on.

I wanted the burlap material the objects were sat on to fall into Zone III so this is where I based my exposure. Taking into account the minus 2 stops from what the meter indicated, the exposure at f/32 was 1 second so this is what I used.

Another one for the trash :(

fomopan.jpg

Notice the notorious scratches have also returned.
 
By the looks of this negative it has not been loaded in to the holder correctly Ian. Notice the really wide margin on the notched end and the lack of a margin on the opposite end -the film hasn't been pushed fully into the holder and thus lain flat so the end flap covers more of the film and the dark slide will scrape over the end of the film. The shot below shows what I mean on one of my holders.

Loading.jpg

and before you ask, yes, the dark slide can still be pushed into place!
 
Good information Keith. That could that be part of the scratching problem with the dark slide rubbing on the film.
If that were so the scratches would be on the emulsion side. Can you confirm that Ian?
 
I think Keith might be right here.

It'd hard to tell which side the scratches are but under close examination with a loupe, I would say the emulsion side
 
Right, after Keith's comment, I took my time a little more this time loading 2 sheets into holder.

They are hanging to dry and so far they look scratch free. This time I did not put the notch under the trap door if that makes any difference
 
They are not loaded right as we can see however you need to check the first scratched ones which from memory were correctly inserted into the darkslide.


The scratches came a lot further down on the negative on the abbey picture in a random pattern, loading incorrectly as per Keith's photo would not do that. I dont think the way Ian has loaded it has anything to do with the marks, the scratches are not straight as you would expect from the dark slide.


I think its the emulsion side and its caused trying to get them out of the darkslide, you need a decent nail or two to do it first

time ;)
 
Last edited:
You are right Martin, unlike this one the original scratched neg had random marks over most of it and as Ian said he has er, very short fingernails - i.e. none - so where they came from I can't imagine.

Late edit: I've just looked back at the first scratched neg and I see the two end margins are very uneven there too, it didn't cause the random scratches but might be indicative of an underlying problem with getting the neg into the holder.
 
Last edited:
I have been having a think about this negative and have re-read your earlier post number 3. I am setting myself up to be shot down here but as I understand the Zone system the close down 2 stops for Zone III is from a REFLECTED reading of a shadow or other area where you want a dark tone with detail. Your post says that you used an INCIDENT light reading and as this is an integrated reading of the overall light falling on the scene (still life in this case) does this need the 2 stop closing down?

I have also found information that suggests the true speed of Fomapan 100 is nearer to 50 ISO rather than 100. My normal rating for this film is 64 ISO.

All in all that, combined with the reciprocity effect, could account for your underexposed negative.
 
Ian-Barber said:
Sorry Bill, I did mean spot reading not incident.

Do you have a link to this please.

What issues did you encounter with ISO 100 and also what developer do you use for Fomapan 100
Click to expand...

Your use of a spot reading would make sense to the rest then.

The film speed was from this discussion on FADU http://www.film-and-darkroom-user.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=7882 and post No 2 on this http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?47592-Fomapan-100

I have never used it at 100 ISO. Long story but on a course I did many years ago we were told by Mike Ware, of alternative processes fame, to halve the makers film speed and cut development by 15%. I have stuck by that ever since but tests do show that it works. I have used ID11, Xtol, Perceptol and Ilfotec HC. I am settling on ID11 probably 1+2 as noted by Alan Clark in another post.
 
Do you think these suggestions apply to scanning or just to darkroom printing on grade paper
 
As I have never tried scanning and the FADU forum is for darkroom users I suppose they are for darkroom usable negatives. As is always the case with films and developers the normal advice is to adjust film speed, developers and processing times until they suit your equipment and way of working.
 
Thanks Bill, I have made some notes and will perform some experiments with different ISO speeds and judge the results individually.
 
Scratches on Foma can drive you to distraction. I honestly believe you can scratch it with the wind caused by blinking to much when loading DD's.
My modus operandi is to rate it at 80 and develop in Rodinal 1:50 for 8 minutes. The reciprocity I use is, 1/2-1 s + 1 stop. 1-10s + 3 stop. 10-100s + 4 stop
If the photo is high contrast, ie the interior of a cathedral looking at the big window, I will cut development by about 20%
Cheers
Diz
 
Diz said:
The reciprocity I use is, 1/2-1 s + 1 stop. 1-10s + 3 stop. 10-100s + 4 stop
If the photo is high contrast, ie the interior of a cathedral looking at the big window, I will cut development by about 20%
Click to expand...

Are you printing in a darkroom Diz or scanning and inkjet printing
 
I,m printing on a diffuse DeVere 504. However, it seems to scan well on my epson 700. That said, I have very limited digital skills, so they might be poor:oops: I will try and find one I made before and post it.
Cheers
Diz
 
Here's a scan using my usual method. The only digital tweeks are histogram, contrast and unsharp mask.
web_Coloony mill.jpeg
Cheers
Diz
 
Thanks Diz. I have also noted your Reciprocity times down as I understand this Fomapan can be tricky at exposures over 5 secods
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top