Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Good old Foma
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   B&W Film Gallery
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun May 01, 2011 7:48 am    Post subject: Good old Foma Reply with quote
Sinar F1 + Fuji Fujinon 150mm + Foma Fomapan 100+ Home made two bath developer (Sol A: metol-HQ+sodium sulphite+potassium promide; Sol B: sodium sulphite + borax) + Epson V700 multipass raw scan.





PostPosted: Sun May 01, 2011 8:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
beautiful b&w! my fav is #2!


PostPosted: Sun May 01, 2011 10:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
superb tonality ..

I love FOMA -- it's one of the best films ever - very mellow rendering and very large scale of tones ..

tf


PostPosted: Sun May 01, 2011 12:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Really good images. I am a fan of Foma too, although I use a different developer. I may try some more contrast next time.


PostPosted: Sun May 01, 2011 12:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I like last one, great job!


martinsmith99 wrote:
Really good images. I am a fan of Foma too, although I use a different developer. I may try some more contrast next time.

Try FOMADON LQR it is contrast developer from FOMA.


PostPosted: Sun May 01, 2011 4:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Number 2 is my favorite has a great look, will have to give foma a try.


PostPosted: Sun May 01, 2011 4:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Yes, Foma makes a cheap and reliable film. I'm using it for more than 2 years now and never had a complain about it Smile


PostPosted: Sun May 01, 2011 6:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
piticu,

Kudos for your photographs and how you made the most out of your model!

Question: did you get the two-bath formula somewhere or you figured it out yourself?

I do not know if it is an issue with the scan, on my monitor, the pictures appears to have some highlight compression, but two-bath developer is meant to minimize that.

If I were you, I would be very tempted to do double-shoot and then develop both rolls differently: one in your existing formula, and the other in a slightly revise form:

Increase metol, reduce hydroquinone, and use only borax for the second bath, while reducing second bath agitation further. It might also be helpful to up-rate the film by one-third to two-third of a stop too.


PostPosted: Sun May 01, 2011 6:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Attila wrote:
I like last one, great job!


martinsmith99 wrote:
Really good images. I am a fan of Foma too, although I use a different developer. I may try some more contrast next time.

Try FOMADON LQR it is contrast developer from FOMA.

Thanks Atilla - I may give that a go.


PostPosted: Sun May 01, 2011 7:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Seele wrote:
Question: did you get the two-bath formula somewhere or you figured it out yourself

I've started with the formula from somewhere but i've managed to fuck up badly the second bath, meaning that i over weighted both borax and the sulphite to the point that the solution was over saturated. So i've discarded the undisolved surplus of chemicals and doubled the water. I've also tried before a higher amount of hydroquinone but the films were way too contrasty for my scanner.

Regarding the tones compression: i'm sure that it's the result of PS processing or more exactly the result of developing the raw scan (i scan in DNG format and use adobe raw converter to "develop" the jpeg. Probably i'll give it another try sometime in the future Smile

One more thing: i hardly shoot 35mm, mostly 4x5 sheets so i can develop each one individually, by inspection.

Thank you all for your visits and nice comments.


PostPosted: Sun May 01, 2011 7:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
piticu,

The highlight compression appears to suggest too high a hydroquinone concentration in the first bath, despite the presence of potassium bromide (at a concentration unknown to me), active development would have already started in the first bath. For my money I would even go as far as eliminating hydroquinone altogether but use a high level of milder alkaline. Come to think of it, have you tried Heinrich Stoeckler's two-bath?

First bath:
Metol 5g
Sodium sulphite (anhydrous) 80g
Sodium bisulphite 20g
Water to 1 litre

Second bath:
Borax 10g
Water to 1 litre


PostPosted: Sun May 01, 2011 7:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I've also tried sodium hydroxide instead of borax with the same result: too much contrast for my taste. No, i didn't tried Stoeckler's formulas yet. For the moment i'm waiting for glycine to arrive, after i play with it, i will try your suggestions too.

Thanks again


PostPosted: Sun May 01, 2011 8:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
piticu wrote:
I've also tried sodium hydroxide instead of borax with the same result: too much contrast for my taste. No, i didn't tried Stoeckler's formulas yet. For the moment i'm waiting for glycine to arrive, after i play with it, i will try your suggestions too.

Thanks again


piticu,

Sodium hydroxide is a no-no: and its action is opposite of what you want to do with a two-bath developer. It gives very fast development and blocks up highlight in a flash before putting it into the second, activator solution.

Also ensure that it is glycin, not glycine, for photographic use, from a photographic chemical dealer.


PostPosted: Sun May 01, 2011 8:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
sodium hydroxide was in the second bath. still, the ph was way too high, that's why i've switched to borax. i'm still playing with the idea of changing borax for sodium carbonate but for the moment i'll hold any experiment.

what's the diference between glycin and glycine? i though they are the same chemical, but different spelling Neutral


PostPosted: Sun May 01, 2011 8:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
It is perhaps advisable to give Stoeckler's formula a try first, as a baseline. 1% borax is quite enough as activator, with sodium hydroxide as second bath, even at very low strength, can get things pretty haywire as it is inherently active, even at low strength.

As far as I know there is a form of glycine which is of no photographic development property, so that is the one to avoid: much safer to procure from a photogaphic chemicals supplier.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   B&W Film Gallery
Page 1 of 1