How to achieve big sharp grain with normal tonality?

[Juan Valdenebro]

Hello...
I mean big sharp grain on wet prints, not scanning...
I can't get Rodinal nor 3200 film, and I don't want to crop... I want grain like the one we get from TMZ in TMax developer... Sharp and big, present in small and medium sized prints from 35mm and 120.
Extremes like Dektol tend to ruin tonality...
What would you do with ISO 400 film?
Thanks!

 

[koraks]

I'm not sure if what you want, can actually be done. There are two "workarounds" that come to mind. The first is lith printing, but then the normal tonality requirement becomes problematic. The second is trying to get the film to reticulate. This would more or less accomplish what you're looking for, but the problem is that modern film is very resistant to reticulation.

If course, start with the coarsest grain you can find at 400, which will likely be fomapan 400 film. But even then you'd likely have to resort to pretty extreme development to get really big grain in small prints - with all the tonal implication that come with such an approach.

 

[alanrockwood]

Hello...
I mean big sharp grain on wet prints, not scanning...
I can't get Rodinal nor 3200 film, and I don't want to crop... I want grain like the one we get from TMZ in TMax developer... Sharp and big, present in small and medium sized prints from 35mm and 120.
Extremes like Dektol tend to ruin tonality...
What would you do with ISO 400 film?
Thanks!

How about switching from TMax developer to Rodinal? That could help you achieve you goal, though perhaps not to the degree you want.

Another might be to sandwich your negative with a kind of mask to add graininess.

 

[Pflaumesaft]

Depends on the film, but look up acceptable CIs at the higher temperature ranges. Develop hot, ice bath stop, warm fixer, then ice water wash. None of the post developer stuff would affect tonality, but Foma 400 will show a bit of reticulation. Never tried in the printing stage, but worth an experiment too.

 

[ic-racer]

The higher grain paper, the more pronounced the grain. So try under development.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Push 35mm Tri-X or HP5+ to 1600 in Dektol, you'll get the grain you want. Same is true with Fomapan 400 pushed to 1000. I've process film in Dektol recently (this year) and tonality seemed fine (though I didn't push at all).

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Koraks, great idea using foma400! Thanks!
Donald, that's interesting... In fact I haven't used Dektol yet... I'll give it a try! Thank you!

 

[Paul Howell]

I would use Foma 400 or 320 Retro, then D76 diluted 1:3 which dilutes the solvent activity larger gain with increased acuity. Another old school film with large grain is Kentmyer 400 also sold in the U.S as Ultrafine 400.

 

[Donald Qualls]

I would use Foma 400 or 320 Retro, then D76 diluted 1:3 which dilutes the solvent activity larger gain with increased acuity. Another old school film with large grain is Kentmyer 400 also sold in the U.S as Ultrafine 400.

The same could be done with Xtol 1+2 -- in fact, it starts with less sulfite than D-76, so there's even less when diluted. Both have more suflite than Dektol 1+9, the usual dilution for film. Caffenol is a genuine no-solvent developer, and versions with ascorbate produce less stain (stain tends to reduce the appearance of grain in wet prints). I've noted considerable grain in scans of Caffenol negatives shot on Tri-X or Foma 400.

 

[Patrick Robert James]

Another simple one is Beutler's. You just need Metol, Sodium Carbonate and Sodium Sulfite. Easy peasy. It is a dilute developer that is pretty gentle, but has high acutance. It is difficult to blow highlights with it even on extended developing, but the compensation it provides still develops the shadows appropriately and the lack of sulfite gives you pretty big grain, at least in this day and age. It is comparable to Rodinal with a longer scale.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Thank you, Patrick !

 

[Maris]

The grain in the positive image is a map of the spaces between the grains of the negative. Dense negatives have fewer such spaces and they are further apart. I would start by making a very dense low contrast negative, lots of exposure plus soft development, and then recover normal tonality by projecting it on a very hard grade of paper. So much for theory. The only times I've done something like this is when trying to rescue a bad negative.

 

[Alan Johnson]

Another simple one is Beutler's. You just need Metol, Sodium Carbonate and Sodium Sulfite. Easy peasy. It is a dilute developer that is pretty gentle, but has high acutance. It is difficult to blow highlights with it even on extended developing, but the compensation it provides still develops the shadows appropriately and the lack of sulfite gives you pretty big grain, at least in this day and age. It is comparable to Rodinal with a longer scale.

I agree with this, Beutler gives sharper grain than Rodinal and more speed. Fomapan 400 would probably give most grain of this speed film but is really closer to 200 if you don't mind losing some speed compared to HP5+.

 

[George Collier]

I agree with Maris - and the contrasty paper will help accentuate the grain.

 

[Yukon Alvin]

Dektol 1:3 - 1:4 dilution @ 5 min with lots of agitation on Tri-x or HP5 type films gave me nice sharp golf balls. Not so good with T grain film.

 

[Rudeofus]

+1 to Maris' suggestion. An easy way to achieve higher overall density would be raising the pH of the developer or adding a silver solvent like a few dashes of fixer to the developer.

 

[Pixophrenic]

Hello...
I mean big sharp grain on wet prints, not scanning...
I can't get Rodinal nor 3200 film, and I don't want to crop... I want grain like the one we get from TMZ in TMax developer... Sharp and big, present in small and medium sized prints from 35mm and 120.
Extremes like Dektol tend to ruin tonality...
What would you do with ISO 400 film?
Thanks!

Which ISO 400 film can you get? And does it have to be the same film in 135 and 120? There are so many ways to make a high speed film grainy, but the general rule is that you take what is around known as a paper developer, dilute it 1:10 and determine the development time for low contrast by film clips. There are many possibilities besides Dektol, but in every case you will have to account for some speed loss. Another way, if you can buy or mix yourself a monobath. Especially in 35mm, this will give grain like you have never seen before. A less accessible way is to mix a simple formula containing glycin, catechol or pyrogallol. Neither of these three is particularly fine grained in low sulfite, but they do give excellent tonal scale.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Thank you, Pixo!

 

[Donald Qualls]

Another way, if you can buy or mix yourself a monobath. Especially in 35mm, this will give grain like you have never seen before.

The monobaths that are commercially available at present, Df96 and R.5, don't produce any stronger grain than ordinary film developers. I've used Df96, on 35mm Fomapan 400, and the grain was no worse than Parodinal, hardly any more than HC-110 B.

 

[Pixophrenic]

The monobaths that are commercially available at present, Df96 and R.5, don't produce any stronger grain than ordinary film developers. I've used Df96, on 35mm Fomapan 400, and the grain was no worse than Parodinal, hardly any more than HC-110 B.

Thank you, Donald, sounds intriguing. Unfortunately, it probably all depends on point of reference. IMO, whatever I put Foma 400 into, it was only deemed usable in 120. My experience with monobaths was with a few published formulas, like Crawley's FX 6. Good to know they got better.

 

[Donald Qualls]

My original HC-110 monobath (essentially R.1 that was superseded by R.3 and R.5 as New55 and then Famous Format improved my experimental formula) gave no worse grain than a conventional HC-110 process; I tested it on Tri-X (ca. 2004 expiration, so fresh film when I did this), so I'd have noticed if it was huge. It was distinctly less than a no-ascorbate version of Caffenol.

You could probably make a viable monobath from Xtol stock, but you couldn't use a rapid fixer component -- Xtol is too slow working. If I were going to make up a new monobath now, still intending to use rapid fixer, I'd probably use Dektol at something like 1+3 (instead of the usual 1+9 for film) and an alkaline rapid fixer like TF-4. I might still have to add some sodium hydroxide to kick up the pH to make the developer work fast enough to beat the fixer to the halide -- and that would have some very distinct grain.

 

[Lachlan Young]

You can get visible, sharp grain off most 400 speed films without much effort - and with nothing fancier than D-76. Generous exposure, generous processing, hard grade of paper, that's essentially all there is to it...

 

[Donald Qualls]

You can get visible, sharp grain off most 400 speed films without much effort - and with nothing fancier than D-76. Generous exposure, generous processing, hard grade of paper, that's essentially all there is to it...

True. Dilute as far as you're comfortable, too. At 1+2 there's less solvent effect (the sulfite is only 33 g/L instead of 100 g/L in stock), so the grain will be softened less.

 

[Alan Johnson]

LFA Mason "Photographic Processing Chemistry" p 120:
"Graininess is also often worse at high pH values,due partly to the rapid development of the coarse grains and partly due to the greater spread of the silver filaments into the much softer gelatin"
Approximate pH, D-76 ~ 8.5, Beutler ~11.5

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Great information, Donald, Alan... Thanks...
I guess going the Beutler route could give me big sharp grain, and, possibly, Neofin developers can be shipped internationally...
Which of the Neofin developers, diluted, is known for the sharpest biggest grain?