Kentmere 400 D76 Stock, scans have crossed lines of grain

[Mustafa Umut Sarac]

I am developing kentmere 400 with d76 stock and they go to fuji lab scanner before printing. I am using Leica iii 1938 and Leitz Elmar 5cm 1938. Scans are strange , I found there are crossed patterns - when you enlarge too much - in the highlights , more disciplined grain than I expect ? Why is that ?

 

[loccdor]

I'd guess low quality scanning combined with scanner noise which gets worse on negatives with overexposure. Hard to say without seeing it.

 

[koraks]

crossed patterns

That's almost guaranteed to be a digital artifact and not caused by the film or how it was developed.

Hard to say without seeing it.

For sure; please post an example if possible, @Mustafa Umut Sarac

 

[dokko]

the Fuji Frontier doesn't deal too well with b/w in general, but if it's a strong artefact then it's likely due to bad settings.
for example, some labs forget to turn off the infrared dust removal, which gives very poor results.

 

[brbo]

Some Frontier scanners can do that (grid pattern).

 

[P Sanders]

Couple of questions. Cross patterns are seen when enlarging: are you viewing the scans on a monitor, generating a digitally enlarged negative or digitally printing the image enlarged?

Assuming the negative is continuous tone with no pattern (check the negs with a loupe on a light box) if they’re smooth, the pattern must be digitally generated. Some people prefer converting 35mm negs using a digital camera with macro lens to avoid the software settings and enhancements of flat bed scanners.

Before asking them to rescan, check the shadows and mid-tones for any other artifacts not present in the negative. It may be a simple negative highlight setting or something more involved if you feel the grain has also been overly sharpened.

good luck

 

[Mustafa Umut Sarac]

I saw the crossed patterns when I enlarged to %1600 setting. Due to large files , I cant attach the photos here and I forgot which scan shows the pattern but the highlights. Color scans are ultra good at fuji lab scanners but bw is so poor. I think it oversharpens the grain and unsharp masking gives the crosses as a friend said.
I miss Kodak lab gear but I dont know where all of these giant machines gone. May be they sold them to bulgaria , greece or may be much faraway. Thank you very much.

 

[koraks]

enlarged to %1600 setting

Then you're likely just looking at individual pixels probably combined with some jpeg compression artifacts. Simply put, you can't enlarge a digital file that much and still expect it to look OK.

 

[Prest_400]

I don't have a sample right now on hand but have observed that in some (colour) Frontier scans. There is a slight artifacting on some edges that looks like exaggerated pixelation. A but like some RAW files show in some tools before demosaicing.
Past 100% it's to expect to see artifacting, moreso if the scans are small. Then B&W has grain aliasing when scanning. My pet peeve are that some labs still offer small res/size scans.

 

[koraks]

This is what happens with insane compression levels as sometimes used by low-end labs/services. 200% view.

Same view, but on an image with far less compression:

Again, viewing digital images beyond 100% on a computer monitor doesn't say much; the only practical use case I can imagine is when doing very fine healing/spotting work on defects like dust etc.