Fomapan 400 dev problem.

Messages
543
Name
Dave
Edit My Images
Yes
I have used Bellini Duo Step for the development of my B&W films for a while. I get nice results developing Fomapan 100, 200 and Kentmere 100 film in it.

Today I developed my first roll of Fomapan 400 (bulk loaded). I did it for 4 mins in Part A and Part B. It came out very thin, maybe as if it had been exposed at 1600 rather than 400.
The camera was a compact point and shoot Konica Z-up 60. It reads the DX code on the film, but gives no indication what it has read.

Is Fomapan 400 not good in Duo Step? I noticed that there is no dev time given for it in the Nik & Trick guide sheet.
 
It's very possible that the Z-up was the cause, based on my short experience with one! Can you try it in a more reliable camera?

Eg...

R11-06529-013A Z-up.jpg
 
Yes ChrisR, it was also the first off the new bulk roll, so I guess that some further testing is needed.
I have a short length from another camera test to dev, so a few frames of F400 can go with it in the Duo Step.
 
My Rollei B35 was pressed into service to shoot three frames at 100/200/400 (as metered on my phone app) on a short length of Fomapan 400 film.

The results are below, as scanned using my Samsung NX3000, so there may be an element of auto exposure in action in the results. (My scanning procedure is still work in progress).

SAM_3534ns.jpgSAM_3535ns.jpgSAM_3536ns.jpg

The thinnest negative was not as thin as those produced by the Konica P&S camera at 400 and is very usable. The densest at 100 is maybe a little too thick. Whilst the negatives look very good, the positive of the last image (100) looses some detail and has more grain.
Regrettably, I have introduced more variables whilst doing this test: I used a different camera and metering device and also developed for four and a half minutes in Duo Step, rather than the original four minutes (there not being an entry in the guide chart).
If the camera can be considered as being accurate for speed and aperture, then I guess that these results stand for my metering device and dev process, so that is informative at least. For this combo, I would choose something between the first two. As my B35 is set to get more use, this is a good benchmark test.

They are all pretty close, shows how much latitude this film has. I assume that the Konica isn't good with 400 speed film and leave it there.

EDIT: just playing with the negatives here, the "thin" one has made a very good positive....
 
Last edited:
I have a Konica Z-Up 70 and have always had good results with it until the last two films which were both Fomapan 400. Slightly thin negatives and excessive grain were the result.
 
I have a Konica Z-Up 70 and have always had good results with it until the last two films which were both Fomapan 400. Slightly thin negatives and excessive grain were the result.
Thin negatives can give the appearance of grain clumping when scanned. If the edge marking is well developed it would point to under exposure, if the edge marking is barely visible it would be under developed or very old film stock.
 
That's interesting... this Z-up 60 is new to me, but has produced some nice, well exposed images on a couple of rolls of Fomapan 100.
Perhaps it will be easier to restrict it to 100 for future rolls (if it gets used again).
 
Last edited:
I've only shot Foma 400 in sheet form (10x8) but I can back up what everyone else says about thin negs when exposed at box speed (developed with HC110 and XTOL in my case).
 
Thanks to all for your comments. The test I did (images above) show that the combo of Fomapan 400 and Bellini Duo Step can work well. Even the shot at 400 is good.
It's possible that the extra half minute development had a effect, but it does seem likely that the camera metering is off. Another set of three similar images show a thinner 400 neg, so maybe a little extra exposure will be the norm for me, as experienced by others who commented.
 
Back
Top