Це відео не доступне.
Перепрошуємо.
Cheap Film Doesn't have to Suck | Fomapan 100 Review
Вставка
- Опубліковано 5 лип 2023
- Fomapan 100 is a cheap black and white 100 ISO negative film that ticks all of the boxes; making it easily one of the best value-per-dollar film stocks you can buy.
Want to support the channel? Consider buying me a coffee. (I really appreicate the support, thank you!)
www.buymeacoff...
The supplies I use (affiliate):
Epson V600
Amazon (US): amzn.to/3XuWdvn
As an amazon.com associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Image Credits:
Josef Šrámek ml., CC BY 4.0
creativecommon..., via Wikimedia Commons
archiv Jaroslav Hrůza, CC BY-SA 3.0 creativecommon..., via Wikimedia Commons
I use Fomapan 100, Fomapan 400, and ferrania 135 films. I use Bellini Ecofilm (xtol) as developer. I can tell ya that FP100 is absolutely awesome. Sincerely, it provides wonderful contrast, wide tonal range, and a gorgeous grain. I shot this film from 100 to 400 iso, always good results. I use Fomapan since many years, i never encountered any defect at all. And give a try to fomabrom and fomatone baryta papers, absolutely amazing
I used to shoot fomapan for many years. Some negatives I have are more than 60 years old (from my father) and I don't see any significant fading. My negatives are mostly medium format.
This is good to hear. Thanks!
I am getting fine grain, impressive sharpness and rich tonality using Foma 100 in Rodinal. I call it my 20/20 development. Rodinal 1-100, 20 second agitation up front, 20 more at 10 minutes and dump at 20 minutes. This has become my everyday film. I am trying the new Arista Pan 100 (not EDU) but so far I am not ready to use it on a regular basis.
Fomapan 100 has always been a fav of mine! For a 100 iso film, and for the price, it’s hard to find a nicer film. And I for one enjoy the vintage feel/halation of it. Contrast is on point for me, and finely grained. Looks really good in Rodinal
I just picked up some Rodinal. I’m pretty busy at work, so I’ve been using a lab, but as soon as I get time to develop film myself again I look forward to trying Fomapan 100 in Rodinal.
Fomapan is becoming my favorite because of the prices. I really like the 400.
I’ve heard that Foma film has extended red sensitivity, similar to tri-x, and that is what gives it that contrast and older look I believe. I’ve shot Foma 200 and enlarged it and was very happy with the sharpness and dynamic range. In fact, I was very surprised by how much dynamic range it had as I had pretty sloppy exposures on the roll. But the negatives were delicate and thin, which is why I usually go Kentmere for a cheaper film just because the film base is easier to work with, though I will say I think the Foma has more dynamic range.
Not all Foma. Of the three common ones (Foma 100, 200, and 400) only the 400 has extended red sensitivity. The Foma 200 has the same standard panchromatic sensitivity Tri-X has. The other Foma film with extended red sensitivity is Foma Retropan 320.
I've used all speeds, Fomapan and Arista, and my favorite is asa 200. I saw a video from Lina Bessonova
where she explains that Foma claims that Fomapan 200 is a traditional grain/T-grain mix. Maybe that's why I perceive more acutance from that specific speed. Great video by the way. =)
This makes me even more eager to try the 200.
I've shot with F200 last year and gotta say it's a nice film to work at. I'd typically shoot it at EI 100 but develop it for ISO 200. And this film is indeed a hybrid cubic and tabular grain film, so best fix it for at least 15% longer than usual. I recommend it as an "everyday" version of T-MAX or Delta.
Fomapan 100 is already sitting on my desk. I only need go out and use it. 🙂
I have been a fan for years!!! A lot of Freestyle films are rebranded Foma films and actually less expensive!!!
I was very critical about fomapan… until I actually tried it. Its frighin great. Still not my favourite (that would be FP4) but way nicer than across 2 or hp5
I started shooting it (only 120) because of the price, but now it's great to have a brick available for summer shooting. I like it's rendition and oldschool character to boot. So far only processed it in HC110 Dil H, Rodinal and XTOL but liked all the combinations. Foma in general is good to shoot at a lower EI than the ISO rating.
There are some manufacturing inconsistencies, such as pinholes or black spots; the batch I have (2020-21 bought) is Foma branded but has "Ultra" rebates, so there we know who makes the Arista film ;)
As of the fading, what is the source? B&W should not fade like color films as the final negative is metallic silver and not dye clouds. As an archival counterargument: 120 and sheet are coated on polyester base which is much more stable on the longterm than acetate (no vinegar syndrome).
