excessive grain and no grain at all

removed account4 · Sep 23, 2014

no, this is not a satire or parody thread
but this ...

if you were given the assignment to make a film like tmax100 ( or delta 100 ) excessively grainy, what would your recipe be for success.
i would hope if you post an answer it would be from experience, not i heard or someone suggested
also if you were given the task of making a normally grainy film .. not grainless, but less grainy what would you do?

the film would have to be 35mm film , and the enlargement would be 11x14, nothing gigantic or muralesque or tiny ..

i have had threads sort of like this in the past that i started as a satire, but this is for keeps ..

and i would hope that this would be a reference down the road since every week or 2 someone is asking for grainy film or sharp/not grainy film.

David Brown · Sep 23, 2014

I'm not one to try and make things what they are not intended to be. If I wanted a Delta film with lots of grain, It would be Delta 3200, not 100. Simple as that. "Oh, but I need to shoot outdoors in bright sunlight!" OK, that's what neutral density filters are for ...

And in between, there's always Rodinal, Acufine, and that ilk. In my experience, Tri-X in Acufine in 35mm gives all the grain one should reasonably want.

Going the other way, the only thing I have experience with is the late, great Microdol-X. But it's "grain reducing" effects were small.

Dr Croubie · Sep 23, 2014

I just devved some FP4+ in Perceptol, ei50. Holy hell. Cannot see any grain at all.
Even scanning at the equivalent of blowing up a 4x5" to 5.4x6.1m (I'm sure I'll never get paper in a 6 meter roll) I can't see any grain a foot from my screen.
FP4+ in Rodinal, however, if I squint enough I can just about see it on the neg without even scanning or printing it. Could cut yourself on the sharpness of it though.

Meanwhile, just shot my first Delta 3200 in 135 (normally I do 120), in Microphen. Grainy as all hell too, but was kinda expecting it. Somehow the Delta 3200 I used to get done at a lab was a whole lot less grainy, I think they used TMax dev, so I've bought a bottle to see how that goes.
Also, I've shot D3200 outdoors at f/16 with a CPL and filter, it just got down to the 1/2000 limit of the camera. Didn't look too bad either.

bdial · Sep 23, 2014

I agree with David in that my first choice in making those two films excessively grainy would be to use something else.
But, if one of those were the only choice, I would give it generous exposure and process in Dektol. I would also compose loosely to maximize the enlargement. Shooting from a tripod would likely be necessary to get a slow enough shutter speed to allow a smallish aperture so as to keep things sharp.

I've never had a reason to do that, so that answer is not from direct experience, but does come from knowledge of the materials and processes.

For reducing the apparent grain, I would probably process in straight, replenished Xtol. I've been shooting quite a lot of Tri-X 35mm lately, and the Xtol has been producing surprisingly little grain.

removed account4 · Sep 23, 2014

in light of what you have said ..
i will change completely what i have asked ...
instead i would suggest ways of getting a virtual grainless negative
any film, any developer
and a negative that is as grainy as a sandstorm, any film, any developer
both still enlarged to 11x14

sorry for suggesting to stick a round peg in a square hole ..

Athiril · Sep 23, 2014

T-Max 100? Pushing to 1600 using a pre-flash to keep shadow detail ought to do it. I know T-Max 'resists' a lot of bad treatment though.

Dr Croubie said:
I just devved some FP4+ in Perceptol, ei50. Holy hell. Cannot see any grain at all.
Even scanning at the equivalent of blowing up a 4x5" to 5.4x6.1m (I'm sure I'll never get paper in a 6 meter roll) I can't see any grain a foot from my screen.
FP4+ in Rodinal, however, if I squint enough I can just about see it on the neg without even scanning or printing it. Could cut yourself on the sharpness of it though.

Meanwhile, just shot my first Delta 3200 in 135 (normally I do 120), in Microphen. Grainy as all hell too, but was kinda expecting it. Somehow the Delta 3200 I used to get done at a lab was a whole lot less grainy, I think they used TMax dev, so I've bought a bottle to see how that goes.
Also, I've shot D3200 outdoors at f/16 with a CPL and filter, it just got down to the 1/2000 limit of the camera. Didn't look too bad either.

If you're scanning a flatbed I am not surprised you can't see any.

removed account4 · Sep 23, 2014

Athiril said:
T-Max 100? Pushing to 1600 using a pre-flash to keep shadow detail ought to do it. I know T-Max 'resists' a lot of bad treatment though.

If you're scanning a flatbed I am not surprised you can't see any.

tmax does resist everything!
i love abusing it in coffee though
and over exposing it about 3 or 4 stops

DannL. · Sep 23, 2014

I have a roll of Delta 400 (35mm) that I developed years ago in warm Dektol. The grain is pleasant yet quite intense. I can't recall the dilution or exact temperature, but I recall having just mixed it and I failed to let it cool down properly.

Bill Burk · Sep 24, 2014

Andreas Feininger to the rescue: Contact print the original negative and experiment with a copy.

This was how he recommended experimenting with reticulation. You could do grain experiments the same way.

NB23 · Sep 24, 2014

Developing in very warm developer is good to promote grain.

The opposite? I'd go with a fine grain developer, develop it at 18-20c and... that's about it.

David Allen · Sep 24, 2014

Grain: Foma 400 developed in a print developer.

No grain: Pan F / Delta 100 developed in a two-bath developer.

Bests,

David.
www.dsallen.de

mauro35 · Sep 24, 2014

My experience is Delta 3200 exposed at EI 6400 and slightly underdeveloped in Microphen. Enormous grain size. On the other hand, Fuji Acros 100 at EI100 in D76. So fine grain I cannot focus on it when enlarging.

darkosaric · Sep 24, 2014

NB23 said:
Developing in very warm developer is good to promote grain.

David Allen said:
Grain: Foma 400 developed in a print developer.

This is what I do when I want:

Big grain - Fomapan 400 or Delta 3200, warm Rodinal 1+10 (expensive, I know), agitate like crazy, and overdevelop:

Dead Link Removed

Small grain - Any film iso 100 in any developer:

Dead Link Removed

No grain - Kodak TP or Adox CMS 20 in Technidol or adolux:

Dead Link Removed

removed account4 · Sep 24, 2014

thanks for the posts
hopefully others will chime in how they do it and maybe
if someone in the days ahead wants to learn how to make grain or no grain
they can find it ..

i make grain by overexposing like mad, and developing in either print developer or coffee ( or both )
but you have to be aware that the negatives will be dense and to some, they could be hard to print.
i don't do grainless often but i just use tmx or tmy maybe over expose 1/3 stop and process it in sprint film developer for the
time it says to developer normally ...

bill, test negatives+prints are a great idea

+ thanks for the links darko ! great stuff youhave there!

Alan Johnson · Sep 24, 2014

Altman and Henn did some research on this, see the table at the end of the link:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/rec.photo.darkroom/altman$20henn%7Csort:relevance/rec.photo.darkroom/zp8vBn9P8Nw/KwOF132MEq0J
AH-18 was the most grainy, it is Kodalk with low metol and sulfite.
It might be possible to get more grain by replacing Kodalk by sodium hydroxide but this research has not been done AFAIK.

excessive grain and no grain at all

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency