Grain

Wade D · Jun 5, 2006

I shoot Tri-X and develop in D-76 for 4X5. The smooth grain and tonality are great. I've been using this combo for 30+ years. There are probably newer films/developers that are also good but I'm not into experimenting unless the
Great Yellow Father stops making them.

Harry Lime · Jun 5, 2006

>It depends on the subject matter and what message is being conveyed

Bingo.

But for the most part I like a little texture in my photos. That's probably one reason why I don't shoot digital...

I love the look of Tri-X. Even in a fine-grain developer it has some texture. Gives your eye something to focus on.

Shawn Mielke · Jun 5, 2006

Lots of middle of road, even headed answers and voting here. I love grain. It's one of the reasons I shoot film. Also, the only reason to shoot film is to shoot black and white film (gospel according to Shawn). I like the raw and dirty look. I like the painstakingly charcoal and soot look. (I like the well heeled aesthetics of slop). I like to look and feel as though I could see the world and it's people made of subatomic grain particles, each savagely fighting the other for time and space. I am so not into two dimensional curation of the outer world; the outer world is my interior, and in my out there, there is GRAIN.

Grain of this order is managed by contrast, which is, in turn, managed by, well, every single other photographic factor.

John Bragg · Jun 5, 2006

I used to hate the presence of grain in my work, and tried to keep it to a minimum by using fine grain solvent types of developers. This well intended plan has led to many mushy, fuzzy, dull prints over the years. Now however I use developer with little or no solvent effect, Rodinal...... not renowned as a fine grain brew, but OH! what tones !!!! My TRI-X has never looked better. High dilution, and developing to the correct contrast with reduced agitation give me GOOD GRAIN, the sort inherent in the film and the building blocks of my images. J.B.

Phillip P. Dimor · Jun 5, 2006

I love the look of 120 Tri-x at 1000, souped in Acufine. For me, that was/is my holy grail of combinations.

I like grain. Glad to hear that there are others who enjoy a bit of grit..

removed account4 · Jun 5, 2006

grain is okay ..
sometimes it us useful, sometimes not .....

it all depends ...

i checked all 3 boxes

MMfoto · Jun 5, 2006

For me, grain size, in addition to subject, also depends on the relative size/distance of subject details. There is a big differance between a face at 1 meter vs a face at 3 meters or a close up vs a landscape with a grainy film.

Thomas Bertilsson · Jun 5, 2006

I don't think the survey was set up correctly. Add the percentages up, and you'll see why...

I concur with many others that I like all three different options. It's like asking if I like a Corvette or a Caddilac Escalade best. Depends on what I have to do with it.

- Thom

nworth · Jun 5, 2006

For my work, I don't like the grain to be obvious. That does not mean that it always needs to be invisible. It just should not become a subject in the picture. Sometimes you can have a lot of grain that is very visible (TMZ in Rodinal) and the picture is just fine. The grain is part of the gradation not part of the picture. (Distinguish here between the picture (the thing you are trying to portray) and the image (the pattern of silver or dye spots on the film)). Other times it is better if it is truly invisible. Most of the time I go for something between invisible (TMX, Pan-F+) and subtle (TX).

SteveH · Jun 5, 2006

I like 125tpx in HC110 and APX100 in Rodinal. To me, the 125tpx seems slightly more creamy; very pleasing.

psvensson · Jun 5, 2006

I don't mind the grain itself so much, but in my work, I feel that when it's visible, the continuous tone of the image seems to break up a bit and luminosity is lost. Some other photographers seem to be able to maintain luminosity even in grainy images - Salgado for instance. I experiment now and then with accutance developers, trying to replicate the results, but no luck so far.

fparnold · Jun 5, 2006

Robert,

The poll should read:

None: (Velvia, K25)
Normal: PRO-160S, Provia
Some: UC-400
More: Kodachrome-200
Extra: Scott 640T, GAF-500 (gone, alas)

My personal answer is "around normal, known as Portra-160NC in 6x6cm". The grain in 400UC is not bad either; adds just enough tooth to enhance the acutance when enlarged, without getting so obvious as to be annoying.

(so, yes, color shooters worry about Grain as well, in addition to the other 97 secret herbs and variables)

BWGirl · Jun 5, 2006

Well, I have tried & tried to 'like' grain.... I've seen it in other people's photos and heard why they wanted it there. I've tried to see it as a 'good thing' or even an essential thing. But alas... I just do not get it. I guess I just am not that 'arty' or something. I put it in the same category as out-of-focus prints... don't 'get' those either. :confused:

I'm just a simple girl. If I have grain... I want it to be in my Irish oatmeal.

Markok765 · Jun 5, 2006

I am going to dev hp5 in rodinal 1:200 for 2 hours, i wonder what the grain wil be like

Travis Nunn · Jun 5, 2006

BWGirl said:
...I guess I just am not that 'arty' or something. I put it in the same category as out-of-focus prints...don't 'get' those either...

I'm with you Jeanette.

Flotsam · Jun 5, 2006

It is like the "brushstroke" of photography.
Some use a palatte knife, some use an airbrush.
It's all good as long as the image communicates.

Petzi · Jun 6, 2006

I didn't realise that Pan F was grainless.

BWGirl · Jun 6, 2006

Petzi said:
I didn't realise that Pan F was grainless.

Nothing is 'grainless'.... but PanF is like "High Definition TV" vs. the old analog signal TV. haha

Andy K · Jun 6, 2006

BWGirl said:
Nothing is 'grainless'.... but PanF is like "High Definition TV" vs. the old analog signal TV. haha

True, but at least you can still watch the old analog signal without loss of sound or the picture freezing when your neighbour uses their mower.

Petzi · Jun 6, 2006

I haven't shot Pan F in almost 20 years. Is the grain really finer than e.g. T-Max 100 or Acros?

BWGirl · Jun 6, 2006

Andy K said:
True, but at least you can still watch the old analog signal without loss of sound or the picture freezing when your neighbour uses their mower.

yes, PanF is finer grained than Acros... another personal favorite of mine.

Grain

How much grain do Like?

None(Pan F+)

Normal(hp5 or tri-x)

Lots (Delta 3200 In RODINAL) Gasp?!?

Wade D

Harry Lime

Shawn Mielke

John Bragg

Phillip P. Dimor

removed account4

MMfoto

Thomas Bertilsson

nworth

SteveH

psvensson

fparnold

BWGirl

Markok765

Travis Nunn

Flotsam

Petzi

BWGirl

Andy K

Petzi

BWGirl

Grain

How much grain do Like?

None(Pan F+)

Normal(hp5 or tri-x)

Lots (Delta 3200 In RODINAL) Gasp?!?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency