What is the grainiest bw film and developer?

[Graham06]

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

Oh boy, the first three. The composition is a bit weird, but I love the grain and the mist and the branches in the foreground and the lens light falloff. I guess they were quite underexposed?

I wonder how necessary the 1:3 was. e.g would 1:6 or 1:12 give you the same thing?

Sometimes something about the look just grabs you. The first post of #182 for example. I have both UN54 and Double-X in bulk rolls and love the tones normally exposed in HC110 B Don't like the tones of most of the HP5 around post #182, but then why do I like that one? Looking again, there are are no tones. Everything is a silhouette or white snow with a bit of mist indicating distance.

I'm glad you can get this look with films that can be bought today.

 

[Graham06]

Canon Demi EE17 half frame camera. Kodak 4-X. HC-110 B. Ridiculously underexposed. Photoshop heroics. Not sure why I like it. Look at the grain in the crop at 100%

 

[TheGreatGasMaskMan]

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.

I will be sharing my TX rodinal preliminary sometime in the future.

Oh boy, the first three. The composition is a bit weird, but I love the grain and the mist and the branches in the foreground and the lens light falloff. I guess they were quite underexposed?

I wonder how necessary the 1:3 was. e.g would 1:6 or 1:12 give you the same thing?

Sometimes something about the look just grabs you. The first post of #182 for example. I have both UN54 and Double-X in bulk rolls and love the tones normally exposed in HC110 B Don't like the tones of most of the HP5 around post #182, but then why do I like that one? Looking again, there are are no tones. Everything is a silhouette or white snow with a bit of mist indicating distance.

I'm glad you can get this look with films that can be bought today.

I think the composition in part can be attributed to the argus being a rangefinder, so my composition doesn't line up exactly. also think the lens has a vignette. and keep in mind, I've still got UN 1:1 and push tests to share...

 

[TheGreatGasMaskMan]

ORWO UN54, Rodinal 1:1, 39s, 68ºF, Argus C3.

 

[benderscameracorner]

The old Tri-X 40/5063 that came with a $15 bulkroller I bought in an antiques shop some two years ago and am still shooting through. Dev'd in 1:100 Rodinal with partial sit-stand method (half hour swish).

No idea exactly how old the film is but judging how it compares to Tri X rolls I've attained from the mid to late 1990s, I'm guessing about the same.

Rough as guts but has, ahem, much character. And the price was right...

 

[Graham06]

ORWO UN54, Rodinal 1:1, 39s, 68ºF, Argus C3.

Do you see anything in your 1:1 photos that can't be obtained with 1:12 or 1:25 dilutions and an appropriate adjustment to development time? I like the look of the last three which is of course made of more elements than just grain. The internet advice I've read for Rodinal is that the higher dilutions add a compensating effect to the response curve, and I wonder if the curve changes for lower dilutions or if there is a difference in apparent grain.

I'm going to start experimenting with Rodinal and will start with 1:12 or 1:25

 

[TheGreatGasMaskMan]

I'm afraid, the one way to really tell any difference between dilutions would be to do darkroom printing, which I don't really have access to doing. Data sheet stuff isn't something I'm familiar with, but could potentially help me dial in dev. times if I really wanted to optimize the process. besides, 1:1 and 1:3 use up so much chemistry, and require more care to do.

somewhere down the line, I'm also thinking about trying low dilution FX 39 devs as well, I've already started the preliminaries but it'll probably be a bit before I share those.

 

[Graham06]

Data sheet stuff isn't something I'm familiar with, but could potentially help me dial in dev. times if I really wanted to optimize the process. besides, 1:1 and 1:3 use up so much chemistry, and require more care to do.

This is why I asked: it is so much more fussy and expensive. Are you finding something there that makes it worth the effort? Or better, would I find something I find worth the effort to explore.

Everything adds something special. Your Argus C3 adds something different than my Canonet QL17. I have no idea why I love Panatomic-X or why Photrio even exists and is filled with people still taking black and white photographs…

Anyway I appreciate your exploration and will post my own when it happens. Will probably be Rodinal 1:12

 

[Bill Burk]

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.

You mentioned you have a bulk roll unperforated. See if you can make acquaintance with Mark Osterman, he’s got a perforator and may be willing to run it through for you.

 

[TheGreatGasMaskMan]

This is why I asked: it is so much more fussy and expensive. Are you finding something there that makes it worth the effort? Or better, would I find something I find worth the effort to explore.

Everything adds something special. Your Argus C3 adds something different than my Canonet QL17. I have no idea why I love Panatomic-X or why Photrio even exists and is filled with people still taking black and white photographs…

Anyway I appreciate your exploration and will post my own when it happens. Will probably be Rodinal 1:12

ah, ok. I guess my biggest purpose for trying the ultra low dilutions is to see if I can get higher grain or not.

and I will say, even if the c3 is having winding issues, it has a certain quality I really can't put my finger on.