Forma does VERY well with semi-stand development. I use Hc/110 with a tiny bit of rodinal. Comes out looking very good and takes good advantage of the film latitude.
I've tried both Fomapan 100 (developed in Rollei Supergrain and Bellini Ecofilm) and Fomapan 200 (in Rodinal, Bellini Ecofilm, and Kodak Xtol) and I gotta say that the "classic" look of these films is indeed true. Some of my technically-best shots were also made on these flms. I'm currently liking Fomapan 100 for the more traditional look that made me love ADOX CHS 100 II.
My rule of thumb is to expose Fomapan films lower than their rated ISO values especially with developers like Rodinal which typically pull a 2/3 stop from the nominal ISO. In my tests, Fomapan 100 gets full spectrum response at EI 64 when developed in Rollei Supergrain and EI 80 on Bellini Ecofilm.
Funnily enough, though the Fomapan line has "notoriously bad" reciprocity failure values, the longer exposure times were easier for me to time long exposure shots (minutes are easier to count over seconds).
Man I love Foma and Arista but I got a bad bulk roll from B&H and was very disappointed. I would suggest buying single rolls so that you can switch batch numbers quickly if needed.
There were little orbs, lines of halides missing in the emulsion, and inconsistent grain. Just my anecdotal experience though
This is good advice. Thank you.
Great video
I’ve so far only shot the Foma 400 and have been very disappointed so far. Just can’t get a decent exposure at any speed and the negatives turn out too thin for printing in the darkroom.
In canada the flic films rerolls are a very good price for foma locally
How does it compare to the Rollei Retro 8OS?
Here in Brazil film is so expensive (as in the other parts in the world as I see) and Formapan reach us 2x more expensive than in US. I´ve achieved very good results with all the Fomapan familhy specially 100 and 200. I´ve got two prints on my wall made with it and my experience is very good. Arriving now in the channel and I want to congratulate you for the content that I´ve just started to explore.
You can order a bulk for pennies from Czechia or Poland
@@Xisbrezatsgzormd It´s a good idea but I need to check the taxes to pay when arrives here in Brazi.
This looks way better than HP5. But that archival instability sounds concerning. Thank you Aperture Dundee
I’m not sure how big of an issue it is. I haven’t any long enough to tell, but it is something that I ran across more than once while researching the video.
Foma 100 120 is literal godsend. Fine grain and good contrast for the price.
The poor archival quality is a criticism I haven't heard before. Interesting.
фомапан 400 сильно скручивается, а так да детализация хорошая.
How can you talk about a film stock after having shot only two rolls that you don't even processed by yourself ?
This is really the youtube caricature the old dudes are laughing about on forums.
At least you did some good research and give goods infos and context... be thanked for that.
Fomapan 100 is a good film because it is cheap... For the price it is ok but it is far from (and doesnt try to) competing with more modern and expensive film stocks.
I experienced some prety bad defects on 120 (100 or 400) but it is like 1 out of 10 rolls so for the price it is still ok. I am much more pleased by the results and the quality consistency of the sheets films, 4x5 and 13x18cm.
I simply discovered and enjoyed a film stock, and felt others might enjoy it too. I see no problem with that, do you? At no point did I claim to be the ultimate authority. Not to mention, the lab I used is a very popular one. The result I get when I develop might not match what you get, but if we both used the same lab the result should logically be similar. Just my two cents.
Developing film is perhaps the easiest part of the whole process. Why spend money on a lab when you can have more fun doing it yourself? @@noahvonhatten
Why anyone (who isn't new and has actually tried various films) buys HP5 let alone Tri-X boggles my mind. It's the exact same thing as fomapan or kentmere, you're literally just throwing money in a pit because of consumerism conditioning or... something, again it boggles my mind, so I can't describe the reasons.
really?😀
@@zhongyao-sc1lj Apparently it boggles your mind too since you also can't even think of a reason.
@@gavinjenkins899 what's the reason?
@@zhongyao-sc1lj My point was there is no reason to pay for the identical expensive ones. So I don't have a reason because I don't think there is one. T-grain is actually a bit different and may be worth more, but other classical grain films like I listed Hp5 and tri-x, nah
all you picture were developed or scanned.
They were scanned. I don’t have a darkroom set up at the moment, although I want to get into that again soon.
@@noahvonhattenimage were JPG or tif
I have quite liked Fomapan 100 so far with one exception: it is the most infuriating film stock I have ever tried to scan. 35mm is a bit annoying, but the 120 is just about driving me to distraction. It just loves to curl, flop around, and head for the floor. :) That having been said, I can't fault the resulting image, especially for the price.