Clear film on the B&W negative means underexposure and NOT overexposureBut I tried to flatten the water with long exposures using setting A at F16 which was reading 1/8th. These just developed clear on the neg which I guess is overexposed.
Is the increased graininess apparent in the darkroom print or are you scanning the neg and reversing it for viewing and /or printing?
That was definitely not my point.I think the previous post from Mark is correct in that it is my poor exposure
Robin,
For what this comment is worth - I have been shooting film my whole life (50 years +) but ony recently been scanning the negs to keep an inventory so to speak. My scanned negs look like yours with big grain but when I print in my wet darkroom - no issues. Grain reduced significantly. I cannot say for sure that it is what you may find but it may be worth a go for your own peace of mind and print your negs in a wet silver environment.
Cheers,
Sam
Thank you Sam ( and thanks Darin and everyone else taking the time to assist with this issue)
You have given me renewed hope and convinced me that I need to take the next step in my new found addictive hobby and jump into enlarging and printing my negatives. It sounds like the results will be far more satisfying and I am excited by this prospect. The scanner I am using is a Plustek 7400 with updated SilverFast 8 software. I see what everyone is saying about scanner software behaviour adjusting itself to the exposure and contrast which can increase the grain as I have just been scanning my first colour film home developed in the Tetenal C41 kit and the auto Midtone and Contrast settings are swinging a lot more either way with each negative than it does with my B&W negs.
The SilverFast software does not have a preset for this new B&W film Bergger Pancro 400. Having tried every film in the list available on the software I have settled on the Kodak T400 CN setting which seems to give a reasonable result. The Plustek is a cheap old scanner I picked up for $100. I will get a decent enlarger first before worrying about upgrading the Plustek.
Regards
Robin.
+1. Underexposed negatives result in more grain apparent in the scan.When scanning underexposed negatives, the software must increase the amplification digitally. The scanner lamp does not get any brighter. This also increases the apparent grain. Either from the existing grain or from dust in the optical system or digital noise.
You may find them more printable with a traditional darkroom.
The SilverFast software does not have a preset for this new B&W film Bergger Pancro 400.
When you scan an underexposed neg using the auto settings, the software tries to set the black and white points at the low end of the histogram. This usually ends up with crushed dynamic range as it compresses the data, making the graduations between areas of similar tone more coarse, showing off the grain in the sky. The sharpen algorithms then make them even more apparent. There is noise in the shadows, but the grain will still be most apparent in the brighter areas.Just an FYI for those who are suggesting underexposure as a possible problem here. In this specific case the example of the offending grain is most prominent in the clouds and sky, the areas of the negative that got the most exposure, in fact obviously plenty.
If there were an underexposure problem the problem would show in the dark areas of the positive.
While you may have a point for an underexposed shot of a foggy scene, that isn't the problem here.When you scan an underexposed neg using the auto settings, the software tries to set the black and white points at the low end of the histogram. This usually ends up with crushed dynamic range as it compresses the data, making the graduations between areas of similar tone more coarse, showing off the grain in the sky. The sharpen algorithms then make them even more apparent. There is noise in the shadows, but the grain will still be most apparent in the brighter areas.
Try shooting a foggy scene. If you underexpose it and then scan on auto, the foggy areas (brightest in the image) will be the most apparently grainy areas, much more so than the grain in the shadows.
You said if the scene were underexposed the grain would be appear in the shadows. That's what I was replying to.While you may have a point for an underexposed shot of a foggy scene, that isn't the problem here.
We are looking at a well lit scene with decent detail all the way into the shadows.
No, I said an underexposure problem shows in the shadows. That isn't about grain, it's about having enough exposure to get good well defined detail on the negative in the shadow areas.You said if the scene were underexposed the grain would be appear in the shadows. That's what I was replying to.
The grain in a scan is almost always most apparent in areas of sky or fog or any bright areas with small changes in tones and underexposing increases the chances of getting more grain from the scan.
Scanning on auto can massively increase the grain as it inevitably reduces/compresses the tonal range. Scanning it flat allows there to be much smoother gradients in large areas of sky, etc.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?