wheat field

John Esco

Member
Registered User
Beautiful sunny day yesterday so I decided to go for a stroll.

Camera Wista 45N / Lens: Fujinon 210mm f/5.6 / Film Fomapan 100 - 50EI / Red filter used

044_4x5_10_f22_1sec_Foma100_EI50_redfilter_3stops_WheatField.jpg


040_4x5_06_f22_1sec_Foma100_EI50_redfilter_3stops_WheatField-Edit.jpg
 

John Esco

Member
Registered User
Yes, I was quite happy developing them and observing the tonality. However, there’s something tricky in Foma 100 granulation? I can’t really tell but when zoom in looks like there’s lots of artefacts. Or is just me...
 

Ian Grant

Well-Known Member
Registered User
How accurately do you keep the temperatures for developer, stop bath, fixer and wash, they need to be 20ºC +/- 1º or you run a high risk of micro/incipient reticulation (also called surface artefacts by Kodak). You can work at a higher temperature but variations need to be less than +/-1º, I manage +/- 0.2º when abroad working at 27ºC

Foma films have a slightly softer emulsion than most films so need greater care. I've not had any issues I can see what you are talking about on the monitor here in my darkroon.

Ian
 

John Esco

Member
Registered User
How accurately do you keep the temperatures for developer, stop bath, fixer and wash, they need to be 20ºC +/- 1º or you run a high risk of micro/incipient reticulation (also called surface artefacts by Kodak). You can work at a higher temperature but variations need to be less than +/-1º, I manage +/- 0.2º when abroad working at 27ºC

Foma films have a slightly softer emulsion than most films so need greater care. I've not had any issues I can see what you are talking about on the monitor here in my darkroon.

Ian
How accurately do you keep the temperatures for developer, stop bath, fixer and wash, they need to be 20ºC +/- 1º or you run a high risk of micro/incipient reticulation (also called surface artefacts by Kodak). You can work at a higher temperature but variations need to be less than +/-1º, I manage +/- 0.2º when abroad working at 27ºC

Foma films have a slightly softer emulsion than most films so need greater care. I've not had any issues I can see what you are talking about on the monitor here in my darkroon.

Ian
As you said, Ian, always around 20C +/-1. Never saw that on 120 film. And I can’t really see it on Foma 400 (5x4 sheets) either. Might be only Foma 100’s emulsion. Hope to receive my Foma 200 this week and give it a try too see how it goes
 

Keith Haithwaite

Active Member
Registered User
Yes, I was quite happy developing them and observing the tonality. However, there’s something tricky in Foma 100 granulation? I can’t really tell but when zoom in looks like there’s lots of artefacts. Or is just me...
I have processed hundreds of Foma 100 and 200 5x4's without being absolutely certain that my temps were all within 20º +/- 1º and never seen such an effect on the film but I have seen it produced by scans. I suggest you get a really strong loupe and check the comparable places on the actual negative. Just saying ....
 

Ian Grant

Well-Known Member
Registered User
I have processed hundreds of Foma 100 and 200 5x4's without being absolutely certain that my temps were all within 20º +/- 1º and never seen such an effect on the film but I have seen it produced by scans. I suggest you get a really strong loupe and check the comparable places on the actual negative. Just saying ....
It may be worth scanning at a different resolution. In the early days of Digital minilabs Kodak had issues with their films and excessive grain when scanned, printed optically there were no issues, this was down to surface artefacts.

Usually the temperature variations have little effect with some films but a greater effect with others. John Davies the landscape photographer found that the variations in graininess of his students work shot and processed with the same film and developer, almist certainly FP4 and ID-11 was down to poor temperature control.

Many years ago I needed my portrait taken working with my LF camera in the landscape. The photographer (a friend) used a couple of rolls of Tmax 400 in his RB67. Later that evening he processed the films as I cooked, I noticed he didn't check the temperature of the stop, fix or wash, I did make a comment. I processed some 35mm Tmax 400 I'd shot with my Leica M3 in the same replenished Xtol. The next day when I went to make the prints his rolls of TMY were excessively grainy and unusable, much grainier than my 35mm TMY negative which were quite fine grained as expected. Now as I'd supplied the film and had used the batch before (and after) it wasn't storage.

One developer in particular can and will cause issues with softer emulsion films and that's RO9 Rodinal because it contains free Hydroxide. Surprisingly the worst film in Rodinal was Acros which contains Whale gelatin rather than Bovine Gelatin, there's plenty of examples of Acros reticulating badly in Rodinal, and also emulsion lifting off the base but Tmax 400 was prone to issues as well but not as severely.

Having said that I had no issues with Acros or Tmax 400 in Rodinal. I grew up processing Ferrania reversal films then E4 (E3) and the temperatures were critical to +/- 0,5º F rather hard but manageable just :D

Ian
 

John Esco

Member
Registered User
I have processed hundreds of Foma 100 and 200 5x4's without being absolutely certain that my temps were all within 20º +/- 1º and never seen such an effect on the film but I have seen it produced by scans. I suggest you get a really strong loupe and check the comparable places on the actual negative. Just saying ....
I guess you're right, Keith. I digitise the negative using my mirrorless and there's no artefacts

*crop from digitised negative
Screenshot 2020-07-06 at 19.36.46.png
 

Alan9940

Active Member
Registered User
Hi John,

Glad to see you're on a path with this issue. Like others, I've shot many sheets of Foma 100 and have never seen any artifacts; either wet darkroom printing or scanning. But, to be fair, I shoot this stock mostly in 10x8 so I doubt I'd ever see these things. ;)
 

Collas

New Member
Registered User
That's not wheat, it's barley as it has the feathery spikes on the seeds. They may look delicate but they've got serrated edges so that they can stick to passing animals. They're very itchy and extremely difficult to remove from clothing.
 

John Esco

Member
Registered User
That's not wheat, it's barley as it has the feathery spikes on the seeds. They may look delicate but they've got serrated edges so that they can stick to passing animals. They're very itchy and extremely difficult to remove from clothing.
I actually had a debate in regards of that. :) Thanks for clarification
 

KenS

Well-Known Member
Registered User
That's not wheat, it's barley as it has the feathery spikes on the seeds. They may look delicate but they've got serrated edges so that they can stick to passing animals. They're very itchy and extremely difficult to remove from clothing.
That's not wheat, it's barley as it has the feathery spikes on the seeds. They may look delicate but they've got serrated edges so that they can stick to passing animals. They're very itchy and extremely difficult to remove from clothing.
As an Agricultural College graduate (SRUC 'Ayr camps) years before I got into photography as a "pro" with Agriculture Canada's Research branch ) I was somewhat suspicious that it was NOT barley. BUT...nnyone not close to 'farm life' might make the same mistake

Ken
 
Top