print grain index for kodak and ilford b&w films

[bonk]

I stumbled across an intresting document about the print grain index of kodak color films.
Are there documents about the PGI of ilford and kodak B&W films too somewhere ?

 

[pentaxuser]

I stumbled across an intresting document about the print grain index of kodak color films.
Are there documents about the PGI of ilford and kodak B&W films too somewhere ?

Thanks for that. Equally interesting, will there be a comparable index for Fuji colour negs to allow meaningful comparisons between Fuji amd Kodak colour neg films? If Kodak use print grain index but Fuji stick with RMS, it may not do either company any favours when it comes to consumer choice. That of course presumes that each consumer makes decisions on film purchase based on "objectivity" as opposed to other factors which are unaffected by such measures.

I'd be surprised if a Fuji grain index list measured by Kodak gives different scores such that the "photographer in the street" should logically vote for one or the other in terms of makes.

pentaxuser
pentaxuser

 

[Roger Hicks]

I stumbled across an intresting document about the print grain index of kodak color films.
Are there documents about the PGI of ilford and kodak B&W films too somewhere ?

No. PGI is a Kodak standard, and look at the methodology: it's not really applicable to mono.

RMS depends on the equipment used, so Kodak RMS, Ilford RMS and Fuji RMS are all different. At one time Ilford had the idea of using an East German university to do comparisons on all films at their (Ilford's) expense but I don't know what became of it.

Ultimately, too, what does it matter? Faster films are grainier; overexposed films are grainier; films processed in some developers are grainier. Nor can RMS granularity tell you whether the grain is a pleasing shape or not (another big difference between color and mono, except chromogenic). Making pictures is the only meaningful test.