Minimizing grain with Delta 3200 when printing

Larry Kellogg · Sep 28, 2015

Hello,

So, I shot some Delta 3200 in bright sunlight and think it is grainier than I would like. How do I minimize the grain when printing? I suppose I should use no agitation. I'm printing with LPD 1:2 on Ilford Fibre Classic paper.

I've been trying to calibrate my Ilford 500 head with RH Designs Analyzer so perhaps my contrast settings have something to do with the problem.

I suppose I should print on the V35 VCC to see if I can get better results.

Thoughts?

Best,

Larry

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

markbarendt · Sep 28, 2015

The paper IMO doesn't, as a practical matter, add graininess to the look of a photo. Softer contrast may help but that provides tradeoffs.

One SWAG you might try is a double print exposure, 1 focussed well, 1 defocussed.

darkosaric · Sep 28, 2015

Hi,

Once when you have developed the film - not much can be done. Try on focomat V35 - I comparing to other enlargers V35 gives me slight lower contrast with more details (can help in appealingly less grain).
For future - when developing delta 3200 --> use DDX or Tmax or some similar developer that will minimize the grain.

RobC · Sep 28, 2015

once the grain is in the negative there's little you can do except use additional diffusion and that won't make much difference if you're already using a diffusion enlarger.

D3200 is grainy film. Learn to love grain.

You didn't say what EI you used or what you developed it in. Those are the things which give you some control over grain.

Microphen gives full 3200 speed but is the most grainy.

Use D3200 at EI 1600 and develop in Ilford DDX 1+4 18mins @ 20degC will give less grain but full 1600 speed.

summicron1 · Sep 28, 2015

I am told this film is really closer to 1600. Rate there and you might get less grain. Or, try shooting tri-x or HP5 at 1600 or even more. Both give less grain when pushed than 3200 does when shot normally.

Bottom line ... You shot the wrong film for what you apparently wanted. I found 3200 to be unacceptably grainy and so don't use it.

Thomas Bertilsson · Sep 28, 2015

The finest grain I've ever been able to get with Delta 3200 was with replenished Kodak Xtol. It is not much finer than Ilfotec DD-X 1+4, only a little. But it's a tad sharper too.

Delta 3200 is a compromise. It gives you the ability to get shots you wouldn't otherwise get. But it'll be very grainy. You can't get around that; it's got to do with the size of silver clumps (grains) and light sensitivity.

At the printing stage you can go abstract and print slightly defocused, or you could sacrifice sharpness and use a diffusion material between the lens and the paper. That will also lower contrast, and if you bump the contrast filter up to compensate, the grain will come back. Basically, it's tough to win.

I would focus on sharpness, which makes people look at details in the picture instead of the grain; it also helps to be very close to the subject - the closer you are, the less the details will be obscured by grain.

Roger Cole · Sep 28, 2015

Why did you shoot D3200 in bright sun?

I love D3200 (mainly in 120 where grain is much less of a problem though) but only where the light calls for it.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk and 100% recycled electrons - because I care.

Larry Kellogg · Sep 28, 2015

I think I had a roll in from the night before and did not switch, or, I thought rating it at 1200 would be less grainy than it is. I guess I messed up.

I suppose the grain will be a lot less pronounced on a page in a small book, say 6x8 inches than an 11x14 print.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

pentaxuser · Sep 28, 2015

Larry Kellogg said:
I think I had a roll in from the night before and did not switch, or, I thought rating it at 1200 would be less grainy than it is. I guess I messed up.

I suppose the grain will be a lot less pronounced on a page in a small book, say 6x8 inches than an 11x14 print.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No problem with rating D3200 at EI 1200 at all. That way and in most developers you will get full shadow detail but the plain fact is that D3200 even at 1600/1200 with DDX or Xtol in 35mm is a grainy film. I develop in Xtol and in most shots grain begins to show at as little as 5x7. 6x8 is only a little bigger and might be fine as well but there is no magic bullet that will give you the kind of grainless negs that D400 or TMax 400 will give and allow grainless 11x14 prints.

Well not in my experience anyway

pentaxuser

markbarendt · Sep 28, 2015

Larry Kellogg said:
I think I had a roll in from the night before and did not switch, or, I thought rating it at 1200 would be less grainy than it is. I guess I messed up.

I suppose the grain will be a lot less pronounced on a page in a small book, say 6x8 inches than an 11x14 print.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If you haven't already I'd suggest that you go ahead and print 11x14 as a test. Show it to somebody that doesn't "know any better" and ask them what they think.

It's a beautiful film and makes great pictures, I think many times we're too critical of graininess.

Larry Kellogg · Sep 28, 2015

Thanks, the image looks better if you step back a bit, LOL. Close up, it's kind of overwhelming. Perhaps I need to embrace my inner graininess.

I'm not ever sure my book images are 6x8, I think they're smaller. I'll check tonight.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Larry Kellogg · Sep 29, 2015

The images in my book are 4 1/2x6 7/8 for portrait and 5 1/4x7 1/2 landscape.

I'll scan my 11x14 print and slap it in my InDesign doc to see what it looks like in terms of grain.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

RobC · Sep 29, 2015

if you're scanning then use a tad of smart blur which will make it grain free. (assuming photoshop)

Bob Carnie · Sep 29, 2015

I was going to suggest a split print... use a black stocking for the low filter and no stocking for the 5 filter

you will get smoother mid to highlight tones and sharp black detail shadow..

this is a fashion trick I used for Hakim Optical . As well a very cool method of blurring and sharp images.

ic-racer · Sep 29, 2015

The lower contrast you can print with the less pronounced the grain. If you process the negatives so they print on #0 filtration the grain will be minimized.

cliveh · Sep 29, 2015

If you want less grain, why are you using that film?

Larry Kellogg · Sep 29, 2015

Thanks for all the great ideas! I think the images are salvageable. I messed up, obviously.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nokton48 · Sep 29, 2015

Delta 3200 at EI 800 processed in straight Microdol-X 6x9cm 120 Plaubel Makiflex

Makiflex Test Delta 3200 by Nokton48, on Flickr

Roger Cole · Sep 29, 2015

Well it's not hard to get no grain from a 6x9 negative and reasonable enlargement. The OP is talking about 35mm.

With films like this in 35mm you just have to embrace the look of grain, though different developers will influence it somewhat. With medium format it becomes different.

ritternathan · Oct 1, 2015

If you can mix your own I would try DS-10 full strength. Here is the recipe:

DS-10

Very fine grain film developer

Water 750ml
Dimezone S 0.15g
Ascorbic Acid 8g
Boric Acid 4g
Salicylic Acid 1g

Sodium Sulfite (anhydrous) 75g
Triethanolamine 99% 10ml
Water to make 1000ml

Mixing Instructions: Add chemicals in specified sequence.
Dilution: Stock or 1+1
Usage: Starting point dev time: 10 mins (Stock)

When I shoot 35mm and want the smallest grain this is where I turn. I think the TEA helps keep the grain small. YMMV.

David Lyga · Oct 1, 2015

Next time develop the 3200 for less time, to a lower contrast. That will give less grain.

I would like to see your negatives: if they are dense and overdeveloped ... that is your answer. - David Lyga

darkosaric · Oct 1, 2015

David is right: I just developed one Fomapan 400 from last weekend - and some frames that are overexposed (and I overdeveloped the whole film to same other frames) are much more grainy than other (on the same film) that are exposed ok or underexposed.

Rich Ullsmith · Oct 1, 2015

If you have a negative that you like but think is too "grainy," what Bob Carnie said about diffusion. I use simple clear plastic sleeve document protector with hairspray on it. Try with 10% of exposure diffused, then maybe 20%, etc. You should be able to smooth out some grain before your blacks start bleeding. You can also do this selectively, i.e. not the whole print but desired areas. Hairspray and clear plastic, give it a try.

Larry Kellogg · Oct 9, 2015

I'll try to take a picture of the negative in question. I didn't think it was overdeveloped but perhaps it is. I will try some of the diffusion techniques.

Someone I know suggested D-23 as a developer to tame the grain. Too late now though, of course.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

M Carter · Oct 9, 2015

The hairspray-plastic may be a bit much. I've experimented with stuff from my video-filmmaking gear between the enlarger lens and the paper - Tiffen pro mist filters, even some of those plastic Cokin diffusion filters. There's a tremendous range of diffusion levels out there.

I have some negs I shot in very dark situations with 3200/35mm that were very grainy, but loved the shots. Very hard to print, even harder to tweak with bleach, since midtones aren't so much midtones as tiny clumps of black grain, so the bleach just sort of burns things out. I found that lith printing was nice for those images. The way lith works with graininess suddenly made the grain much more a part of the image.

Minimizing grain with Delta 3200 when printing

Attachments

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency