The effect of greater dilution on grainsize and contrast?

[michielp]

Lately I am wondering what the effect is of greater dilution in the developer on the contrast and the size of the grain of your B&W negative.

I know that a longer developing time gives more contrast and increases the grain size (correct me if I'm wrong), but what about the effects of greater dilution? What happens to the contrasts and to the grain goin from say 1:25 to 1:50 or to 1:100?

cheers, mike

 

[Anscojohn]

Grain size is virtually 100% a function of the level of development, all things being equal. Thus, greater dilution will only decrease apparent grain by decreasing the level of development. the grain will not be decreased if the film is developed to the same density and gamma. That being said, if the grain is sharper because of greater adjacency effects caused by extra dilution, the apparent grain might be subjectively less obtrusive.

Anscojohn, Mount Vernon, Virginia USA

 

[Tom Hoskinson]

Grain size is virtually 100% a function of the level of development, all things being equal. Thus, greater dilution will only decrease apparent grain by decreasing the level of development. the grain will not be decreased if the film is developed to the same density and gamma. That being said, if the grain is sharper because of greater adjacency effects caused by extra dilution, the apparent grain might be subjectively less obtrusive.

Anscojohn, Mount Vernon, Virginia USA

Film grain size is primarily determined by size and structure of the grains placed in the emulsion by the film manufacturer.

 

[percepts]

when you start these discussions you should state whether you mean silver grains or grain clumps. For the most part what most people call grain is actually grain clumps. The silver grains migrate into clumps during development. The actual silver grains are minute compared to the grain clump sizes. So what causes clumping? I have no definitive answer to that but I have observed that the higher th PH of the developer, the greater the tendancy of the grain to clump. I know the chemists will argue about this but that is my observation. If grain size is an issue for you, then use Ilford Perceptol or Kodak Microdol X to develop your negatives. You will then have a problem seeing the grain through your grain maginifier because of the lack of clumping that takes place. The grain you see, if you can will be very very fine.
Use Perceptopl at 1+2 or 1+3 @ 20deg C for appropriate time for your film. About 12mins for HP5 at 1+3. Also Reduce film speed by about 1 stop from iso speed when using either of these developers.

 

[dancqu]

[QUOTES=percepts;472925]
"I have observed that the higher th PH of the developer,
the greater the tendency of the grain to clump."

I've not checked specifically for that but have read that
developer ph is second only to the film itself where grain
size is concerned.

"Kodak Microdol X to develop your negatives. You will then
have a problem seeing the grain through your grain magnifier
because of the lack of clumping that takes place."

First place does go to Microdol X for least grain while it
and Perceptol maintained maximum sharpness. The latter
slipped a bit on grain. Dilution made little to no difference.
That from an article by Otis Sprow in Darkroom and Creative
Camera Techniques. Panatomic X and Agfapan 25 were tested.

Rodinal developed the most grain; as good though as any
other for sharpness. If I'm not mistaken, Microdol X is a very
low ph developer with long developing times. Is it available
off-the-shelf? I home brew; perhaps a formula? Dan

 

[percepts]

[QUOTES=percepts;472925]
If I'm not mistaken, Microdol X is a very
low ph developer with long developing times. Is it available
off-the-shelf? I home brew; perhaps a formula? Dan

Assuming Kodak are still making it, then it should be available off the shelf. I use Perceptol for 35mm film as it is readily available in the UK where as Microdol X is not. For 4x5 I use HC110 which is also readily available in the UK.

 

[John Bragg]

Greater dilution in combination with less agitation can produce some very smooth results. There is not nescessarily less grain, just that it looks more refined and less clumpy. This is Tri-X (@ EI 200) in HC-110 Dilution H. 9 mins @ 20c. Agitation continuous for first 30 secs, then 2 gentle inversions at the start of each subsequent minute.Contrast is also held in check by the slight compensation at this dilution.

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showfull.php?photo=63551

 

[Tom Hoskinson]

[QUOTES=percepts;472925]
"I have observed that the higher th PH of the developer,
the greater the tendency of the grain to clump."

I've not checked specifically for that but have read that
developer ph is second only to the film itself where grain
size is concerned.

