Polaroid type 55 versus Fomapan 100 in rodinal 1/50 same difference or better? what say you?

[william_littman1]

Certainly anticipating the availability of the new 55 film expected by next summer

but reluctant to depend solely on something i have no idea which speed and which price and which final result.

I was very exited tp learn from some of my clients that Fomapan 100 in rodinal 1/50 can be indistinguishable from the old type 55

minus the funky edges which after 70 years are not so novel .

 

Apps like photoshop for mobile phones have this kind of trick border for selfies .

In any event I always sought 55 for its panatomic feel and not for the print which required fixing.

 

I care about the negative and happy there is a currently available film that can be purchased for a dollAr a sheet which brongs me back to

2001 price wise.

The second aspect I like is the ability to push and pull

and which after developing one sheet could let you tweek a whole job

plus i dont have to wait a year.

Have you guys had any experience wih it?

Thank you.

[leicaglow]

Not sure what youre asking exactly, but I have had experience with both films in the past. I use type

55 for one reason only: to have a 4x5 inch negative I can tweak on the spot. It isnt cheap, but

bracketing never is. And the sodium sulfite always makes a mess. Frankly, I think a pro who knows

how to read a negative, would be happy with Type 54 and a 1/2... an instant film with just the

negative, and no print. The reason is that the speed of the print never matched the speed of the film.

As for Fomapan, it is a nice film, but I wouldnt go out of my way to buy it. It works nicely in Pyro, but

I hate the idea of having to use hardener to fix it.

 

I really like Adox, but moreso when it was cheaper. And I used Acros almost exclusively until Lex forced me to take a better look at Tmax. After all the testing of films and paper, I realized what I really need is a single film that will be around awhile, and a consistent process that works everytime for it.

 

By the way, William, good to see you around. Your cameras are stunning pieces of Art. Is Brad Pitt still shooting his Littman camera?

[sheldonnalos]

<p>I shoot 8x10 Fomapan 100 and develop in Rodinal 1:50. It's a nice combo, and relatively affordable. I bought the film from Freestyle, marketed as their Arista EDU Ultra 100 film, but it's the same stuff as Fomapan 100.</p>

[drew bedo]

<p>I am a little confused: Are we talking about "instant" film or regular sheet film? somehow I am not following the discussion.</p>

[jnanian]

<p>type 55 film was similar to if not the same as panatomic x<br>

maybe someone can comment on the similarities between fomapan100<br>

and panatomic x. i haven't used rodinal but i have used pan x and fomapan<br>

and they are both beautiful films nice and tight grained.</p>

[drew bedo]

<p>Iused to gwr Ultra-sound film in 8x10 froma clinic called "Ektascan". After a few tests, I rated it at ISO 200 and processed it in the clinic's automatic roller transport processor; the sheets came out dry in 90 seconds!. The chemistry was compatible with Tri-X. It was fine grained and moderately fast with a nice tonal range, I liked I then . . .and miss it now.</p>

[william_littman1]

Wow I must have not turned on the notifier as I just came bk today and saw the thoughtful responses.

Thank you!!!

True about 55 and panatomic haha

I was a crash test dummy for film rxperimentation and teaching peoplehow to shoot fashion in their kodak seminars.

 

I dont know if the range of fomapan and t55 is identical but bloody close.

 

Regarrding T55 as being insant film there is one important misconception.

It takes you 30 to 45 minutes to process your film on a jobo tank from start to finish

 

Type 55 if cleared properly and rinsed to be semi archival would rake you a 1/2 day to process and and turn you into an

ambulant esoteric gypsy camp on your shooting set with buckets liquids and tupperware and baggies and clotheslines and

and and and etc etc which in some cases you have the extra time to deal with.v

In some cases you absobloodylootely do not!!

 

Price...

 

Rodinal diluted w an estimated cost if 10 c per sheet .

Band H sells a 50 sheet box. of fomapan for about 40-50 .

That brings your total cost to about 1.25 tops and which may decrease significantly if you know how to reuse chemicals

 

I got a very detailed heads up at the show that new 55 has made some progress but has a huge gap to bridge from here to

the shelves. Nobody knows what its going to look like the cost estimated at circa 6 usd per sheet and nobody knows who

the suppliers will ne or its effective speed.

 

The opposite is also true.

You now know there is a film which can give u t 55 results at T55 prices of 1995.

You know how to develop it in less time than it took to deal with 55 and you can go out and shoot tomorrow.

 

Im a very loyal supporter of film which comes second to being a loyal supporter if my photography practise.

 

When New 55 is made available if it is superior to the fomapan option I will gladly get on board but its been 6 years since

Polaroid 55 was discontinued and I alwaysthought the positive was horrible needing ti be coated so Im only interested in a

Panatomic type neg .relatively simplified process. and having an option that if i have to shoot an extensive art projekt like a

book I will be able to afford it.

 

BTW if you use Fomapan on 810 with an identical dilution you should end up with a lesser kontrast probably a more

somber look.

Every format is its own animal with its own math.

Ei

what u light up with kinoflow on 35 and go to 45 and u need hmi to get similar kontrast and tgen go to 810 and u may

need defused strobe to get close .

But if you are using the same light kontrast then your developer concentration should be higher on a larger format.

[william_littman1]

Wow I must have not turned on the notifier as I just came bk today and saw the thoughtful responses.

Thank you!!!

True about 55 and panatomic haha

I was a crash test dummy for film experimentation and teaching people how to shoot fashion in their kodak seminars.

 

I dont know if the range of fomapan and t55 is identical but bloody close.

 

Regarding T55 as being insant film there is one important misconception.

It takes you 30 to 45 minutes to process your film on a jobo tank from start to finish

 

Type 55 if cleared properly and rinsed to be semi archival would rake you a 1/2 day to process and and turn you into an

ambulant esoteric gypsy camp on your shooting set with buckets liquids and tupperware and baggies and clotheslines and

and and and etc etc which in some cases you have the extra time to deal with.v

In some cases you absobloodylootely do not!!

 

Price...

 

Rodinal diluted w an estimated cost if 10 c per sheet .

Band H sells a 50 sheet box. of fomapan for about 40-50 .

That brings your total cost to about 1.25 tops and which may decrease significantly if you know how to reuse chemicals

 

I got a very detailed heads up at the show that new 55 has made some progress but has a huge gap to bridge from here to

the shelves. Nobody knows what its going to look like the cost estimated at circa 6 usd per sheet and nobody knows who

the suppliers will ne or its effective speed.

 

The opposite is also true.

You now know there is a film which can give u t 55 results at T55 prices of 1995.

You know how to develop it in less time than it took to deal with 55 and you can go out and shoot tomorrow.

 

Im a very loyal supporter of film which comes second to being a loyal supporter if my photography practise.

 

When New 55 is made available if it is superior to the fomapan option I will gladly get on board but its been 6 years since

Polaroid 55 was discontinued and I alwaysthought the positive was horrible needing ti be coated so Im only interested in a

Panatomic type neg .relatively simplified process. and having an option that if i have to shoot an extensive art projekt like a

book I will be able to afford it.

 

BTW if you use Fomapan on 810 with an identical dilution you should end up with a lesser kontrast probably a more

somber look.

Every format is its own animal with its own math.

Ei

what u light up with kinoflow on 35 and go to 45 and u need hmi to get similar kontrast and tgen go to 810 and u may

need defused strobe to get close .

But if you are using the same light kontrast then your developer concentration should be higher on a larger format.

[william_littman1]

My reference to spending 1/2 day to clear rinse dry sleeve old 55

Is because I was air drying and allowing for a decent fix time.

When processing wet films I use less space and time so type 55 was

never instant when it came to everything after it was peeled apart and a great film

but i often wonder why its users perceive other wet films as being more laborious.

I dont think that is true.