Thanks a lot for going through all the work to put these interesting tests together. Hope this inspires a lot of people because it shows: Great film photography doesn't need to be expensive.
You know I was walking about waiting for Emma to come out of a shop and stumbled across an old mill down a side street. Never knew it was there. It was sitting on private property. A Business.
I literally had just ordered my first bottle of rodinal and a few rolls of fomapan 400 2 days ago. No one had it locally so it is in the mail. Lol. Your timing is perfect.
Got some Foma 400 that I'll have to try out soon. Also have some 100 as well. Your pics turned out pretty good!!! Some were a little grainy, but I don't mind that. Gives the pics some character.
Great video Roger, I haven’t shot much fomapan, but I have used the 400, in 4x5 and 120. I have shot it at 200 and the results have been decent. I prefer HP5, but as everything is going up, it’s good to have a solid cheaper option and for the price it’s really good
Already many years i stuck with Fomapan 400 + Holga + Rodinal 100 semi-stand developer. This combo is working great for me. Especially great for multi-exposure shots.
Hi Roger. A great video again. I recently shot Fomapan 400 bulk film. And i realy satisfied from its results. Fomapan 400 fairly flexible film negative. Mostly i like it.
Been watching your video for a little bit now and I'm back in to my photography both film and digital so thank you for your inspiration and hard work. And I just love it when you say 'shoot the shit out of a reel of film' I just laugh my arse off hahaha
Fomapan is a great option. I use Foma paper for the darkroom as well as Ilford Multigrade but Foma is my choice for larger prints as its noticeably cheaper here in Oz. 100 and 400 film is a great cheaper option and they sell bulk rolls which are always great value. Have been thinking of shooting some 400 at 200. Another great video Roger.
Hello Roger! Love your videos! Here’s a couple of questions: First, how did you arrive at 4:00 for Rodinal when you shot Fomapan 400 at EI 100? I couldn’t find an entry on the MDC at that EI. Second, based on your experience, what would be your time for EI if you had used D-76 1:1? Thank you and cheers!
Hi Kevin. That video was some months ago and without watching it back myself I don't have the answer. If I shot it at 100 (2 stops over) I would have dropped time off the development. Usually I'd drop 15% per stop so 30% of the MDC time. Or there about. Same with D76. From there you can fine tune your IE and Dev time
This video shows examples of photos taken with the original camera. "TLR Lubitel 2, Lubitel 166U cameras examples of black and white photos" Fomapan 100, D-76, Watch and be amazed!
I have been lately shooting Fomapan 100 and Fomapan 200. I can tell you as well that fomapan 200 it suits my needs, I did push to 400 with good results. Also I think that Fomapan 100 it is a great film, more contrasty than Fomapan 200 but it has something that reminds me of Koudelka's photos, it can be a rough film when pushed to 200 but in a really good way, I love it as well. Have fun.
Have you tried doing a semi stand with Rodinal at 1:200? I found success with this dilution using FP4, though I haven't tried it with 400 ISO film yet. Great video!
Foma 400@250 in xtol-r is my favourite use for it. I have shot @400 in Rodinal 1+25 with my zorki and Jupiter 12. Kind of like that combo just for that camera. I do suspect the shutter is slow by at least a stop though.
I shot Foma 400@250 and developed it in XTOL and got great results as well. I prefer Kentmere 100 for a cheap-and-cheerful b&w film, but I have no major complaints with Foma film.
I develop Fomapan 400 with 1:1:100 Pyrocat HD, Jobo development, all the way from 35mm film to 8x10. I do tend to rate my film at 160 iso though as Pyrocat HD has good tolerance to highlights.
I just got a 400’ roll of XX from B&H a few weeks ago, for $293.50. If you unroll 100’ at a time, & get 18.5 rolls per 100’ from your Watson loader, it comes out to $4/36.
@Cameras, Clocks & Watches easy to find at online retailers or on Kodak's website. That maybe we should be supporting foma as they are producing all types of analog photographic supplies and the last thing we want is less players in this game.
@@davyboyo I only just got it two weeks ago, so haven’t processed any yet. My usual massive research indicates that XX in Rodinal is what I’ve been looking for. I’m running it through two Nikons: a 1964 F at 400, to be developed in Rodinal 1:50/11 minutes, & a 1980 F2 at 1600, in 1:25/16 minutes (it goes to 1/2000, so I can shoot in full daylight, for nightmarish contrast & pregnant snowball grains). There was no way I was gonna buy Cinestill XX @$12/36 when I could chop up 400’s for a third of that, so I jumped head-first into the Ant Nest. It definitely is a quality film. After all, it’s made for professional cinematographers for use on film productions where millions are at stake. They have to know that they’ll nail the shot every time, since they burn it at 90 feet/minute (by contrast, I burn 90 feet in about six months). That’s why it’s not as pushable as Tri-X or HP5, it doesn’t have to be. Need more light? Have the crew set up more lights. Is the shadow side of that girl too dark? Have a grip hold a white card on her. And they don’t even know what reciprocity is, since they work at only one shutter speed, 1/48. Still shooters can use that narrower latitude to make shadows fall off nicely, just like in 1959. Another fun thing: In the last two years, a 400’ of XX has gone from $280 to $293 (B&H) = $73.37/100’, but a 100’ of Tri-X has gone from $100 to $150. And unlike TX, EK hasn’t screwed w/XX. It’s still Pure, Uncut 1959. Apologies for the huge screed. Have a lovely day!
