I can't lie, I love this kind of breakdown of kentmere. I would love to see you do a video for HP5, just to hear your opinion on the film stock, even if it's all i shoot. This is pushing me to buy 100ft of kentmere to try and err on the side of underexposure because I also didn't like the way the highlights rendered so flat. thanks for the all the info and details, it really is helpful and also fun to watch. great images as always! p.s. also want a SWC so baddd
I had the same problem with Fomapan400. All negatives were underexposed. I also suspected that it was my camera. But now I have found a solution for myself. Stand development. Adonal or Rodinal 1+100, 1 hour, minimum 5ml/film. 1 tilt at the start and 1 tilt after half an hour. Stop bath, fix. Done! No rotation. I have a Jobo CPE2 myself, but I only use it for color film.
When you first made your move over to Fomapan, I actually was inspired by your jump and did the same, but after 200’ of it expressing the same QC issues in both rolls, I abandoned ship and jumped back to shooting HP5… but now I’m curious again. Thanks for the deep dive!
Recently I had a similar experience. Together with a friend we went on a trip together and we both shot black and white, he used Fomapan and pushed it to 800 and I used Kentmere pushed one stop too. When we came back I developed the two rolls together in the same tank using Rodinal 1+25. The results were night and day. I understand the hat Rodinal may not be the best developer for Fomapan since it has already lots of contrast, but I think that Fomapan retained a lot more of detail and sharpness. And now that you mentioned it, most of the shots my friend took with Fomapan looked slightly underexposed. I have shot Fomapan for about a year now but I have just switched to Kentmere as my go to black and white film stock. Great video, thanks for sharing!
appreciate your mention of how fomapan 400 underexposed! i had the same problem with more or less half of each 135 roll and i'm convinced it's not an issues of lightmeter or camera malfunctioning.
indeed, i shot 2 rolls at EI 800 and 1000 ASA and noted the lab to pushed +2 stops in development. some of the images turned out okay, but many of them were quite unusable.
Wow this is exactly what kind of content im looking for! I love the detailed breakdown, this is good stuff. Can you eventually do this on Ilford’s xp2 as well? Im thinking of making the change because of the interesting characteristics of it including being able to change iso mid-roll and it being able to be developed almost anywhere
This was incredibly informative, honestly extremely helpful! I would love to see your exposure tests conparing stocks such as HP5 like many others have mention but also slower films like ilford FP4 and Delta 100.
Man congratulations on your dedication to film. That's a lot of film. I wouldn't blame you for changing. Expensive enough without getting the results you want. I tend to shoot fomapan only on sunny days. I started shooting on foma noticed very little detail in shadows.
Happy to know I am not the only one noticing underexposure with foma 400, I have experimented with bulk roll for over 1 year and a half adding up to over double the recommended developper time for a push to 800 in order to get usable results. I kind of have found a sweet spot but it still can be erraticaly surprising.
Started out with kentmere 100 in full daylight and loved it so when I tried out 400 and was treated to similar results that you've shown I was pretty let down. Great explanation, guess I'll have to give it another shot.
I have been shooting exclusively with Fomapan 400 for years and have faced the same issues you've mentioned. I’ve been looking for a comparison blog to explore alternatives, and I have been considering Kentmere as well. After watching this, I feel it’s a sign to make the switch and set Fomapan aside for now.
Been having very good results with Agfa APX400. It's very forgiving overall, and although it does come out a bit flat, I actually enjoy the potential of toning exactly what I am interested in after developing
This is a very good breakdown! The rolls of Fomapan 400 in 120 I've shot always come out underexposed and horrible, even if extend dev times or expose it as an ISO 200 to give it more light. The film itself is really weird too, thin, gunky, water get weirdly blue like mouthwash if pre-washing before dev. Much happier with Kentmere 400 as a budget film stock and it is my go-to as film n00b. Contrast can always be added in post.
Cool concept for a video. I’m thinking of next year doing a project where at least 90% of the time I use Kodak Vision 3 250D, so I really get to know its strengths and weaknesses. I keep going back and forth between this and that and it feels like I’m not learning as much as I could.
I’ve had a similar hit or miss experience with fomapan. Even on a single roll. Some pictures on a roll so badly underexposed they’re unusable, and some gorgeous
Sad to know the love ending story but everything comes to an end.. glad you find a solution… looking forward to kentmere.. i used fomapan most of the times due to its low cost, but strictly with a 100 speed films.. since the 400 has not been consistent throughout when shot at 400.. that is not something new.. however, hp5 is my go to for high speed films.. though i prefer kentmere 400 when available
It's fun bc what's now called Kentmere was sold as Ilford pan 100 and pan 400 for years in a shop in Paris, kinda weird that's since its rebrand, lots of people are talking about it But anyway, it's a very cool film to play with.
I believe there is something that changed with Fomapan/Arista EDU 400. In my B&W class, many of us shot the new Foma/Arista 400 that comes in plastic cartridges, and a lot of it came out looking really flat, dull, and low contrast. However, older rolls of Arista/Foma that came in the metal cartridges all came out fine.
Hey Jeremy, it would be really nice if you could do a video on how you meter for B&W negative film with your Leica for "normal pictures," nothing too flat or contrasty. Until now, I haven't found the sweet spot. I try to meter for mid-shadows and let the dynamic range of the film do the trick. For color negative, this always worked pretty good, in my opinion. I like the pastel colors. With my B&W shots, I'm still not happy after my first 60 rolls of Foma. One more question: If you had to use a lab. What would you tell the lab how to develop the film? Just push a stop?
It happened to me too, to have a severely underexposed roll of 120 foma 400, i couldn't explain that to myself, but i usually evaluate exposure by eye so i thought i just had a bad day, now i'm not sure i want to shoot the rest of 120 Foma i have. 35mm always came out fine, shooting dozens of foma 400 rolls, and i could always trace the occasional mistake to me or to my bad developing. It's a shame to have such problems because it's a beautiful film.
I've had those same issues with 120 foma 400 on a few rolls...I think it's an issue with one (or more) batches, probably... I shoot fomapan 100 the most, and now ortho 400 as a higher-speed option. And for really slow emulsions, I make my own (ISO 1-25) ^_^
I don’t know if I’d describe Foma 400 and Kentmere 400 a so fundamentally different. Or at least not as the polar opposite you describe. I get your point but to me the differences are more like two sides of the same coin: The cheapest B&W film they each could make. Kind of low contrast. But you’re right in that Kentmere is clean and polished and Foma is rough and gritty. To me the biggest jump in look in the same speed class is probably going from something super clean like TMax to gritty and contrasty like Street Pan.
Have you considered altering dev depending on the exposure latitude you need? I know it would be hard for a full roll of film but in sheet film, if you places to detailed shadows at zone 3 and detailed highlights at zone 8 and thus 5 stop range then dev at N. If you have a scene that requires less (very contrasty) or more (very flat) then altering dev by N+1 or N-1 (20% more or less time) to accomplish your vision. Just a thought
Wow. Great video as always. I’m really enjoying your deep dives into filmstocks. Let me ask you one thing. How did you develop kentmere? I assume it’s ilfotec hc but which times and what rpm?
Fomapan 400 at box speed was always underexposed, I’ve concluded that it’s probably around 250 iso, I now shoot it at 200 and develop in hc110 dilution h with good results
try both films again without the rotary processor. I regularly shoot both films but I do a semi-stand at 1+25 Rodinal. I have had perfectly good images at 1600 and 3200 with kentmere 400 to the extent it directly competes with TMAX and Ilford Delta 3200
This Video is costing foma so much money. Switched to foma 400 some months ago. Had similar issues. Since I don't devolop myself, I thought it's the lab or somethings wrong with my camera. Since then I simply overexpose the shit out of it. Might also Order now some kentmere for myself...
