Can You Have It All? Fine Grain And Sharpness?

[Snapshot]

Hi All,

I've been experimenting with different films and I'm just starting to get the hang of T-Max. The Tri-X and APX film I've been shooting have been a breeze (relative to T-Max). I've noticed the following charatistics with my shooting and film development:

Tri-X: Interesting grain, good sharpness, relatively fast (especially souped in Diafine) and easy to work with. Great for night shooting.

APX 100: Some grain, excellent sharpness, great tones and easy to work with. I like it for landscape scenery with contrasts.

T-Max: Tight grain, excellent sharpness but a little flat in tones and not easy to work with. I've blown highlights with this film but I'm getting better.

I've been wondering is there any way of getting finer grain but maintaining sharpness. I am preferring APX's tones but sometimes I want to reduce grain visibility but I'm unsure this is possible without losing sharpness. I'm using T-Max Developer for T-Max and Diafine for APX and Tri-X. I've considered XTOL for improving grain visibility know it will not give me the same speed boost I've grown accustomed with when I use Diafine.

So, I guess the question is...

Is it possible to reduce grain without losing sharpness?

 

[Photo Engineer]

If you want both sharpness and fine grain, a lower speed film might fit your needs. I know, you have used high speed films, but then lower speeds are not all that bad.

As for most negative films, I find they work best with 1/3 stop overexposure to give the best grain and sharpness. I like T-Max and Tri-X, but I also use Ilford films with good results.

PE

 

[Paul Howell]

There has been lots of discussion, it seems to boil down to the subjective, what is fine grain to one viewer course to another. In my subjective opinion the best balance between fine grain and sharpness is D777, Edwal 12, and Edwal 20. Other seems to favor staining developes.

 

[fschifano]

If you can live with a slow film, Ilford's PanF+ might be a good choice as well. You need to handle it more carefully than a medium or fast film since it can build contrast very quickly with over development. For general purpose use though, you really can't beat the medium speed films (~ ISO 100) from the major players. The choice comes down to which flavor you like, and that is something only you can determine for yourself.

 

[Snapshot]

I was thinking of PanF+ for getting fine grain and sharpness but I have a stock of APX film and want to take advantage of it's tonal qualities. It's my guess that fine grain developers naturually reduce sharpness but I thought XTOL might be a good compromise.

 

[Bruce Watson]

I've been wondering is there any way of getting finer grain but maintaining sharpness.

Yes. Move up in format. For a given print size, larger film requires less enlargement, and thus shows less grain for the same film. You can't beat bigger engines in cars, or bigger film in cameras.

 

[jim appleyard]

Most of us settle on a compromise bewteen fine grain and sharpness as they are at opposite ends of the spectrum.

However, there are four ways to increase both:
Go to a larger fomat.

Go to a slower film.

Use a tripod with a cable release or self timer. I know it's not directly related to film sharpness, but it can be surprising how much camera movement hand-held shots can have.

Live with smaller prints.

 

[Snapshot]

Well, it seems there isn't a free lunch here so I want want both sharpness and low grain I'll have to make a change of film or format size.

 

[reellis67]

Barry Thornton described it quite well in his book "Edge of Darkness". He used a triangle as an analogy with speed, grain, and sharpness - he said something like you could have any two but never all three (it's been while since I read it, but I think that sums it up). In my experience that is mostly true unless as previously stated, you change something fundamental like print size or negative size.

- Randy

 

[Ian Grant]

If you can find some APX25 you'll find it's like moving up a format. It was omly available in 35mm and 120. You could also try EFKE25 (also sold as Adox25) and as fschifano suggests Pan F, theswe films will give you the best grain, sharpness and tonality.

However with careful exposure and processing both APX100 and Tmax 100 give excellent fine grain and sharpness, I've been using both in all formats up to 5x4 since their release. I suspect your not using the right developer to get optimal results.

Ian

 

[Scott Peters]

Go 8 x 10 or larger and contact print. Best of all worlds. You will be pleasantly surprised by the tonality in your prints as well.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Barry Thornton described it quite well in his book "Edge of Darkness". He used a triangle as an analogy with speed, grain, and sharpness - he said something like you could have any two but never all three (it's been while since I read it, but I think that sums it up). In my experience that is mostly true unless as previously stated, you change something fundamental like print size or negative size.

- Randy

Ahhh yes, the eternal triangle with the photographer being the hypotenuse.

PE

 

[Ryuji]

In short, if it were possible to improve grain, sharpness and all that, merely by changing the developer, everyone would, and D-76 would be completely forgotten.

In reality, there are many formulae and techniques advocated with all sorts of claims. It is so easy to waste time on testing them just to find the same as what some people already found and reported above.

When XTOL came out, we realized that there was still a small margin to improve all aspects of image quality, though by a small factor. XTOL had (has?) some reliability issues and how to solve it is one problem of interest.

At the same time, emulsion technology saw changes that improved speed, granularity and tonality, although sharpness is a personal taste in many cases. (e.g., as the film became less grainy, people make larger enlargements and think the film isn't sharp any more.)

Another issue is that most commercial developers are made to give at least usable image quality with most films, and most films are made to give decent image with D-76. One way I found to be potentially useful approach is to abandon this cross-compatibility and make a developer that is optimized for a particular film group without worrying about other films.

So the answer is that, what you are looking for may exist, but if you try to find it, you'll waste a lot of time.

I didn't find APX100 to be particularly fine grained film, and the grain and tonality are affected by overdevelopment, like older films. I would say the best is to change the film, move up the format, etc., but if you have to stick with APX100, I'd use XTOL or D-76 1+1 and do not overdevelop.

 

[Snapshot]

However with careful exposure and processing both APX100 and Tmax 100 give excellent fine grain and sharpness, I've been using both in all formats up to 5x4 since their release. I suspect your not using the right developer to get optimal results.

Ian

Well, if I can improve the grain of APX without sacrificing too much sharpness, I'm certainly interested in changing my current process. What developer would be recommended for APX to maximize fine grain? I just want to have options when using this particular film. I guess if all else fails and I need ultrafine grain, I can stick to T-Max or try PanF+.

 

[Snapshot]

I didn't find APX100 to be particularly fine grained film, and the grain and tonality are affected by overdevelopment, like older films. I would say the best is to change the film, move up the format, etc., but if you have to stick with APX100, I'd use XTOL or D-76 1+1 and do not overdevelop.

I can't make a film do what it isn't designed to do so if APX 100 is not going to give me fine grained results then I can use T-Max or Delta and maybe PanF+. I don't think overdevelopment is the problem, however, as I used Diafine and it's relatively straight forward to use.

Thanks for your input!

 

[Ryuji]

Well, Diafine is an interesting developer, but as a general suggestion, D-76 or XTOL should be the standard benchmark against which your current processing is compared. If you ask your question with the info of what you get with D-76 and Diafine and what you think is wrong/improvable then you are expanding the chance to get better quality answers, as well as better understanding of your processing.

 

[Ian Grant]

APX100 will give results at least comparable to Tmax 100, here in the UK a number of fine art photographers were using the film, usually processing in Rodinal and getting remarkably fine grained sharp tonal negatives/prints.

The first time I used the combination I was amazed at quality of 35mm which is outstanding. Of course Agfa recommened using Rodinal and it may well be that this is an ideal combination. Use the dev at 1:50 or 3:100. APX100 is certainly as fine grained as Tmax100, and equally as sharp, it also has one other advantage in usage it's effective ISO is 100, whereas for Tmax100 it's 50. (Which is also Kodak's recommendation for good tonality).

Ian

 

[Snapshot]

Well, Diafine is an interesting developer, but as a general suggestion, D-76 or XTOL should be the standard benchmark against which your current processing is compared. If you ask your question with the info of what you get with D-76 and Diafine and what you think is wrong/improvable then you are expanding the chance to get better quality answers, as well as better understanding of your processing.

This seems to be a sensible suggestion. I'll mix some XTOL tonight and develop a few rolls in it when I get the chance. Hopefully, I'll be able to provide better context for everyone to comment on.

 

[jim appleyard]

Well, it seems there isn't a free lunch here so I want want both sharpness and low grain I'll have to make a change of film or format size.

Correct, no free lunch, and both fine grain and sharpness are desirable, but don't let it end there. I used to tell my students, (imagine your photos are hanging in a gallery) that the viewer will have to be six inches from the photo to see grain and detect poor sharpness, but tonality and good composition scream at them from across the room!

Point being, don't get caught up in the grain/sharpness issue. A slightly grainy or mushy grainy photo will still be an eye catcher if it has good composition and tonality.

 

[Rolleiflexible]

The earlier reference to Barry Thornton was apt. His book, Edge of Darkness, (devoted to the pursuit of sharp images) discusses the relationship between sharpness and grain. He notes that Tech Pan is near-grainless but looks less sharp than grainy films. Grain has an important impact on how you perceive sharpness in a B+W image. Pick one. You cannot have both.

 

[Michel Hardy-Vallée]

Is it possible to reduce grain without losing sharpness?

Watch your prints from further away. Suddenly, grain will disappear...

 

[Ian Grant]

Michel HV

Try looking at a grainy 35mm print from a few meters or rather cm's away, in reality the difference is apparent from quite a distance away.

It appears your saying sloppy technique is acceptable.

Ian

 

[karavelov]

APX100 will give results at least comparable to Tmax 100, here in the UK a number of fine art photographers were using the film, usually processing in Rodinal and getting remarkably fine grained sharp tonal negatives/prints.
Ian

When I was shooting in 35mm I also had a lot of success developing APX100 with Rodinal. I have rather used high dilutions 1+100 - 1+200: higher the dilution - finer the grain. And the tonality and the sharpness are excellent.

 

[midlife crisis]

Best of both worlds

I recently switched to MF from 35mm. This is definitely the route to take if you wish to improve both grain without loosing sharpness. As they used to say in automotive circles "there's no substitute for (cubic) inches".

Regards
N

 

[Renato Tonelli]

I'm very disappointed to find out that there is no free lunch and that I can't have all three. Maybe I just keep forgetting. I will be trying Tri-X 4x5 in XTOL next week and see how things turn out.