From what I’ve seen from other reviews on this film, people are recommending shooting this at 200-250 iso for best results, I shot loads of this film in college at 400 with good results though, can’t remember what developer we used. I have ordered 10 rolls to explore shooting at different iso , thanks for your video, it was very interesting but may have been more informative by shooting at 200 iso also
You can never go by what speed others shoot the films at unless you know their development process. Best to always test the films yourself in different lighting conditions with your preferred developer and see how it works for you. I do that.
Great video, must say I really do like the look of that film, I’ll keep an eye out for that. I’m sure it should be easy enough to get hold of, I think WEX may sell it as they do have a decent range of film stock and do seem to be cheaper than most, plus no postage to pay either which is always a bonus. Saying that, it’s been a while since I bought any as I mainly shoot digital but was also given a couple of rolls of film along with a Minolta SLR, Lens and padded holster bag, which was badly stained, tried washing it but to no avail. The stain, and the smell was there to stay,can’t complain for free though.
Wow, yeah it happens. Usually I find with old expired film or occasionally a film that has been loaded from the end of the manufacturers line. They generally flatten over time in your negative sleeve (if that sleeve is compacted eventually by other sleeves) or, put the sleeve in a heavy book for a few days.
hi maestro, If I remember this film is the formula of the long time ago HP, the ancestro of hp5 and hp5+ of ilford .. for the price and to shoot and shoot... we hope the day of trix400 on the same price. try the Bergger pancro400, very nice film and not so expensive. nice day shooting
Tried a semi-stand development for the 1st time yesterday on a roll of fomapan 200. Negatives came out funky and thin. Was usually slightly overexposing the shots so I'm guessing it was underdevelopment. I'll give stand a shot again in the future but I'll probably stick with regular development most of the time in the future. Also, I was experimenting with Ilfosol 3 (after some internet research) because it was the only thing I had on hand at the time. So that's also probably another issue. Or the fact that I'm very much a beginner. lol
I generally shoot fomo in a camera , only kidding Roger, I have never used it but heard really good reports about so just ordered a few rolls to try, thanks fir another enjoyable video
I don't get it, ive seen many test of fomapan and is always very grany, but your resoults WITH RODINAL are quite nice. I am going to give it a try, 100%. I have ilfosol 3, though.
Foma 400 in Rodinal is pretty good. It really sings in Caffenol. But if you plan on using HC-110, you really need to expose it at E.I. 250 or else the contrast just shoots-up into the stratosphere.
I had same issues with it at the beginning, it seems that using a lower dilution (1:63 or 1:50) would help to control the highlights. If I tray development my film I will be using hc110 at 1:50.
Great work and info Roger. I have been debating getting some, and after this video I will get some and give it a go. I'll let you know how I do. Thank you
Great video , Roger. And my favorite film stocks in 35mm & 120. I develop in Ilfosol 3 or D76, what ever i have open at the time. For hand held I use 400 and tripod 100. Thanks. Ken
Pushed to 1600! I imagine deep contrast and bigger grain?
2 ปีที่แล้ว +1
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss exactly, especially bigger grain. You will love it for some types of scenes. Also i think that F400 need to be developed in more contrasty way, because otherwise it will give you ... let say ... dull negatives.
The other day I shot some foma 400 and developed it in adox fx39 1+9, 12.30 at 21 degrees (C), really like that combo, very acceptable grain. Next on the list is foma 200 and fx39. Kodak d76 is nice too with foma, xtol not at all (although being a big fan of xtol/ADOX xt3)
It's hit and miss so when I am shooting I make sure (as well as I can) not to shoot anything decent around the halfway mark. I then cut the leader away and fold the film in half and make the cut. Usually I hit a frame.
I wasn't a big fan of Foma 400 in Rodinal, but admittedly only shot a handful of rolls. I found it too grainy, but I'm really thinking that I need to buy a bulk roll of it and give it a proper shake. I've been loading up on 100ft tins rather than buying individual rolls to keep the cost down. Maybe Xtol will tame the contrast a bit and manage the grain. Or, maybe ID-11/D76 as some mid-point between Xtol and Rodinal.
Used Fomapan 400 quite often recently. It is not a fine grain film but for street and architecture okay. Not so good for portraits or nature. As Rodinal is my go-to developer I bath it in 1+25 at 18 degrees Celsius for 7:30. I also tried Xtol 1:1 but it was not much better. So I stick to Rodinal. I only use stand development when pushing to 1600. Did you try out the film at lower dev temps like 18 or even 16? If so what were your experience there?
I always thought that Rodinal at 1:25 is not enough to reach even 100 asa? Also, some people say that Foma 400 is only a true 260 iso film? What do you say?
I think there are many that prefer to shoot it at 320, 250 or 200. You've really got to experiment yourself with your own development and see how it suits you. Rodinal is fine at 1:25. About the best ratio I'd say. 16ml of Rodinal for a 35mm film (400ml soup). 1:50 would be even less at 8ml.