I notice that that alot of your photography hinges upon large areas of inky blacks...do you scan yourself as well? (surely you must if you're developing) How do you handle hair and dust, is it all just patience and skill cleaning hair/dust in photoshop, or is there some secret methodology?
Well one of the problems was using Ilfotec HC which is known for making film slower, e.g., you should rate your 400 film at 320. Maybe you should have tried T-Max developer or Ilfotec DD-X?
![Noob To Max With DRAGON REWORK In Blox Fruits [FULL MOVIE]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/LnBMOinoOvA/mqdefault.jpg)
14:38 THIS! is exactly the information that i have been searching for. thanks for doing these test. very useful stuff.
I can't lie, I love this kind of breakdown of kentmere. I would love to see you do a video for HP5, just to hear your opinion on the film stock, even if it's all i shoot. This is pushing me to buy 100ft of kentmere to try and err on the side of underexposure because I also didn't like the way the highlights rendered so flat. thanks for the all the info and details, it really is helpful and also fun to watch. great images as always! p.s. also want a SWC so baddd
your channel is grossly underrated, and your work is exceptional
I had the same problem with Fomapan400. All negatives were underexposed. I also suspected that it was my camera. But now I have found a solution for myself. Stand development. Adonal or Rodinal 1+100, 1 hour, minimum 5ml/film. 1 tilt at the start and 1 tilt after half an hour. Stop bath, fix. Done! No rotation. I have a Jobo CPE2 myself, but I only use it for color film.
So good having a analog channel where you get real deep knowledge. Thank you
Brother, this is like a class. I honestly learned a lot and understood exposure to a deeper level. This is great content
When you first made your move over to Fomapan, I actually was inspired by your jump and did the same, but after 200’ of it expressing the same QC issues in both rolls, I abandoned ship and jumped back to shooting HP5… but now I’m curious again. Thanks for the deep dive!
Recently I had a similar experience. Together with a friend we went on a trip together and we both shot black and white, he used Fomapan and pushed it to 800 and I used Kentmere pushed one stop too. When we came back I developed the two rolls together in the same tank using Rodinal 1+25. The results were night and day. I understand the hat Rodinal may not be the best developer for Fomapan since it has already lots of contrast, but I think that Fomapan retained a lot more of detail and sharpness. And now that you mentioned it, most of the shots my friend took with Fomapan looked slightly underexposed.
I have shot Fomapan for about a year now but I have just switched to Kentmere as my go to black and white film stock.
Great video, thanks for sharing!
appreciate your mention of how fomapan 400 underexposed! i had the same problem with more or less half of each 135 roll and i'm convinced it's not an issues of lightmeter or camera malfunctioning.
fomapan 400 and 200 have both been tested to be significantly lower EI than the label. Even Fomapan 100 is best shot at 80 ASA
indeed, i shot 2 rolls at EI 800 and 1000 ASA and noted the lab to pushed +2 stops in development. some of the images turned out okay, but many of them were quite unusable.
Wow this is exactly what kind of content im looking for! I love the detailed breakdown, this is good stuff. Can you eventually do this on Ilford’s xp2 as well? Im thinking of making the change because of the interesting characteristics of it including being able to change iso mid-roll and it being able to be developed almost anywhere
thoughtful as always, Jeremy.
This was incredibly informative, honestly extremely helpful! I would love to see your exposure tests conparing stocks such as HP5 like many others have mention but also slower films like ilford FP4 and Delta 100.
Such and excellent video, I thought as if this channel doesn't have 1000 times more subscribers and then saw the last comment with the same sentiment!
Awesome video with really good explanation for exposures! I wonder how Kodak Double X / 5222 would react
great video, as always! So much work you've put into it, thank you! Would. love to see and hear your take on Rollei Retro 400S
Man congratulations on your dedication to film. That's a lot of film. I wouldn't blame you for changing. Expensive enough without getting the results you want. I tend to shoot fomapan only on sunny days. I started shooting on foma noticed very little detail in shadows.
Very interesting - are you moving over to Kentmere for your 35mm work too? - not sure if you said that in the video or not
Great video! I recently shot 4 rolls of kentmere, I always heard it was kind of a flat film but, I'm pretty happy with the results so far.
i've always liked kentmere 100/400 in d23 for a flat negative. it prints very well and i can manipulate it more than a contrasty negative.
Great stuff. I’ve avoided Kentmere 400 because it’s so flat, I’m going to give it another go now.
Happy to know I am not the only one noticing underexposure with foma 400, I have experimented with bulk roll for over 1 year and a half adding up to over double the recommended developper time for a push to 800 in order to get usable results. I kind of have found a sweet spot but it still can be erraticaly surprising.
Started out with kentmere 100 in full daylight and loved it so when I tried out 400 and was treated to similar results that you've shown I was pretty let down. Great explanation, guess I'll have to give it another shot.
I have been shooting exclusively with Fomapan 400 for years and have faced the same issues you've mentioned. I’ve been looking for a comparison blog to explore alternatives, and I have been considering Kentmere as well. After watching this, I feel it’s a sign to make the switch and set Fomapan aside for now.
Kentmere pan 100 is my go to b&w film. pushed one stop, developed in rodinal
Amazing video, well done man.
Relative Exposure within a frame is blowing my mind. I need a "good" lightmeter but I've loved everything I've shot on Kentmere 400.
Been having very good results with Agfa APX400. It's very forgiving overall, and although it does come out a bit flat, I actually enjoy the potential of toning exactly what I am interested in after developing
suuuuper informative. always love your content. would also love to know how this held up when being pushed in development!
This is a very good breakdown! The rolls of Fomapan 400 in 120 I've shot always come out underexposed and horrible, even if extend dev times or expose it as an ISO 200 to give it more light. The film itself is really weird too, thin, gunky, water get weirdly blue like mouthwash if pre-washing before dev. Much happier with Kentmere 400 as a budget film stock and it is my go-to as film n00b. Contrast can always be added in post.
Cool concept for a video. I’m thinking of next year doing a project where at least 90% of the time I use Kodak Vision 3 250D, so I really get to know its strengths and weaknesses. I keep going back and forth between this and that and it feels like I’m not learning as much as I could.
I’ve had a similar hit or miss experience with fomapan. Even on a single roll. Some pictures on a roll so badly underexposed they’re unusable, and some gorgeous
Sad to know the love ending story but everything comes to an end.. glad you find a solution… looking forward to kentmere.. i used fomapan most of the times due to its low cost, but strictly with a 100 speed films.. since the 400 has not been consistent throughout when shot at 400.. that is not something new.. however, hp5 is my go to for high speed films.. though i prefer kentmere 400 when available
Very thorough and informative video!
It's fun bc what's now called Kentmere was sold as Ilford pan 100 and pan 400 for years in a shop in Paris, kinda weird that's since its rebrand, lots of people are talking about it
But anyway, it's a very cool film to play with.
I believe there is something that changed with Fomapan/Arista EDU 400. In my B&W class, many of us shot the new Foma/Arista 400 that comes in plastic cartridges, and a lot of it came out looking really flat, dull, and low contrast. However, older rolls of Arista/Foma that came in the metal cartridges all came out fine.
11:32 This was actually a very nice explanation
I don't shoot bnw, but still loved the video. Good work mate. Looking forward to the hassie swc video. :)
Hey Jeremy, it would be really nice if you could do a video on how you meter for B&W negative film with your Leica for "normal pictures," nothing too flat or contrasty. Until now, I haven't found the sweet spot. I try to meter for mid-shadows and let the dynamic range of the film do the trick. For color negative, this always worked pretty good, in my opinion. I like the pastel colors. With my B&W shots, I'm still not happy after my first 60 rolls of Foma. One more question: If you had to use a lab. What would you tell the lab how to develop the film? Just push a stop?
