New 16mm b/w film stock - Fomapan 100 cine vs. double X comparison

[Sebastian Bock]

I've been very happy about another "new" film stock and immediately ordered some reels from Foma.
So here's my first impression of the new Fomapan 100 cine.

I exposed it in an ARRI SR @EI100 and then switched the magazine to also expose some double X @EI200 (so I closed the lens by 1 stop) and developed both stripes in Kodak D76 in the same small tank at 20°C. Standard dev time for both stocks is supposed to be 7 minutes. I developed the test strips for 6,7,8 and 9 minutes.

Short explanation of my methodology:

What you see in the pictures is my grayscale, which is basically ND0.3 gels layered on a glass screen with a LED-panel behind it. The far right stripe, labeled with an "X (+5)" has no gel, the next "IX (+4)" one ND.3, and so on, ending in 8 layers of ND.3 at the left stripe "II (-3)". Another "zone" with a ninth layer is in the lower left corner of the wedge and a last "zone" is made with another diagonal ND.3 gel. This is to judge the last bit of shadow detail.

The whitest thing on the far right is a translucent canister of a 135 stills film sitting on a strong LED torch. This white is even 2 stops over the last stripe "X (+5)". I placed it there to get an impression of the highlight latitude.

I measured with a Sekonic cine meter on "zone V" (0). 

Both film stocks are shown in a split screen, Kodak XX is the upper half, Fomapan 100 cine is the lower half. Split screen and adjusting black/white point were done in Davinci resolve.

6 minutes dev (= underdeveloped):

7 minutes dev (recommended time from the spec sheets of both films):

8 minutes dev (= overdeveloped):

9 minutes dev (= overdeveloped):

 

The result / My interpretation:

Both films have an enormous highlight latitude! Kodak's XX even a tad more.
Since I know Fomapan 100 from stills photography, I expected it to have not as much shadow detail as XX. The result shows clearly, that Fomapan 100 cine needs more light - many people using it for photography rate it 50 ISO. Double XX shows much more shadow detail. It is also flatter in general.
Since XX is more sensitive (200/250 ISO), it has expectably more grain.

What I didn't expect: Fomapan is noticeably sharper than XX and the grain does not get nasty, when the film is overdeveloped (pushed). So far, I am very pleased. Well done, Foma.

I will continue testing the film. Next time, I will rate it as 50 ISO and shoot some real life footage, also to see how precise the perforation / how stable the footage is. I will post the results here.

 

[Sebastian Bock]

OK, here's the next split screen comparison. 

Upper half, Foma 100 cine rated as 50 ISO (1 stop over)
Lower half, Foma 100 cine rated as 100 ISO (same as in the above test)

Development 7, 8 and 9 minutes in 20°C Kodak D76

7 minutes (standard development):

8 minutes (slightly overdeveloped):

9 minutes

 

Conclusion: The film definitely benefits from rating it at 50 ISO (overexposing it by one stop). The image now shows a clear difference between -3 stops under and -4 stops under and there is still some detail remaining against the base.
With my specific thermometer I would develop for 8 or 9 minutes in the future. Yours might tell you a different time...
 

[Scott Barton]

Sebastian -

Thank you for the detailed discussion of this film. It is something that I too look forward to using...

It's good to see Foma producing again to support us 16 mm folks...

[Richard Tuohy]

Hi Sebastian,
thanks for doing this comparison!    I am really glad that Foma took the opportunity to add this to their official inventory.  And I am quite relieved that you got pleasing results.   Just prior to Foma releasing this stock, I spent a long time organising a massive order of this film stock from Foma in 16 and standard 8 for the filmlabs.org community of artist run film labs.   (The order was really massive, at least for us, but in the end we got enough subscribers to double it!  We ordered around 27 kilometers or 88500 feet of this stock in total). I did this partly in the hope that once they (Foma) realised there was a market for it in the absence of ORWO black and white stocks, they might take the opportunity to make it available as a regular item, which they did!  (Subsequently, Wittner film has somehow managed to get a supply of UN54 going again.  I'm not sure how, but I am very thankful for that continuing to be available).  The funny thing is my personal share of this (17.5kg worth!) is waiting for me in the Netherlands.  I haven't shot any yet.  So I am very pleased and relieved to hear your report!
all the best from nanolab (Australia - but currently in Inner Mongolia as I write!)

richard

 

 

[Sebastian Bock]

17 hours ago, Richard Tuohy said:

I did this partly in the hope that once they (Foma) realised there was a market for it in the absence of ORWO black and white stocks, they might take the opportunity to make it available as a regular item, which they did! 

Richard, thanks for the energy you've put in that topic. All narrow gauge filmmakers benefit from that!

Maybe you should also place a massive printfilm order so they realize there is a market, create their own PF emulsion and sell it in 2000ft cans. 
Ok. enough kidding... Fingers crossed that you manage to get your personal share shipped to Australia. But I have another information that might relieve you a bit: Foma's "best before" date on the packaging says: 05/2027.

All the best from floodlab (Hamburg;)  

Sebastian 

[Richard Tuohy]

4 hours ago, Sebastian Bock said:

Richard, thanks for the energy you've put in that topic. All narrow gauge filmmakers benefit from that!

Maybe you should also place a massive printfilm order so they realize there is a market, create their own PF emulsion and sell it in 2000ft cans. 
Ok. enough kidding... Fingers crossed that you manage to get your personal share shipped to Australia. But I have another information that might relieve you a bit: Foma's "best before" date on the packaging says: 05/2027.

All the best from floodlab (Hamburg;)  

Sebastian 

Oh!  You are THAT Sebastian!  Ha!  
Tell me, how did the reversal processing of the Foma go?

 

[Samuel Preston]

Hello all! As you, Richard, were involved in the large order, you probably know best. Does foma offer these new stocks in 400ft rolls of 16mm upon request? Or any lager quantities that make it possible to recan down to 400ft? 

Maybe someone else has some knowledge on this topic too. Thanks!

[Richard Tuohy]

Hi Samuel,

Well,  yes, we did have the option of any length rolls we wanted.   We got a mucus of 30 meters and 120 meters, but could have had up to 600 meter rolls.  However the special order minimum is about 13.5km plus or minus 10% and you have to take the entire made quantity. 

[Stephen Perera]

excellent work thank you for posting this

[Sebastian Bock]

On 8/27/2024 at 4:26 PM, Richard Tuohy said:

how did the reversal processing of the Foma go?

The very first test was a bit too contrasty but promising.
I need to play around with developer, dilution, temperature and time before I publish any result here. 

[Aapo Lettinen]

wondering if they could make the Cine100 with Double8 perforation. Would be ultimate low budget film stock for home developed b/w short films as negative is super easy to develop compared to reversal and much cheaper to develop too

[Samuel Preston]

8 hours ago, Aapo Lettinen said:

wondering if they could make the Cine100 with Double8 perforation.

They make it and it’s in stock ready to order from various sources 

[Aapo Lettinen]

25 minutes ago, Samuel Preston said:

They make it and it’s in stock ready to order from various sources 

looks like at least Fotoimpex has it in small rolls. Weird that cannot find it from Foma's own shop, would be cheaper there for sure. and would need 100ft rolls

[Nick Tash]

@Sebastian Bock I'm very interested in seeing this tests you did for Fomapan 100. Do you have these up for viewing anywhere? 

[Stephen Perera]

I've shot quite a bit of Double X 16mm (processed by Cinelab London in D96 I assume) I don't see much latitude in highlights....1.5 stops if that over after that it starts to blow. Rating it at EI250 as recommended by Kodak outdoors and EI200 in tungsten indoors. I find it does great in low light. I'm more worried about blowing highlights when showing than the shadows using this film. Any comments???

Edited January 15 by Stephen Perera

[Sebastian Bock]

Ok, it took a while, but as promised, I shot some real life footage with the Fomapan 100 cine.
I rated it as 50 ISO and developed it in D76 1+1 for 12 minutes. 

The results are really satisfying for me. It is a very classic b/w look with good shadow detail and a pretty good highlight latitude. It's definitely not the finest grain but D76 is also not known as fine grain developer. But if I wouldn't like grain, I wouldn't shoot 16...

Perforation of the Fomapan 100 cine is ok - the image is maybe a tad more jittery than Kodak XX film stock but it's not a big deal for my purposes. Overall, I am very happy with the new Fomapan 100 cine and will definitely use it again. Hopefully Foma sells enough so the production is profitable for them. 

Fomapan 100 cine is also possible to reversal process and has a nice punchy contrast if developed in D19 + KSCN + Iodide (9-12 minutes at 20 degrees). Though, the base is not as transparent as Fomapan 100R.

Here are some images:

[Stephen Perera]

very interesting thanks for posting this......labs will prob have D96 to do Double X so would be interesting to see what a lab makes of it.....and yes a very classic BW look to my eyes

Edited April 11 by Stephen Perera

[Stephen Perera]

here is the technical spec. as a pdf

Edited April 11 by Stephen Perera

[Stephen Perera]

interesting to see one my fave developers, XTOL on their developer tests

[Giray Izcan]

It only comes in 100ft rolls... that cancels out any serious shoot, if there is one, destined to shoot on black and white 16mm, it will be double x.

Edited April 11 by Giray Izcan

[Sebastian Bock]

Thank you for your sharing your thoughts, Giray. 

I am still thankful for a new film stock. It is about half the price of Kodak films with an equal quality and offers people with lower budgets to shoot private films on their Beaulieu, music videos on their Arriflex ST, experimental stuff on their Bolex and much more on 100ft daylight spools. If you can only shoot "serious" stuff on 400ft rolls, just go with your Double XX. That's ok, but it has nothing to do with this thread.
 

[Steven Jackson]

It would be interesting to see if applying the Zone System from still photography and exposing for the shadows and under developing to preserve the detail in the highlights while maintaining detail in the shadows.  No reason why that wouldn't work.  I'm currently trying out their 35mm 400asa film which is sold in 50m rolls in a Cameflex camera.  Seems to be running through the camera just fine.

[Giray Izcan]

On 4/11/2025 at 8:13 PM, Sebastian Bock said:

Thank you for your sharing your thoughts, Giray. 

I am still thankful for a new film stock. It is about half the price of Kodak films with an equal quality and offers people with lower budgets to shoot private films on their Beaulieu, music videos on their Arriflex ST, experimental stuff on their Bolex and much more on 100ft daylight spools. If you can only shoot "serious" stuff on 400ft rolls, just go with your Double XX. That's ok, but it has nothing to do with this thread.
 

Or it could be offered in 400ft, maybe more serious productions would/could use it. Otherwise, yes it is exciting and awesome to have the new stock that I would like to test out myself