It's definitely a bit of a higher contrast look at 400 but to be honest the images look great if you don't mind a bit stronger contrast. Sometimes having detail in absolutely every square mm of the frame can distract from your chosen subject!
Interesting... is the modern Rodinal really as sustainable as years ago....? Wil it work stilll for years? when I look at the Datasheet from Foma and Adox not.
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss I read various stories on the internet, but at least not the mighty longevity of the past. but nice to know that 1 year and even longer the Adox Rodinal still works. Do you leave the Rodinal in its original packaging? Are you injecting some, like Protecan gas or something? Thank you! 👍
I bought a 17m roll and have now shot some film with different cameras. I haven't developed one with Rodinal yet, but with the Wehner developer. Exposed at 200 ISO, then at the normal time or at 400, but then I developed it as if the film was pushed one step. That has given me the best results. It's definitely usable, especially because it's so cheap. But it's definitely not my favorite film. The Fomapan 100 is better there, but not as fast.
I use Fomapan 400 for 4x5 and 120, though I prefer Fomapan 200 or Ilford HP5/FP4 for 120. For 35mm I find Fomapan 400 too "harsh" and grainy for my taste so for that I use Ilford as here in Finland the price difference is not that great. I have found I need to shoot Foma 400 at something like ISO 150 to get decent negatives. I'm quite sure it's the film as I shoot HP5 at 400 using the same cameras and metering and it works great. I develop in Pyrocat HD 1+1+100 14 minutes for Foma 400.
I found that Fomapan at 400 works best with Rodinal stand developing for me!!! The only issue i have with Foma is that the film base is brittle and can tear in some older rough cameras!!!
It's a great film for the price Roger, i been using a lot more and pushing to 1600. Hp5 it's better but almost the double the price. You must try with color filters and see if you like. Cheers mate 👍
@@Murgoh here in Portugal if I buy hp5 in bulk 30,5m cost me between 90€ and 110€ in some places. If i buy a single roll cost between 7€ and 8,50€. In other hand fomapan in bulk 30,5m cost about 60€ and I buy from Germany, I can't find here anywhere. And a single roll 4,80€ in Portugal. It's not the double the price but it's almost there.
If that fomapan was stand developed for 1 hr, cut the time to 45 min when the film is rated 100. Worth a try anyway. but I will try Rodinal diluted 1:25 for 4 minutes first.
Hi Harald. I buy it from a UK stockist in tins of 100ft. ORWO UK. BUT...... You can buy it as Lomography Potsdam 100 or Silberra 54UN. Both readily available.
Foma is an acquired taste. My first few rolls were meh, but I learned to use it. I never had the grain issues others get, being a D-76 user. Perhaps you might like the D76+Foma combo for less grainy results. Hell, I barely get any grain pushing to 1600!
Rodinal is not a fine grain developer. It is a high acutance developer. So if you have a single tone like a blue sky, the grain is going to be clearly visible, especially at box speed of faster.
I love Fomapan 400. I tried X-Tol and Rodinal with it (shot at boxspeed and at 250). So far I had the best results in X-Tol 1:1 But Rodinal is my go to most of the times cause it's easy to use and it's cheap. One thing about Stand dev : if I understand the process correctly, the goal is to developed until exhaustion of the developer. So when you use just a cut of a 36 roll, should you not tone down the quantity of developer used ? If you develop 12 shots from a roll, shouldn't you use only 1/3 of the recommended quantity ? I'm wondering cause I developed a small piece of Foma 100 yesterday (trying a new camera) in rodinal 1:100 stand dev 1h (5 ml in 500 ml of water). And the negs turned out over exposed. I know the shutter speeds are fine on this camera. So I'm wondering if using a full 5 ml of rodinal wasn't just too much for a fraction of the 36 roll and I over developed it.
Hmmmm. Makes sense. I'm gonna have to try that Julien. What about 24 exposures compared to 36? You'd still stand the same. But I wonder if the results would differ because of the surface area. Interesting
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss yeah I plan on trying that with 1,5 rolls of foma 100 (cheap fo test). Both filled with the same shot of an indoor scene so that the shots are all exposed the same. Then develop 1 of the 36 films fully in 5ml rodinal (for 500ml water). 2nd film I'll shoot just half of it and develop it with same quantities and see how it goes.
@@michelk5 Thanks, with more experiment in stand dev, I tend to agree with you. The result feels more time related than "film surface to develop" related. My own conclusion is that the slower the box speed of the film is, the shorter the stand development should be.
@@stratocactus ok that's a good point. Did you experience the same with other film brands? Did you try fomapan 400 stand dev in rodinal? I have some 120 format rolls and I wonder if 1h is too much time also with 400 iso film.
G'day Rog, have you considered wacking the foma 400 through ID-11 at stock? Even though I have a shed load of Rodinal kicking about, I recently made up some of that two part classic and it was great to get back into such a quality product
No Andy. I chose Rodinal for the video as I notice more people use it with Foma. ID-11 would give less grain I imagine especially at stock! I used it yesterday on a new vlog coming soon.
I love fomapan for street photography, but it really seems to fall apart for lots of leafy or green scenes. I'm not sure why, but it seems to just look a bit hazy. I'm not sure if it's the same film, but I really like the holga 400. It seems to perform differently, but it might just be a placebo.
ah Foma 400. I've actually been shooting this a lot lately. I've been shooting it at 800 in winter (sometimes 1600), but actually really like it pulled at 200 which is more possible now as the days get longer. Normally develop in id11 when pulling and rodinal when pushing (I lean into the look either way). I think when the batch I bought is finished I'll be going back to kentmere 400 as my everyday film. It pushes better in my opinion with less contrast. this is better for my scanning as I don't have a darkroom. But the kicker is that my Foma always seems to have damage after developing. more scratches and sometimes just bits missing from images. I don't have this with any other film. I like it, but it's a pain.
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss that's interesting. Maybe it's because I shot kentmere exclusively for about 2 years, so got used to it. The only time I prefer the Foma is when pulling it.
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss its a version of Rodinal made by Tetenal. It have some extended times for most films but in exchange you get huge amount of sharpness and a good speed from the film. Cheers.
This is late and maybe you're on it now but you have the lav and camera mic on at the same time for a large portion of the video and it sounds really strange.
Rodinal is not perhaps the best developer to use with Foma films, mainly due to their relative inherent graininess compared to films from Kodak and Ilford. Rodinal is a very low sulphite/high PH solution. High PH makes for emulsion swelling quite rapidly which accentuates the grain structure, and low sulphite content means little to no ' solvent ' effect on the grain boundaries. The net effect is high acutance and apparent sharpness at the expense of prominent grain and often uncontrollable highlights. Rodinal can give decent results with some fine grain films in low dilutions, such as the old Fuji Acros 100, Ilford PanF plus and the Kodak Tmax 100. I really don't understand for the love of god, why Rodinal is still produced after nearly 130 years, as there are much better developers around. I experimented with Agfa Rodinal in the early 1980s and decided then that this developer was not suitable for my landscape work, unless grain the size of a golf ball was somehow deemed aesthetically pleasing, which never was for me. The 510 Pyro you were experimenting with works very well with Foma films. There is also the issue of these Foma films all being over rated at box speed. As a matter of routine they should be used at at least 1/2 the box iso with dev times adjusted. I have found that Fomapan 400 to be more like an iso 200 film. The photographs though looked delightful on my small laptop screen.
I don't mind Rodinal but not so much for portraits or scapes as you say. I think the love for Rodinal comes from the beginners inquisitiveness to try stand development. Thats how I came across it. And then play with other dilutions. Always a pleasure to read your comments lensman, cheers. I also felt I could have gone to 200 and developed normally.
I mostly use fomapan 400 in 120. Once Once I tried shooting Foma 400 in the night and pushed it to 800 in adox rodinal. Many people say that foma 400 has terrible grain so I was very surprised when the grain went out much softer than I thought it would. Also once I shot whole roll of foma 400 with my friend in Corina which is same as Holga but manufactured in 1960's in Czechoslovakia and we said to ourselves, just try to push it to 1600 for the fun of it. It also came out decent.
I've never seen a guy so excited to shoot in B&W. The video is really cool
ha ha cheers
Thanks a lot for going through all the work to put these interesting tests together. Hope this inspires a lot of people because it shows: Great film photography doesn't need to be expensive.
At 4:55 THAT'S THE BEST STAND DEVELOPMENT PHOTO I'VE COME ACROSS..BRILLIANT 🇺🇸 🇬🇧
You know I was walking about waiting for Emma to come out of a shop and stumbled across an old mill down a side street. Never knew it was there. It was sitting on private property. A Business.
I literally had just ordered my first bottle of rodinal and a few rolls of fomapan 400 2 days ago. No one had it locally so it is in the mail. Lol. Your timing is perfect.
Got some Foma 400 that I'll have to try out soon. Also have some 100 as well. Your pics turned out pretty good!!! Some were a little grainy, but I don't mind that. Gives the pics some character.
Great video Roger, I haven’t shot much fomapan, but I have used the 400, in 4x5 and 120. I have shot it at 200 and the results have been decent. I prefer HP5, but as everything is going up, it’s good to have a solid cheaper option and for the price it’s really good
I've not tried 4x5 yet Geoff. Not even sure if I have tried it in 120!
Your photos and videos are both treasures.
Thanks Vincent.
Thank you! Fomapan - it's our everything!
I was out today shooting a roll of the 120 format of this film. love using it.
Already many years i stuck with Fomapan 400 + Holga + Rodinal 100 semi-stand developer. This combo is working great for me. Especially great for multi-exposure shots.
Hi Roger. A great video again. I recently shot Fomapan 400 bulk film. And i realy satisfied from its results. Fomapan 400 fairly flexible film negative. Mostly i like it.
Been watching your video for a little bit now and I'm back in to my photography both film and digital so thank you for your inspiration and hard work. And I just love it when you say 'shoot the shit out of a reel of film' I just laugh my arse off hahaha
Fomapan is a great option. I use Foma paper for the darkroom as well as Ilford Multigrade but Foma is my choice for larger prints as its noticeably cheaper here in Oz. 100 and 400 film is a great cheaper option and they sell bulk rolls which are always great value. Have been thinking of shooting some 400 at 200. Another great video Roger.
I love the Foma paper for printing!
Hello Roger! Love your videos! Here’s a couple of questions: First, how did you arrive at 4:00 for Rodinal when you shot Fomapan 400 at EI 100? I couldn’t find an entry on the MDC at that EI. Second, based on your experience, what would be your time for EI if you had used D-76 1:1? Thank you and cheers!
Hi Kevin. That video was some months ago and without watching it back myself I don't have the answer. If I shot it at 100 (2 stops over) I would have dropped time off the development. Usually I'd drop 15% per stop so 30% of the MDC time. Or there about. Same with D76. From there you can fine tune your IE and Dev time
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss Thank you for your reply! Very helpful.
This video shows examples of photos taken with the original camera. "TLR Lubitel 2, Lubitel 166U cameras examples of black and white photos" Fomapan 100, D-76, Watch and be amazed!
I have been lately shooting Fomapan 100 and Fomapan 200. I can tell you as well that fomapan 200 it suits my needs, I did push to 400 with good results. Also I think that Fomapan 100 it is a great film, more contrasty than Fomapan 200 but it has something that reminds me of Koudelka's photos, it can be a rough film when pushed to 200 but in a really good way, I love it as well. Have fun.
Have you tried doing a semi stand with Rodinal at 1:200? I found success with this dilution using FP4, though I haven't tried it with 400 ISO film yet. Great video!
Way to go, Boss!
I mainly use bulk Fomapan 100 but occasionally use Foma 400, D76. I develop pulled with 1:1, box speed 1:3 and over in stock development.
Foma 400@250 in xtol-r is my favourite use for it. I have shot @400 in Rodinal 1+25 with my zorki and Jupiter 12. Kind of like that combo just for that camera. I do suspect the shutter is slow by at least a stop though.
I shot Foma 400@250 and developed it in XTOL and got great results as well. I prefer Kentmere 100 for a cheap-and-cheerful b&w film, but I have no major complaints with Foma film.
Kentmere 100 is s good film also. Not too keen on the 400 though.
I develop Fomapan 400 with 1:1:100 Pyrocat HD, Jobo development, all the way from 35mm film to 8x10. I do tend to rate my film at 160 iso though as Pyrocat HD has good tolerance to highlights.
If you're thinking about future bulk rolling options, Kodak xx is said to be cheaper than foma in the 400 foot rolls from Eastman. Cheers 👍
I just got a 400’ roll of XX from B&H a few weeks ago, for $293.50. If you unroll 100’ at a time, & get 18.5 rolls per 100’ from your Watson loader, it comes out to $4/36.
@Cameras, Clocks & Watches easy to find at online retailers or on Kodak's website. That maybe we should be supporting foma as they are producing all types of analog photographic supplies and the last thing we want is less players in this game.
@@emilyadams3228 how are you liking the xx so far? Sounds like a quality film from what I've seen.
@@davyboyo I only just got it two weeks ago, so haven’t processed any yet. My usual massive research indicates that XX in Rodinal is what I’ve been looking for. I’m running it through two Nikons: a 1964 F at 400, to be developed in Rodinal 1:50/11 minutes, & a 1980 F2 at 1600, in 1:25/16 minutes (it goes to 1/2000, so I can shoot in full daylight, for nightmarish contrast & pregnant snowball grains). There was no way I was gonna buy Cinestill XX @$12/36 when I could chop up 400’s for a third of that, so I jumped head-first into the Ant Nest.
It definitely is a quality film. After all, it’s made for professional cinematographers for use on film productions where millions are at stake. They have to know that they’ll nail the shot every time, since they burn it at 90 feet/minute (by contrast, I burn 90 feet in about six months). That’s why it’s not as pushable as Tri-X or HP5, it doesn’t have to be. Need more light? Have the crew set up more lights. Is the shadow side of that girl too dark? Have a grip hold a white card on her. And they don’t even know what reciprocity is, since they work at only one shutter speed, 1/48. Still shooters can use that narrower latitude to make shadows fall off nicely, just like in 1959.
Another fun thing: In the last two years, a 400’ of XX has gone from $280 to $293 (B&H) = $73.37/100’, but a 100’ of Tri-X has gone from $100 to $150. And unlike TX, EK hasn’t screwed w/XX. It’s still Pure, Uncut 1959.
Apologies for the huge screed. Have a lovely day!
XX is a quality film.
Great video
Fomapan my best of the best film
From what I’ve seen from other reviews on this film, people are recommending shooting this at 200-250 iso for best results, I shot loads of this film in college at 400 with good results though, can’t remember what developer we used. I have ordered 10 rolls to explore shooting at different iso , thanks for your video, it was very interesting but may have been more informative by shooting at 200 iso also
You can never go by what speed others shoot the films at unless you know their development process. Best to always test the films yourself in different lighting conditions with your preferred developer and see how it works for you. I do that.