It happened to me too, to have a severely underexposed roll of 120 foma 400, i couldn't explain that to myself, but i usually evaluate exposure by eye so i thought i just had a bad day, now i'm not sure i want to shoot the rest of 120 Foma i have. 35mm always came out fine, shooting dozens of foma 400 rolls, and i could always trace the occasional mistake to me or to my bad developing. It's a shame to have such problems because it's a beautiful film.
I've had those same issues with 120 foma 400 on a few rolls...I think it's an issue with one (or more) batches, probably... I shoot fomapan 100 the most, and now ortho 400 as a higher-speed option. And for really slow emulsions, I make my own (ISO 1-25) ^_^
I don’t know if I’d describe Foma 400 and Kentmere 400 a so fundamentally different. Or at least not as the polar opposite you describe. I get your point but to me the differences are more like two sides of the same coin: The cheapest B&W film they each could make. Kind of low contrast. But you’re right in that Kentmere is clean and polished and Foma is rough and gritty. To me the biggest jump in look in the same speed class is probably going from something super clean like TMax to gritty and contrasty like Street Pan.
I love Kentmere 100 and 400.
Have you considered altering dev depending on the exposure latitude you need? I know it would be hard for a full roll of film but in sheet film, if you places to detailed shadows at zone 3 and detailed highlights at zone 8 and thus 5 stop range then dev at N. If you have a scene that requires less (very contrasty) or more (very flat) then altering dev by N+1 or N-1 (20% more or less time) to accomplish your vision. Just a thought
This is an incredible video. Thanks
Please try Kodak double-x (like this if you also want to see an analysis of this film)
Hell yes. This would be great to see!
Very informative talk. Thank you. What did you settle on as your favorite developer for kentmere 400?
I would be interested to see how you prefer K100 pushed to 400 in comparison to K400 shot on box speed
Very interesting. Any thoughts about Kodak Tri-X? Thank you.
Wow. Great video as always. I’m really enjoying your deep dives into filmstocks. Let me ask you one thing. How did you develop kentmere? I assume it’s ilfotec hc but which times and what rpm?
And does this video only apply to 120?
Fomapan 400 at box speed was always underexposed, I’ve concluded that it’s probably around 250 iso, I now shoot it at 200 and develop in hc110 dilution h with good results
Awesome breakdown. What model of rotary tank rollers are you using to process with?
I shot kentmere 400 @ 3200 and developed with rodinal 1:100 1h. Liked it far better than delta 3200.
try both films again without the rotary processor. I regularly shoot both films but I do a semi-stand at 1+25 Rodinal.
I have had perfectly good images at 1600 and 3200 with kentmere 400 to the extent it directly competes with TMAX and Ilford Delta 3200
Hey Jeremy what do you use to scan your film it looks so efficient!
This Video is costing foma so much money. Switched to foma 400 some months ago. Had similar issues. Since I don't devolop myself, I thought it's the lab or somethings wrong with my camera. Since then I simply overexpose the shit out of it. Might also Order now some kentmere for myself...
Did you try overexposing the shot instead?
what was that monster dev tank at @4:41 please?
A lot of jobos 1530s together. You can see it at some point in his Hong Kong video I think.
I have settled on Rollei RPX 400 and RPX100. Premium film that is easy on the wallet.📷🌟🌟🌟
What's your method of avoiding x rays on trips?
I notice that that alot of your photography hinges upon large areas of inky blacks...do you scan yourself as well? (surely you must if you're developing) How do you handle hair and dust, is it all just patience and skill cleaning hair/dust in photoshop, or is there some secret methodology?
Pull NEVER push!
Well one of the problems was using Ilfotec HC which is known for making film slower, e.g., you should rate your 400 film at 320.
Maybe you should have tried T-Max developer or Ilfotec DD-X?
You grew up in the Caribbean, correct?
Try Kodak 5222!
Did you expose the Fomapan 400 at 400 iso? Fomapan 400 is iso 200 only; only in stand-development it reaches 400.
Bro u still owe us many in depth lens reviews … I’m not satisfied by the in the hand videos 😜
You'll return to Fomapan, or I'll unsubscribe your channel.