What is the grainiest bw film and developer?

[Graham06]

Sample of the recording film negative (I fully acknowledge my phone isn't going to be the most accurate means of sharing this information)||


View attachment 425254

Looks better than @Alan Johnson 's and good enough for a good time. I'd like to know if you developed it too much or too little. Did you develop it so the fog is now way up beyond half max density and there is not much difference between shadows and blown highlights. Or perhaps that's what that "expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights" means: Any amount of development will tell you what exposure level peeks up over the fog, but the development amount will determine how black the highlights are, and when the highest levels start to blend together to black.

 

[TheGreatGasMaskMan]

Looks better than @Alan Johnson 's and good enough for a good time. I'd like to know if you developed it too much or too little. Did you develop it so the fog is now way up beyond half max density and there is not much difference between shadows and blown highlights. Or perhaps that's what that "expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights" means: Any amount of development will tell you what exposure level peeks up over the fog, but the development amount will determine how black the highlights are, and when the highest levels start to blend together to black.

honestly, this test was to bracket for exposure, and after starting I read through more forums and realized I should probably give it a longer development- 10 minutes seemed to be a good average. exposure wise, just used my Nikon's built in meter at iso 12 and bumped the shutter speed from there. didn't add anything to help reduce fog.

bringing it in to be scanned tomorrow- see what the camera store staff have to say as well.

 

[TheGreatGasMaskMan]

ORWO UN54 Rodinal 1:6, 2 min, 68ºF. Argus C3

 

[Graham06]

Here's the first of mine starting with the finest grain. Panatomic-X in a Minox B. I love the film for reasons I don't understand. I tried TMax 100 when I was first shooting film, and decided it was not for me and much preferred Acros 100 and Delta 100. Bought some Tmax 100 again recently to see if I have learned anything, but haven't shot it yet.

Since this is a grain thread, I'm going to post a 1000x1000 pixel crop of each photo too for comparison. Everything is developed in HC-110 B, and scanned on and Epson V850 at maximum sensible resolution, and tone corrected to taste at the best of my ability

 

[Graham06]

Here is Panatomic-X at 35mm full frame. Canon EOS 3. Lens is either a Sigma 50mm F1.4 Art or a 35mm F1.4

 

[Graham06]

ORWO UN54 Rodinal 1:6, 2 min, 68ºF. Argus C3


View attachment 425426 View attachment 425427 View attachment 425428 View attachment 425429 View attachment 425430

Love the contrasty look of these. I have a bulk roll of this that I am fond of and I see that the photos of mine that I like are on the contrasty side too. The photos that have closer to 'good' tonality are kinda boring. It's got a bit of that Pan-F feel. Haven't shot it, but everyone seems to think "It's not my everyday film and the S-curve is terrible, but I've taken photos I love with it" I hope I'll be able to get more when mine's gone. I don't think I like Wolfen 100 with its new anti-halation layer better.

 

[Graham06]

Kodak Double-X in a Canonet QL 17 and a Canon EOS 3

 

[Graham06]

Old Tri-X at least 20 years expired that was another surprise bonus in a bulk loader. Minolta X570 MC Rokkor PG 58mm F1.2 and Leica IIIa Summar F2. I have the other Minolta F1.2 that is sharper, later and probably technically superior, but when I got it I wished I had bought this one. I'm sure the reviews say "You can't shoot it wide open", but I'm not the review guys, and I love it. What if I shoot it with UN54 processed like @TheGreatGasMaskMan 's photos above.

 

[Graham06]

Modern Tri-X in my Minolta X570. If you stop down that 58mm F1.2, a bit, it's plenty sharp.

 

[Graham06]

Kodak 2484 missile testing film. Originally ISO 800 in a Minox B with a 8x11 mm frame size, and a Canon Demi-EE17 half frame camera.

Idiot move that turned out well: I liked the film so much I bought another 200ft roll that was going cheap. I didn't notice that the sale had clearly indicated the film as unperforated. If you buy those cheap plastic hubs that let you put a 35mm cartridge in a 120 camera you can shoot 35mx45mm frames, which is half way to medium format. I shoot it in a 120 back without problems. The grain is less noticible at 35mm full frame, and it seems about the same in 35x45 'cos I underexposed the few rolls I've shot.

 

[Graham06]

I found the 35mmx45mm photo. Kodak 2484 Mamiya RZ67 110mm F2.8 Look at all the detail in the shadows in the crop sample. Can you even tell there's an image there? Took all the skill I have to get this much out of the 'I'm sure it will be fine' exposed negative.

 

[MattKing]

@Graham06 ,
I'm not really sure why those are being posted in a thread about the "grainiest film and developer" ?

 

[Graham06]

@Graham06 ,
I'm not really sure why those are being posted in a thread about the "grainiest film and developer" ?

If this were a competition, I'd argue that some of these are winning candidates.
Panatomic-X, a vintage fine grain favourite looks pretty grainy in minox format. Double-X and new Tri-X were posted to compare with old Tri-X, and my Kodak 2484 is possibly close to 2475 recording film, but is really grainy in a tiny format. In larger format it has lovely 'tonality'. When I try out some of the concentrated Rodinal variations, it will be useful to compare to HC-110 B which is almost a baseline standard

 

[Graham06]

Kodak 4-X (Film code 5224) was originally ISO 500 In a Konica Autorex full frame. Now rated ISO 12 developed in HC110 C (1:19)

 

[TheGreatGasMaskMan]

OK- I fully acknowledge scanning isn't the most accurate means to show tonal variation, but here's an uncorrected bracket from the recording film- Iso 12, 6, and 3. 10 min dev, Rodinal 1:25, 68ºF. I'm thinking about doing more tests, next would be 9 min dev bracketed iso 25-6

 

[Augustus Caesar]

OK- I fully acknowledge scanning isn't the most accurate means to show tonal variation, but here's an uncorrected bracket from the recording film- Iso 12, 6, and 3. 10 min dev, Rodinal 1:25, 68ºF. I'm thinking about doing more tests, next would be 9 min dev bracketed iso 25-6

View attachment 426268 View attachment 426269View attachment 426270

Why? You don't have us on the edge of our seats.

 

[TheGreatGasMaskMan]

Rollei Paul and Reinhold in Rodinal 1:25- another qualifying low dilution stock, but I'm waiting until late fall/ winter to do it.

 

[Alan Johnson]

OK- I fully acknowledge scanning isn't the most accurate means to show tonal variation, but here's an uncorrected bracket from the recording film- Iso 12, 6, and 3. 10 min dev, Rodinal 1:25, 68ºF. I'm thinking about doing more tests, next would be 9 min dev bracketed iso 25-6

View attachment 426268 View attachment 426269View attachment 426270

The first image of the Tesla Cybertruck shows the grain much better if the black and white points are adjusted, is this part of the plan?

 

[TheGreatGasMaskMan]

The first image of the Tesla Cybertruck shows the grain much better if the black and white points are adjusted, is this part of the plan?

yeah- I am planning on doing corrections, but I've got a few other rolls of film to do first

 

[TheGreatGasMaskMan]

OK, second thought... there's no rule that says I can't do a quick and dirty camera raw filter without dust removal
(iso 12, first frame of the bracket)

 

[Alan Johnson]

Way to go, that must be one of the best even if it is EI=12 and rarely found on ebay.

 

[Graham06]

@TheGreatGasMaskMan and others, I would love to see pixel-peeping max resolution crops of various combos. e.g. Mine are scanned at 6400dpi on a Epson V850 and reduced to 4800 and sharpened. Other best efforts will be different and not directly comparable. Photrio will apparently not resize images that are less than 1000 pixels on a side.

Questions I have: Do the silly low dilution Rodinal mixtures make sense? What is the best dilution if you want visible grain? Is it noticeably better than HC-110? How does Rodinal deal with old fogged film? Different developers with the same film? Different films with the same development workflow?

 

[TheGreatGasMaskMan]

@TheGreatGasMaskMan and others, I would love to see pixel-peeping max resolution crops of various combos. e.g. Mine are scanned at 6400dpi on a Epson V850 and reduced to 4800 and sharpened. Other best efforts will be different and not directly comparable. Photrio will apparently not resize images that are less than 1000 pixels on a side.

Questions I have: Do the silly low dilution Rodinal mixtures make sense? What is the best dilution if you want visible grain? Is it noticeably better than HC-110? How does Rodinal deal with old fogged film? Different developers with the same film? Different films with the same development workflow?

A- 100% zoom in photoshop:

original size- 6048 x 4011 pixels, Noritsu Koki.
the proper term is grain gawking...

b-
my low dilutions were calculated to be as close to doubling the chemistry as possible to make calculations easier- ie, 1:25 to 1:12, to 1:6 to 1:3, ect
I've mostly been testing with 1:25 and below, so I can say 1:25 is plenty grainy, but I'd assume higher dilutions are nice too
I have also used hc110, but never done any direct comparison tests. however, videos I've seen have shown that hc110 will give a softer grain while rodinal a coarser grain.

haven't really done much in the way of comparison testing.

 

[IpseLux]

Grainiest? Kodak TriX is pretty grainy, but amazingly it holds it together really, really well. The randomness of the exposed clumps make it a fantastic film to shoot.
By comparison, super fast B&W films with ISOs in the thousands were very grainy, often flat, and the grain was less random imho. They had (and may have) a predictable grain. Very noticeable too.
So, I’d say TriX 400 is a best choice. Grainy, but pleasant.

 

[TheGreatGasMaskMan]

ORWO UN54 Rodinal 1:3, 1 min 20s, 68ºF, Argus C3