"Kodak Microdol X to develop your negatives. You will then
have a problem seeing the grain through your grain magnifier
because of the lack of clumping that takes place."

First place does go to Microdol X for least grain while it
and Perceptol maintained maximum sharpness. The latter
slipped a bit on grain. Dilution made little to no difference.
That from an article by Otis Sprow in Darkroom and Creative
Camera Techniques. Panatomic X and Agfapan 25 were tested.

Rodinal developed the most grain; as good though as any
other for sharpness. If I'm not mistaken, Microdol X is a very
low ph developer with long developing times. Is it available
off-the-shelf? I home brew; perhaps a formula? Dan

Try this Microdol-X substitute recipe, Dan:


In 1 liter of water dissolve:
Metol 5 grams
Sodium Sulfite (anhydrous) 100 grams
Sodium Chloride (iodine free) 30 grams

 

[Anscojohn]

Film grain size is primarily determined by size and structure of the grains placed in the emulsion by the film manufacturer.

******
That's covered by "all things being equal," as a moment's reflection might make more understandable.

Anscojohn, Mount Vernon, Virginia USA

 

[dancqu]

Try this Microdol-X substitute recipe, Dan:

In 1 liter of water dissolve:
Metol 5 grams
Sodium Sulfite (anhydrous) 100 grams
Sodium Chloride (iodine free) 30 grams

Included in P. Dignan's Classic B&W Formulas is
another substitute formula from R. W. Anderson.

Metol 7.5 grams
Sodium Sulfite anhydrous 100 grams
Sodium Bisulfite 7.5 grams
Water to make 1 liter.

Almost a D-25. Times and results are the same
as for Microdol-X. The substitute's weight is not
the same as the packaged. I doubt that sodium
chloride will reduce the ph while S. bisulfite
should some little.

If one would like to go the ultra-fine grain route via
low ph and without all that chemistry a bicarbonated
FX-1 or Beutlers should be worth a try. As with the
substitutes there likely would be a speed hit. Dan

 

[Tom Hoskinson]

Included in P. Dignan's Classic B&W Formulas is
another substitute formula from R. W. Anderson.

Metol 7.5 grams
Sodium Sulfite anhydrous 100 grams
Sodium Bisulfite 7.5 grams
Water to make 1 liter.

Almost a D-25. Times and results are the same
as for Microdol-X. The substitute's weight is not
the same as the packaged. I doubt that sodium
chloride will reduce the ph while S. bisulfite
should some little.

If one would like to go the ultra-fine grain route via
low ph and without all that chemistry a bicarbonated
FX-1 or Beutlers should be worth a try. As with the
substitutes there likely would be a speed hit. Dan

Yes Dan, I posted R.W.Anderson's substitute formula a long time ago in the APUG recipes section and it caught quite a bit of flack.

The inclusion of Sodium Chloride is supported by the Microdol-X MSDS.

 

[michielp]

Thanks everybody, for the remarks. But all of them were about grain size. But what about contrast? What happens to the contrast when you increase the dilution/greater dilution?

In other words, why would one choose a certain dilution? Why go to a greater one, why go to a larger one?

Cheers again, Mike

 

[argus]

Thanks everybody, for the remarks. But all of them were about grain size. But what about contrast? What happens to the contrast when you increase the dilution/greater dilution?

In other words, why would one choose a certain dilution? Why go to a greater one, why go to a larger one?

Cheers again, Mike

Michiel,

contrast is not controlled by dillution but rather by decreasing/increasing development time and agitation.

G

 

[percepts]

Yes changing dilution will change contrast.

If you change from say 1+1 dilution to 1+3 and leave time and temp the same, you will change the effective film speed (reduce) and the characteristic curve shape will also be changed. It tends to rise more slowly (longer toe) and depending on film type, you can introduce a marked shoulder into the film at an earlier point. This is what compensation does. The reverse is also true, i.e. reduce dilution from 1+3 to 1+1 or 1+0 and you will tend towards a shorter toe and shorter shoulder at a higher point.

 

[michielp]

Yes changing dilution will change contrast.

If you change from say 1+1 dilution to 1+3 and leave time and temp the same, you will change the effective film speed (reduce) and the characteristic curve shape will also be changed. It tends to rise more slowly (longer toe) and depending on film type, you can introduce a marked shoulder into the film at an earlier point. This is what compensation does. The reverse is also true, i.e. reduce dilution from 1+3 to 1+1 or 1+0 and you will tend towards a shorter toe and shorter shoulder at a higher point.

How do these changes affect the contrast? (I guess I'm not well known to the characteristic curve shapes)

These changes are when the developing time is left the same, while diluting the solution.

But what if we change the time accordingly as well? Longer time for higher dilution, and vice versa. So what changes can be expected if one changes the dilution and adjusts the developing time accordingly?

 

[percepts]

the contrast is not altered evenly along the characteristic curve.

low contrast would be a flatter curve, longer dynamic range accepted onto film but still fits the paper.

high contrast would be a steep curve, shorter dynamic range fits on film and still fits to paper.

contrast is usually measured as gamma which is the average steepness of the curve over its central portion but changing dilution affects both toe and shoulder as well so it affects both shadow contrast and highlight contrast and not just overall contrast.

The variables are endless which is why you have to test for yourself and arrive at something which suits you. i.e. each dev and film combination combined with temp, agitation and how well you metered, will produce different results. So precise consistency is the name of the game when metering and developing film otherwise your test results will be meaningless.

changing time may remove most of the effect on toe of the curve but typically you will lose separation between zone 0 and zone 1 when you dilute developer unless you alter time and or film speed to compensate. Time may also increase contrast to negate some of the effect on the shoulder. But once again, it all depends on your film and dev combination etc etc.

 

[efreddi]

...I have no definitive answer to that but I have observed that the higher th PH of the developer, the greater the tendancy of the grain to clump. ...

I can confirm this. Actually I remember that somewhere I have read that this is due to a sort of softening of the gelatine at higher pH so the silver grains are more free to clump together, but I don't know if it's the correct explanation.
Regards


Elia

 

[percepts]

when its gets down to chemistry and no one knows the actual chemical formula of any film or the make up of its gelatin and the vast majority don't know the true chemical formula of the dev they are using or how the reaction process between the unknown film formula and dev formula will take place, its no wonder that there is so much speculation on what any change will do to your results. All you can do is experiment and be very very observant of what happens and keep notes. Film development is not an exact science unless you live and operate inside a vacuum such as a Kodak lab and know exactly what all the parameters are.

 

[pentaxuser]

Mike. Have a look in the standard gallery at Thomas Krebs " Gottingen 1994". Sorry Thomas my key board doesn't have an umlaut and I've forgotten the ACS11? code for it. He used ID11 at 1:5 which is a dilution I hadn't seen mentioned before. Stock or more often 1:1 is the normal ratio. A couple of us remarked on this and he said that he found it useful in high contrast scenes.

So high dilution ID11 appeared to work for high contrast scenes. Certainly it was an amazing shot and would make ID11 go a long way.

pentaxuser

 

[fhovie]

Diluting a developer that has 80 to 100 grams of sodium sulfite / liter will always increase the apparant grain size because the solvent action of the sulfite ends when the concentration is cut in half. D76 straight will always look smoother than D76 at 1:3.

At 1:3 you will get an increase in film speed, sharpness and grain.

 

[percepts]

At 1:3 you will get an increase in film speed, sharpness and grain.

are you sure you meant increase in film speed?

 

[fhovie]

Yes - If you read Anchel - it makes sense - the weaker developer (and longer time) has more time to work on the shadows while becoming exhausted in the highlights - this causes more development in the low zones bringing up the film speed.

are you sure you meant increase in film speed?

 

[dancqu]

- the weaker developer (and longer time) has more
time to work on the shadows while becoming exhausted
in the highlights - this causes more development in the
low zones bringing up the film speed.

I don't necessarily equate very dilute with weak.
For example Beutler's and FX-1 are by nature very
dilute carbonate activated compensating developers.
They are not weak.

D23 is a weak developer even though at a 1:3 dilution it
has four times the amount of metol per liter as FX-1;
a sulfite activated developer. Dan