Great video, must say I really do like the look of that film, I’ll keep an eye out for that. I’m sure it should be easy enough to get hold of, I think WEX may sell it as they do have a decent range of film stock and do seem to be cheaper than most, plus no postage to pay either which is always a bonus. Saying that, it’s been a while since I bought any as I mainly shoot digital but was also given a couple of rolls of film along with a Minolta SLR, Lens and padded holster bag, which was badly stained, tried washing it but to no avail. The stain, and the smell was there to stay,can’t complain for free though.
I'be not seen it on WEX. Siilverprint seem too be the cheapest I found.
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss Not heard of them, thanks for the tip
Can you please make a video about how to uncurl the film negatives
Wow, yeah it happens. Usually I find with old expired film or occasionally a film that has been loaded from the end of the manufacturers line. They generally flatten over time in your negative sleeve (if that sleeve is compacted eventually by other sleeves) or, put the sleeve in a heavy book for a few days.
hi maestro, If I remember this film is the formula of the long time ago HP, the ancestro of hp5 and hp5+ of ilford .. for the price and to shoot and shoot... we hope the day of trix400 on the same price. try the Bergger pancro400, very nice film and not so expensive. nice day shooting
I've used the pancro film a number of times. It's nice.
You know, I wish I knew how you make those 'nothing' photos look so interesting!
I just find an angle James. I think we also see someone else's photos as interesting. I do.
Tried a semi-stand development for the 1st time yesterday on a roll of fomapan 200. Negatives came out funky and thin. Was usually slightly overexposing the shots so I'm guessing it was underdevelopment. I'll give stand a shot again in the future but I'll probably stick with regular development most of the time in the future. Also, I was experimenting with Ilfosol 3 (after some internet research) because it was the only thing I had on hand at the time. So that's also probably another issue. Or the fact that I'm very much a beginner. lol
Beautiful contrast. I love this film, I find it very similar to tmax🤘🏿
The electrical pol looks good as is... on my phone, it looks dramatic.
I generally shoot fomo in a camera , only kidding Roger, I have never used it but heard really good reports about so just ordered a few rolls to try, thanks fir another enjoyable video
Enjoy Martin!
I don't get it, ive seen many test of fomapan and is always very grany, but your resoults WITH RODINAL are quite nice. I am going to give it a try, 100%. I have ilfosol 3, though.
So,what I understand that you mean when sunny day,this roll can be shot at iso400?but when light overcast shot at iso 100?
Foma 400 in Rodinal is pretty good. It really sings in Caffenol. But if you plan on using HC-110, you really need to expose it at E.I. 250 or else the contrast just shoots-up into the stratosphere.
I had same issues with it at the beginning, it seems that using a lower dilution (1:63 or 1:50) would help to control the highlights. If I tray development my film I will be using hc110 at 1:50.
Great work and info Roger. I have been debating getting some, and after this video I will get some and give it a go. I'll let you know how I do. Thank you
Please do, thanks!
Great video , Roger. And my favorite film stocks in 35mm & 120. I develop in Ilfosol 3 or D76, what ever i have open at the time. For hand held I use 400 and tripod 100. Thanks. Ken
Cheers Ken
Fomapan 400 in Rodinal is crazy combination. I am huge fan of it, especially pushed to 1600 :-).
Pushed to 1600! I imagine deep contrast and bigger grain?
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss exactly, especially bigger grain. You will love it for some types of scenes. Also i think that F400 need to be developed in more contrasty way, because otherwise it will give you ... let say ... dull negatives.
The other day I shot some foma 400 and developed it in adox fx39 1+9, 12.30 at 21 degrees (C), really like that combo, very acceptable grain. Next on the list is foma 200 and fx39. Kodak d76 is nice too with foma, xtol not at all (although being a big fan of xtol/ADOX xt3)
FX39 is awesome.
Great video, loved the shots developed at ISO 100, curious to know how you split your rolls in half without accidentally cutting any photo.
It's hit and miss so when I am shooting I make sure (as well as I can) not to shoot anything decent around the halfway mark. I then cut the leader away and fold the film in half and make the cut. Usually I hit a frame.
If you want to accentuate grain and get that gritty look try stock D-23 for 7 min, rating the film at 250 ISO.
I wasn't a big fan of Foma 400 in Rodinal, but admittedly only shot a handful of rolls. I found it too grainy, but I'm really thinking that I need to buy a bulk roll of it and give it a proper shake. I've been loading up on 100ft tins rather than buying individual rolls to keep the cost down. Maybe Xtol will tame the contrast a bit and manage the grain. Or, maybe ID-11/D76 as some mid-point between Xtol and Rodinal.
Yes try another developer away from Rodinal if you don't want the grain.
Used Fomapan 400 quite often recently. It is not a fine grain film but for street and architecture okay. Not so good for portraits or nature.
As Rodinal is my go-to developer I bath it in 1+25 at 18 degrees Celsius for 7:30. I also tried Xtol 1:1 but it was not much better. So I stick to Rodinal.
I only use stand development when pushing to 1600.
Did you try out the film at lower dev temps like 18 or even 16? If so what were your experience there?
No I didn't try other temps Ingo. I can only imagine a longer development time or higher dilutions.
I always thought that Rodinal at 1:25 is not enough to reach even 100 asa?
Also, some people say that Foma 400 is only a true 260 iso film? What do you say?
I think there are many that prefer to shoot it at 320, 250 or 200. You've really got to experiment yourself with your own development and see how it suits you. Rodinal is fine at 1:25. About the best ratio I'd say. 16ml of Rodinal for a 35mm film (400ml soup). 1:50 would be even less at 8ml.
It's definitely a bit of a higher contrast look at 400 but to be honest the images look great if you don't mind a bit stronger contrast. Sometimes having detail in absolutely every square mm of the frame can distract from your chosen subject!
I'm really tempted to buy a bulk loader and 30m of fomapan now...
I enjoy buying 100ft tins, only the cheaper stuff though.
Interesting... is the modern Rodinal really as sustainable as years ago....? Wil it work stilll for years?
when I look at the Datasheet from Foma and Adox not.
I've had a bottle for well over a year in the past. My experience so far, but from what I've heard from others it can exceed that.
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss I read various stories on the internet, but at least not the mighty longevity of the past. but nice to know that 1 year and even longer the Adox Rodinal still works. Do you leave the Rodinal in its original packaging? Are you injecting some, like Protecan gas or something? Thank you! 👍
@@nicknick099 No, I just leave it in it's original bottle until its gone.
I bought a 17m roll and have now shot some film with different cameras. I haven't developed one with Rodinal yet, but with the Wehner developer. Exposed at 200 ISO, then at the normal time or at 400, but then I developed it as if the film was pushed one step. That has given me the best results. It's definitely usable, especially because it's so cheap. But it's definitely not my favorite film. The Fomapan 100 is better there, but not as fast.
I use Fomapan 400 for 4x5 and 120, though I prefer Fomapan 200 or Ilford HP5/FP4 for 120. For 35mm I find Fomapan 400 too "harsh" and grainy for my taste so for that I use Ilford as here in Finland the price difference is not that great. I have found I need to shoot Foma 400 at something like ISO 150 to get decent negatives. I'm quite sure it's the film as I shoot HP5 at 400 using the same cameras and metering and it works great. I develop in Pyrocat HD 1+1+100 14 minutes for Foma 400.
If that works for you and your development and you don't need the speed Murgoh
I found that Fomapan at 400 works best with Rodinal stand developing for me!!! The only issue i have with Foma is that the film base is brittle and can tear in some older rough cameras!!!
I've never noticed that Brian. Something to watch out for!
It's a great film for the price Roger, i been using a lot more and pushing to 1600. Hp5 it's better but almost the double the price. You must try with color filters and see if you like. Cheers mate 👍
Double the price? Wow, here in Finland they cost almost the same, something like 5 euros/roll for Fomapan and 5.50-6 for Ilford.
@@Murgoh here in Portugal if I buy hp5 in bulk 30,5m cost me between 90€ and 110€ in some places. If i buy a single roll cost between 7€ and 8,50€. In other hand fomapan in bulk 30,5m cost about 60€ and I buy from Germany, I can't find here anywhere. And a single roll 4,80€ in Portugal. It's not the double the price but it's almost there.
Cheers Peds! Hope you and your family are well :)
If that fomapan was stand developed for 1 hr, cut the time to 45 min when the film is rated 100. Worth a try anyway. but I will try Rodinal diluted 1:25 for 4 minutes first.
Hello Roger. Greetings from Germany. One Question, where do you buy your ORWO film? Stay safe and healthy 😀 Harald
Hi Harald. I buy it from a UK stockist in tins of 100ft. ORWO UK. BUT...... You can buy it as Lomography Potsdam 100 or Silberra 54UN. Both readily available.
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss Hello Roger, Thank you very much for your Info. Go on with your Great work.
Harald
Foma is an acquired taste. My first few rolls were meh, but I learned to use it. I never had the grain issues others get, being a D-76 user. Perhaps you might like the D76+Foma combo for less grainy results. Hell, I barely get any grain pushing to 1600!
@Dane M, I use D-76 on HP5 like this but I'm considering to try the same with Foma. Do you use stock solution or dilute it 1+1?
@john murch Stock, with times provided by the Massive Dev Chart. Good luck!
Rodinal is not a fine grain developer. It is a high acutance developer. So if you have a single tone like a blue sky, the grain is going to be clearly visible, especially at box speed of faster.
Any opinion on how Foma compares to Kentmere? They're both about the same price. Or Arista?
I did a video a few months back Scott on Foma, Kentmere and HP5.
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss That you did. Silly me.
I love Fomapan 400. I tried X-Tol and Rodinal with it (shot at boxspeed and at 250). So far I had the best results in X-Tol 1:1
But Rodinal is my go to most of the times cause it's easy to use and it's cheap.
One thing about Stand dev : if I understand the process correctly, the goal is to developed until exhaustion of the developer. So when you use just a cut of a 36 roll, should you not tone down the quantity of developer used ? If you develop 12 shots from a roll, shouldn't you use only 1/3 of the recommended quantity ?
I'm wondering cause I developed a small piece of Foma 100 yesterday (trying a new camera) in rodinal 1:100 stand dev 1h (5 ml in 500 ml of water). And the negs turned out over exposed. I know the shutter speeds are fine on this camera. So I'm wondering if using a full 5 ml of rodinal wasn't just too much for a fraction of the 36 roll and I over developed it.
Hmmmm. Makes sense. I'm gonna have to try that Julien. What about 24 exposures compared to 36? You'd still stand the same. But I wonder if the results would differ because of the surface area. Interesting
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss yeah I plan on trying that with 1,5 rolls of foma 100 (cheap fo test). Both filled with the same shot of an indoor scene so that the shots are all exposed the same. Then develop 1 of the 36 films fully in 5ml rodinal (for 500ml water). 2nd film I'll shoot just half of it and develop it with same quantities and see how it goes.
I had the same experience with 1h. I tried 40 min with one agitation in the middle and the results were very good. May be you can try next time!
@@michelk5 Thanks, with more experiment in stand dev, I tend to agree with you. The result feels more time related than "film surface to develop" related.
My own conclusion is that the slower the box speed of the film is, the shorter the stand development should be.
@@stratocactus ok that's a good point. Did you experience the same with other film brands?
Did you try fomapan 400 stand dev in rodinal? I have some 120 format rolls and I wonder if 1h is too much time also with 400 iso film.
G'day Rog, have you considered wacking the foma 400 through ID-11 at stock?
Even though I have a shed load of Rodinal kicking about, I recently made up some of that two part classic and it was great to get back into such a quality product
No Andy. I chose Rodinal for the video as I notice more people use it with Foma. ID-11 would give less grain I imagine especially at stock! I used it yesterday on a new vlog coming soon.
I love fomapan for street photography, but it really seems to fall apart for lots of leafy or green scenes. I'm not sure why, but it seems to just look a bit hazy. I'm not sure if it's the same film, but I really like the holga 400. It seems to perform differently, but it might just be a placebo.
Never heard of Holga 400 film. I think the Foma 400 can be a bit bloomy in the highlights.
ah Foma 400. I've actually been shooting this a lot lately. I've been shooting it at 800 in winter (sometimes 1600), but actually really like it pulled at 200 which is more possible now as the days get longer.
Normally develop in id11 when pulling and rodinal when pushing (I lean into the look either way).
I think when the batch I bought is finished I'll be going back to kentmere 400 as my everyday film. It pushes better in my opinion with less contrast. this is better for my scanning as I don't have a darkroom. But the kicker is that my Foma always seems to have damage after developing. more scratches and sometimes just bits missing from images. I don't have this with any other film. I like it, but it's a pain.
I've only found Foma troubles with 120. I've got a tin of Kentmere 400. Can't get on with it t all lol
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss that's interesting. Maybe it's because I shot kentmere exclusively for about 2 years, so got used to it. The only time I prefer the Foma is when pulling it.
Try it in D76
i Roger have you ever try Paranol-S by Tetenal?
I have not Emil. Was it some kind of paracetamol formula ?
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss its a version of Rodinal made by Tetenal. It have some extended times for most films but in exchange you get huge amount of sharpness and a good speed from the film.
Cheers.
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss definitely not among the most used developers but definitely worth a try
I normally just shoot formapan
Roger find it an OK film
This is late and maybe you're on it now but you have the lav and camera mic on at the same time for a large portion of the video and it sounds really strange.
Rodinal is not perhaps the best developer to use with Foma films, mainly due to their relative inherent graininess compared to films from Kodak and Ilford. Rodinal is a very low sulphite/high PH solution. High PH makes for emulsion swelling quite rapidly which accentuates the grain structure, and low sulphite content means little to no ' solvent ' effect on the grain boundaries. The net effect is high acutance and apparent sharpness at the expense of prominent grain and often uncontrollable highlights. Rodinal can give decent results with some fine grain films in low dilutions, such as the old Fuji Acros 100, Ilford PanF plus and the Kodak Tmax 100. I really don't understand for the love of god, why Rodinal is still produced after nearly 130 years, as there are much better developers around. I experimented with Agfa Rodinal in the early 1980s and decided then that this developer was not suitable for my landscape work, unless grain the size of a golf ball was somehow deemed aesthetically pleasing, which never was for me. The 510 Pyro you were experimenting with works very well with Foma films. There is also the issue of these Foma films all being over rated at box speed. As a matter of routine they should be used at at least 1/2 the box iso with dev times adjusted. I have found that Fomapan 400 to be more like an iso 200 film. The photographs though looked delightful on my small laptop screen.
I don't mind Rodinal but not so much for portraits or scapes as you say. I think the love for Rodinal comes from the beginners inquisitiveness to try stand development. Thats how I came across it. And then play with other dilutions. Always a pleasure to read your comments lensman, cheers. I also felt I could have gone to 200 and developed normally.
I mostly use fomapan 400 in 120. Once Once I tried shooting Foma 400 in the night and pushed it to 800 in adox rodinal. Many people say that foma 400 has terrible grain so I was very surprised when the grain went out much softer than I thought it would. Also once I shot whole roll of foma 400 with my friend in Corina which is same as Holga but manufactured in 1960's in Czechoslovakia and we said to ourselves, just try to push it to 1600 for the fun of it. It also came out decent.
All your images are out of focus. You might wish to have your camera/lens checked.
I can't see they are. If so possibly me still getting used to the Leica MP rangefinder. Can you give me a couple of examples please. Cheers.