[BandeauRouge]

Ive experienced wierdness with the antihalation layer that others have mentioned on photrio..

but i also get odd crap that no on understands... square camera off on a wall, aim at flat surface,and rotate the camera slightly can create bizarre blank areas in frames no one understands.

even when the spot meter circle is moved from one side of a sheet of paper to the other..

[kypfer]

I will shot rest of it, have still 2 rolls of 100 but then I will switch to something else. Maybe Rollei or maybe I try Ferrania that has so much hype recently.

If you want total reliability and repeatability … Ilford FP4 in ID-11 … maybe more expensive, but it's good

[HC-110]

Hello.

I have been shooting Fomapan 100 a lot last year and I also ran into this problem recently. As I load bulk, I fed an unexposed filmstrip directly from the roll to my developing reel and get the same artifacts looking like static-discharge arcs. As my film didn't go through a bulkloader or a cartridge or camera and as the problems appeared with a new 100-feet roll, I guess that the problem is related to a particular batch. In my case emulsion number 023215-11, exp 2025/11. I contacted Foma and I am waiting for a response.

[AlbertSteptoe]

Hello.

I have been shooting Fomapan 100 a lot last year and I also ran into this problem recently. As I load bulk, I fed an unexposed filmstrip directly from the roll to my developing reel and get the same artifacts looking like static-discharge arcs. As my film didn't go through a bulkloader or a cartridge or camera and as the problems appeared with a new 100-feet roll, I guess that the problem is related to a particular batch. In my case emulsion number 023215-11, exp 2025/11. I contacted Foma and I am waiting for a response.

Hi - Very interesting to see you’ve had the same problem and I’d be interested to hear the response from Foma. Having had this experience I’m unlikely to be using their products again. Personally, and this is one reason I like using film, I usually spend so much time considering the composition and the exposure settings that I can’t readily suffer production quality issues. I can live with (and hopefully learn) from my own mistakes but need to have some confidence the emulsion I am using is sound. I’d be even more upset if the production issues involved a 100ft roll!!

[HC-110]

Hi - Very interesting to see you’ve had the same problem and I’d be interested to hear the response from Foma. Having had this experience I’m unlikely to be using their products again. Personally, and this is one reason I like using film, I usually spend so much time considering the composition and the exposure settings that I can’t readily suffer production quality issues. I can live with (and hopefully learn) from my own mistakes but need to have some confidence the emulsion I am using is sound. I’d be even more upset if the production issues involved a 100ft roll!!

Hello AlbertSteptoe. The problem is indeed on the complete 30 meter roll ... . Every 10 to 20 cm this strange artifact appears. It took me several rolls of film until I had nailed it down. A friend had the same problem with a recent 36 exposure roll. I have another 100-feet roll of the same batch. The previous 100-feet roll with a different emulsion number was OK. I am still waiting for a response from Foma. I will give them 2 or 3 weeks. If I don't get a response I will contact them by letter and send them my negatives.

But as you say confidence is important. For the moment I stop shooting Foma 100.

I also use Foma papers, Fomapan 400 in 120/135, Retropan 320 and some Foma chemistry. No problems with these products.

I will keep you updated.

[HC-110]

After more than a month Foma has written a short reply. They suggest:

... effect of the electric discharges occurs on films cutted from the beginning of pancake, and also low relative humidity, low temperature or fast rewinding of the film can have a certain influence of this defect on side of user.

They recommend me to make an official complaint at my seller. Well the seller was Foma as I ordered in their webshop.

As Foma does not really go into the problem (check whether batch emulsion number 023215-11, exp 2025/11 is defective), I will use up the films from other batches for minor or irrelevant shootings (camera testing, etc) and then stop using Fomapan 100. I wonder whether the Foma film even has an antistatic layer? I think that FP4+ will be more than a good replacement.

Ah yes and a friend recently had broken 120 type rolls with Fomapan 100. The film was "bent back" in the middle of the roll, so that only the first half was exposed in his Rollei and not the other half because it was folded under the first part ... . So he literally exposed the backing paper ... .

[AlbertSteptoe]

Thanks for the update - not a very impressive reply from Foma!! I haven’t used one of their films since the issue I first reported and will probably stick to Ilford or Kodak for the future although I did try Agfa APX100 recently with reasonable results.

[ChrisPlatt]

Thanks for the update - not a very impressive reply from Foma!! I haven’t used one of their films since the issue I first reported and will probably stick to Ilford or Kodak for the future although I did try Agfa APX100 recently with reasonable results.

Please tell me more about your experience with APX100.

The old Agfa-Gevaert emulsion was my favorite medium speed 35mm film
but I have never tried the new Lupus-made APX100.

TIA,
Chris

[AlbertSteptoe]

Hi Chris - It’s a film I’ve only tried once as still experimenting with different types. I posted some images that I took with it on the thread “Let’s see those film shots” and I think the post was numbered 25610. If you can find these it’s probably easier to let my results speak for themselves. At first I was surprised at the relative graininess of the images but having looked at them for a while decided this did add to their character. So it is probably a film I would try again if the natural light levels were adequate. It is maybe not as contrasty as other films but I guess post could probably improve that. Hope you can find the images I posted and my comments are helpful.

[ChrisPlatt]

Thanks. Though it exhibits a bit more grain than some other ISO100 films I see nothing objectionable.
BTW I read AgfaPhoto APX100 may be the same emulsion as Harman Technology (Ilford) Kentmere 100.

Your photos: :cool: Lets see those ''film'' shots - Page 11 - PentaxForums.com

Chris

[SolitudeTourismBoard]

Foma is dead, long live everything else..