Negative scan vs wet print

[Bikerider]

Using a high acutance developer with film is going to increase the appearance of grain in any case. Not to say compressing the tonal range. Using Foma film doesn't help because as good as it is (I use it) because it isn't the finest grain film anyway. The grain you get by scanning is exacerbated by the scanning process and 'scanning' using a digital camera isn't scanning per se it is taking a photograph of another photograph. If you want prints as grain free as possible you need a better fine grained film such as Ilford FP4 or Delta 100 and then develop it in something like ID11 or D76. Using a fine grain developer will certainly give less grain, but at the expense of slightly softening the image, both in acutance and extending the tonal range. so you have to compromise, hence using ID11or D76.

I sometimes have to send images away via an attachment in an E mail and to get the finest grain possible I always print the negative (usually 35mm) to A4 size where the grain in virtually invisible on the print and then scan the print in a flatbed scanner 1 to 1 and make no changes to the resulting image other than slightly lightening or darkening to compensate what the scanner sees as image as The resulting image when saved as a J Peg in the original size is virtually the same as the original print. Do not use anything like an 'Unsharp mask' as this will increase any apparent grain, this is inevitable and the nature of the beast.

 

[Bikerider]

I think it’s been mentioned already but the scan looks the way it does because of artifacts introduced by the scanning and software.

The grain in the scan isn’t in the negative. It has been added by the computer.

The wet print is more faithful to the negative. If you want to increase grain to match what you like, then to get that much more grain I would recommend getting a half frame camera. I think that significant of a change is needed, and I think half frame will be about right.

The grain is in the negative where else can it come from? What the scanning process does is increase the contrast and the 'grain' is the result of this contrast. 'Grain' or sometimes called 'noise' produced by the scanning process is not the same as grain from a negative via an enlarger. Scanning a print on a flatbed from A4 will be almost grain free as a wet print. Any other Mickey Mouse ways of trying to do it will never be the same.

 

[radiant]

Posted here few times, but I find this interesting comparison: 1200dpi scan (untouched, upscaled resolution) with Epson V600 vs darkroom print. One can easily see that 1200dpi is nowhere near resolving the actual grain.