marek sramek

<p>Yes, it really is 125-160 ISO film. Even 160 is too optimistic in some devs. With Rodinal I would probably suggest even E.I. 100. <br>

BTW, Fomapan 200 looks amazing in Amaloco AM74 (E.I. 160) - very nice tonality.</p>

Have a look at

 

http://www.foma.cz/Upload/foma/prilohy/F_pan_100_en.pdf

 

Diagrams on the second page say it all.

I too shot a lot of pan 400 and did not really see any difference compared to HP5+. If you get terribly different results, something else must had gone wrong (I would not blame the film - it is really good).

To me, pan 100 is just a cheaper version of FP4 Plus. Might be even the old FP4 (not plus)? Who knows... Generally very good film.

Fomapan 100 in FX-39 @ EI 64

Jay, did you test DSD-10 also with Fomapan 200?

I have done first tests of AM-74 on Fomapan 200 and it works really well. I could easily expose the film at EI 200 without much harm. For my street photography it is good enough. Here is an example pic, it is 70% crop of the full frame.<div></div>

Begin with HC-110 or D-76/ID-11.

Sometimes I had to develop my film immediately after it has been taken off the camera, and in those cases it is very difficult to load it on the wheel of the tank properly, that is the emulsion side inwards. So I just loaded it the emulsion side outwards. Films loaded and developed this way become incredibly flat and great for scanning.

One more question, Robert. I wonder if you would know whether AM 20 is also usable with my most favorite film Ilford HP5+. I guess the grain would be pretty visible but probably also extremely sharp, am I right? What would be the advisable speed for this combo? Is it really E.I. 800, as suggested by the instruction manual (this sounds rather attractive for some applications), or will I get better results at E.I. 400? Just in case you or anybody else would know. Thanks again.

I guess Foma 100 and 400 would be also pretty old stuff. Foma 200 is new but it has quite old look.

LC29 is kind of HC-110 so I guess it will have really long shelf life.

Great to have the info right from the source. Thanks again. I am looking forward to experiment.

Thanks, but I am still a bit confused as to whether I have to use gloves with AM 20 or not. AFAIK, with regular catechol developers it is a must, but I would be probably lazy to do that. That is why I ask.

That is what I thought too. OTOH, if the developer is not really staining, then there probably is not true pyrocatechin in it but only some derivatives? All the pyrocatechin developers I know are staining (I might be wrong - I do not know much about it). AFAIK, real pyrocatechin could be even more toxic than pyrogallol.

Thanks very much, Robert. Is this developer more toxic than other regular developers (such as HC-110, D-76 or AM-74)? I have been given the Czech instruction sheet in Foto Skoda and I read it is made of pyracatechin. Does that mean I should rather use gloves with it? I normally do not use gloves for any of my darkroom work.

Is there any advantage in using AM 20 as opposed to AM 74 - especially with Foma 200? I understand it is a kind of surface developer that is probably more delicate to use than, lets say AM 74. Am I right? But would it produce any better results?

I get great results with Foma 400 exposed at E.I.200, developed in HC-110 (dil. H) for 11 minutes. In fact, as Foma�s charts betray, this film is only about 200 ASA - certainly not 400 ASA. With proper exposure you may get really pleasing results with it - especially with HC-110.

I guess this question is primarily aimed at Robert Vonk. I was finally happy to

buy AM 74 here in Prague today and I am looking forward to use it up with my

large stock of Fomapan 200. But I have also seen a new developer at the shop. So

what is this AM 20 actually good for? It seems to be a speed increasing

developer. How does it work with Foma films? Thanks.

Yes, it is bad developer. That is why I stopped using Ilfosol some time ago too.

Thanks to all.

Robert, I was actually planning to buy some AM74 in Foto-Skoda in Prague but the developer is out of stock at the moment, so I have to wait or possibly try Microphen or Excell (Xtol-like developer produced by Foma).

I have been given quit a lot of Foma 200 in bulk. Now, I know its real speed is

about 100-125 ASA (I would usually developed it at 100 ASA in HC-110). Is there

any developer that would help me to get the full box speed of 200 ASA? Here in

the Czech Republic I can get products from Ilford, Agfa, Kodak, Foma, Tetenal

and some of Labor Partner and Amaloco. I do not make developers from scratch �

(I do not own scales and also have no clue where to get any chemicals � they

just do not sell them in the photo shops here). I know there are quite a lot of

speed enhancing developers, but some of them don�t work very well with Foma 200.

I have seen recently some graphs that betrayed that even Tmax dev. can hardly

get only 125 ASA of this film. What is your experience? What would you suggest?

Do I want just too much of this film? Thanks.

It would be great to have similar charts also for other developers and films. (I mean other manufacturer's films). Foma has done a good job on this.

Could it possibly mean that with these developers you can easily get very high contrast, i.e. "gamma 1"? With many developers this is impossible, no matter how long the development time is. Especially on faster films, it is extremely difficult to reach more than 0.8 or 0.9 with many developers. Though, this is not actually a problem, bacause for normal use you need only gamma range of 0.55 - 0.7. But that is just my guess, I have never used these developers, they do not sell them here in Europe (Czech Republic).

"G" is the contrast. Normal contrast for condensor enlargers and scanners is about 0.55. Normal contrast for diffuser enlargers is about 0.7. Above mentioned contrast of 0.6 - 0.65 represents a middle way. Labs usually develop films for this middle contrast. Now, Foma chart on Fomapan 400 actually depicts the relation between the development time "t", ISO "S" and contrast "G". You can notice that with longer development time you get higher ISO and higher contrast. So, if you are for example used to develop your films for contrast 0.6 (the "G" curve on the right), the chart tells you that the proper time for ID11/D76 (stock) is about 6.5 minutes (the bottom "t" line), and you should expose your film at 200 ASA (the "S" curve on the left).

Thanks very much for all your suggestions. I looked into the camera and the wires seem to be OK. I have also bought some silver-oxide batteries and will see what happens. I may try the lithium CR1/3N later too. Thanks again.