Grain.... smooth or crunchy ?

John Bragg · Dec 22, 2015

I have come to the conclusion that our liking for grain or otherwise is similar to personal tastes in Peanut Butter. Some like smooth and lump free whilst others appreciate the random inclusion of added texture and character. Much depends on how you develop your film of choice. Some developers smooth things out whilst subduing the natural grain of a film and others maintain the natural texture and sharpness inherrent therein. I am a liker of regular sharp unaltered grain and I guess that is why I prefer Tri-X and HP5+ over Tmax and Delta. What is your preferrence and how do you set out to achieve the look that you are after ? Crunchy or smooth ?

Old-N-Feeble · Dec 22, 2015

Not grain but acutance... sharp, not mushy.

Gerald C Koch · Dec 22, 2015

Some images are enhanced by gain. Then too grain in an image causes the human eye to perceive it as being sharper than a grainless image of the same scene.

Sirius Glass · Dec 22, 2015

I prefer sharpness unless I have intentionally softened the focus.

Nathan King · Dec 23, 2015

If my image must have grain I prefer small, sharply defined grain that gives the appearance of sand. Perhaps that's why I prefer my condenser enlarger?

John Bragg · Dec 23, 2015

Nathan King said:
If my image must have grain I prefer small, sharply defined grain that gives the appearance of sand. Perhaps that's why I prefer my condenser enlarger?

That is how I like my negatives. I like texture like sugar in the highlights.

cliveh · Dec 23, 2015

John Bragg said:
I am a liker of regular sharp unaltered grain and I guess that is why I prefer Tri-X and HP5+ over Tmax and Delta. What is your preferrence and how do you set out to achieve the look that you are after ? Crunchy or smooth ?

I understand what you mean and agree, but can you explain why you prefer Tri-X and HP5?

Peltigera · Dec 23, 2015

I like very sharp pictures with a wide range of tones - unless the picture demands grain, then I like it like pebbles.

Sent from my A1-840 using Tapatalk

John Bragg · Dec 23, 2015

cliveh said:
I understand what you mean and agree, but can you explain why you prefer Tri-X and HP5?

I prefer the look of traditional cubic grain film to tabular grain.

ericdan · Dec 23, 2015

I like the grain I get from Tri-X @800 or 1600 in Microphen.
But Microphen is expensive in Japan. Have to find a cheaper replacement once I run out.

Sirius Glass · Dec 23, 2015

John Bragg said:
I prefer the look of traditional cubic grain film to tabular grain.

+ 1

Gerald C Koch · Dec 23, 2015

John Bragg said:
I prefer the look of traditional cubic grain film to tabular grain.

+2 or is it +3

John Bragg · Dec 24, 2015

So how does developer choice add to the mix ? I choose HC-110 Dilution H, a non solvent standard developer for good honest grain.

Sirius Glass · Dec 24, 2015

I use replenished XTOL and Rollo Pyro. What is bad dishonest grain? :confused:

John Bragg · Dec 24, 2015

Sirius Glass said:
I use replenished XTOL and Rollo Pyro. What is bad dishonest grain? :confused:

Partly dissolved, masked and hidden, along with lost sharpness.

Colin DeWolfe · Dec 24, 2015

It depends on the image. Some images I love Tri-X, some others Ilford Pan-F and Agfa APX 25. It goes to what the image needs.

Ron789 · Dec 24, 2015

What sort of grain I prefer? I'm still trying to find out.... but then I'm only a newcomer, I started less then 40 years ago.

nworth · Dec 25, 2015

Although the size of grain is mostly a function of the film itself, the developer affects the look of the grain a lot. The developer also affects the shape of the grains. The affects are often subtle. In general, some developers, like Rodinal, give sharp edged, crunchy grain. Fine grain developers, like D-23, are softer. Dilution changes the results - D-76 undiluted is fairly soft (not quite as soft as D-23), but diluted 1+1, D-76 is less soft, but still not crunchy. Some developers produce a mass of fine strings of silver, others produce little balls. Although you may not be able to see these bits of silver (they are smaller than the grains), they affect the way the picture looks. There doesn't seem to be much information about what different developers do to the grain in various films, but in general, fine grain developers produce softer results and acutance developers tend toward crunchy grain. It may not make as much difference as people think. (Does anyone know of any tests that compare viewer impressions of a film developed in soft and crunchy developers?) What do I prefer? I don't know. With Tri-X, I've been very happy with D-76, and I also like Pyrocat-HD.

ericdan · Dec 25, 2015

What's a Rodinal "crunchy" developer equivalent if you want to shoot Tri-X at 1600?
Rodinal is not very good for pushing, right?

John Bragg · Dec 25, 2015

ericdan said:
What's a Rodinal "crunchy" developer equivalent if you want to shoot Tri-X at 1600?
Rodinal is not very good for pushing, right?

Hi Eric, you could try stand developing in Rodinal. I have never attempted it but those who do claim success. Alternatively, you could try brewing your own Microphen substitute and using at 1:3 dilution. I see from your earlier post that Microphen is one of your favorites but is expensive in Japan. Here is a link to a formula for a similar developer if you fancy home brewing.

.http://www.lostlabours.co.uk/photography/formulae/developers/devID68.htm

ericdan · Dec 25, 2015

Interesting idea! Wonder where I would get this stuff from

Sent from Tapatalk

John Bragg · Dec 25, 2015

ericdan said:
Interesting idea! Wonder where I would get this stuff from

Sent from Tapatalk

These guys deliver worldwide. Not cheap but if you order enough may be economical.

https://www.silverprint.co.uk/

removed account4 · Dec 25, 2015

i like them both ...
these days i find photographs without grain to be too clinical for my tastes
clincal is good for some things , and grain is good for others.
i don't mind sensor grain either.

Ashfaque · Dec 26, 2015

ericdan said:
I like the grain I get from Tri-X @800 or 1600 in Microphen.
But Microphen is expensive in Japan. Have to find a cheaper replacement once I run out.

Agreed. If possible, you could try making ID-68 as mentioned by John.

According to Ian (lostlabours), it is very similar, if not the same. But don't confuse it with Autophen. It is very similar to ID-68, not identical.

Bests,
Ashfaque

Gerald C Koch · Dec 26, 2015

Try D-72 or Dektol; use 1+3, 1+5 or 1+7 dilutions for variable "crunchiness."

Grain.... smooth or crunchy ?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency