Too grainy - why?

[Ruvy]

Friends who use TMAX400 get nearly grain free images, mine turns out very grainy. I have used HC-110 and Ultrafin (no xtol available here) with not enough difference to justify one or the other. Is it an issue of over development? no pre soaking? no stop bath? I shoot it at 200 EI, aimnig at darkest area and close 2 stops than open 0.5-1.5 stop depends on the filter used. could it be due to airport security XRay scanning?

If you use these developers are you going by recommended time or found better? Digital truth suggest same as manufacturer so no point reoffering me to their site.

here is good example 1:1 film scan on Epson flat bad (only a partial excuse for softness) http://www.pbase.com/ruvy/image/64536582.jpg

Thanks
Ruvy

 

[Roger Hicks]

The three main things that affect grain are:

overexposure

overdevelopment

choice of dev

Depending on your metering technique I'd suggest that the first is the problem.

Cheers,

Roger (www.rogerandfrances.com)

 

[Zen]

As Roger says, overexposure can be a big problem.

Only recently I've used a roll of Ilford FP4+ on a bright sunny day, some shots were taken on the beach, most of which were seriously grainy, I guess due to the sun's reflection on the sand causing overexposure. The other shots on the roll had fine detail.

 

[catem]

The other thing that effects the appearance of grain is the tone - the mid-greys will show more grain than dark or light tones - your photo does look exceptionally grainy, did you sharpen it digitally? I've used TMAX400 a bit, it can go grainy on you but shouldn't if you try to avoid points mentioned...
Good luck
Cate

 

[frugal]

I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the temperature you're developing at affect grain as well?

 

[MWGraves]

Temperature definitely affects grain. With HC110, I've gotten finer grain and greater acutance by using a 1:63 (from US concentrate) dilution. The biggest problem I see with HC110 is that is seems to compress highlight detail. So if you're shooting fluffy white clouds with lots of subtle detail, you get ... clouds. Never used ultrafin.

 

[Roger Hicks]

I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the temperature you're developing at affect grain as well?

You're absolutely right, but there are at least four ways to overdevelop:

longer times

more concentrated dev

higher temperatures

more agitation

... and the effects of all four are different, and vary from film to film. Alchemy!

Cheers,

Roger (www.rogerandfrances.com)

 

[fhovie]

There is also reticulation from rapid changes in temperature. Your developer could be 70F and your stop could be 80F - easy mistake to make here where I live. I never allow a temp change of more than 4 degrees. I have always gotten smooth negs from TMAX400 - I always use appropriate developers; XTOL, D-76, Microphen, Microdol X, - all these developers will keep grain under control.

 

[Roger Hicks]

There is also reticulation from rapid changes in temperature. Your developer could be 70F and your stop could be 80F - easy mistake to make here where I live. I never allow a temp change of more than 4 degrees.QUOTE]

Absolutely true but (mercifully) less of a problem than it used to be; Tri-X in particular is a LOT better than it was only a couple of years ago. Your 4F/2C limit should be an adequate barrier against almost anything, and overkill with e.g. anything Ilford.

Cheers,

Roger (www.rogerandfrances.com)

 

[srs5694]

Is that a full-frame scan (and if so, of what format?) or a crop of an image? If it's full-frame of 35mm or larger, then I agree that the grain is excessive. If it's a partial frame or a smaller-than-35mm format, then your grain might be normal, but it depends on just how small an area of negative you've scanned.

Also, where is "here" (you said "no xtol available here")? The answer wouldn't affect the question of why you're getting excessive graininess (if indeed you are), but it might help somebody suggest alternative developers that are available, if that might help.

 

[titrisol]

is that a negative scan?
did you use a flatbed or a neg scanner?

Digitizing creates a lot of "apparent" grain

 

[Ruvy]

Is that a full-frame scan (and if so, of what format?) or a crop of an image? If it's full-frame of 35mm or larger, then I agree that the grain is excessive. If it's a partial frame or a smaller-than-35mm format, then your grain might be normal, but it depends on just how small an area of negative you've scanned.

Also, where is "here" (you said "no xtol available here")? The answer wouldn't affect the question of why you're getting excessive graininess (if indeed you are), but it might help somebody suggest alternative developers that are available, if that might help.

Thanks
Its MF film 6X6 images and its a crop of a scnned negative
Here is near Tel Aviv, Israel

 

[Ruvy]

Thanks to all!!! its a big help and i do appreciate. My main problem right now is how can I control it in development. Soem suggested less agitation, no sudden temprature change, different developer etc. Some are relevant as I I might have done it wrong - I still have a few rolls from that trip to develop. Any further ideas will be welcome.

 

[titrisol]

IMHO the best you can do is to be consistent in whichever process you do.
Given you are in Israel water temp can be an issue and you may have to standardize your processes for 25C instead of 20.
That means you have to cut your times for processing by about 30% to those at 20C and/or dilute your developer more.

Try again, and again, and again.....

 

[StephenS]

Ruvy, where you at in Israel? I've found the water in Jerusalem to be very salty. If you freeze some and thaw it, the first bit that thaws is almost total salt water.

Not that it has anything to do with what you are talking about, but water quality is certainly an issue in some places.

 

[Donald Qualls]

When I've used TMY (120 only), I've shot at box speed and reduced development slightly (in HC-110, dilutions F and G), and found the grain comparable in size, but "smoother" (more pebbly than gritty) than Tri-X. It wasn't objectionable at all, even when cropping to 35 mm frame dimensions. Processing in stronger solutions would probably reduce or soften the grain still more, but I prefer the acutance of the high dilution, low agitation process I use over the grain reduction of a stronger solution.

Grain isn't a wholly bad thing -- if you like the tonality you're getting, but the grain is objectionable, the first thing I'd recommend is trying a larger format. A 6x9 cm folder should cost less than $100 (maybe less than $25, if you're willing and able to do a little maintenance, like a shutter cleaning and patching a few bellows pinholes), and one with a good lens will perform well enough that, for the same print size, you'll see no difference from a 35 mm SLR with a high quality lens -- but your grain will drop completely out of sight in prints smaller than about 11x14 inches.

 

[Rob Archer]

'Digitizing creates a lot of "apparent" grain'

I came across this a few weeks ago with a 35mm roll of 35mm TMY400 in Tetanal Neofin Red. The scan (which is posted in my galery pages) appears extremely grainy - so much so I posted a question about it on APUG. On 'proper' printing, though it's fine - noticable grain but very smooth.

see (there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Sorry - I haven't yet worked out how to post a link to a gallery picture!

Rob

 

[nworth]

TMY has noticeable, but very fine grain when exposed and processed properly. The grain size is actually similar to the old Plus-X. With overexposure, the grain increases considerably. Overdevelopment will also increase grain and will dramatically increase density and contrast. The choice of developers is important with T-grain films. I would not use HC-110, although some people have had success with it. The best choice may be D-76 (1+1). TMax Developer, TMax RS, and Xtol are also recommended, although I don't like their look as much as I like that of D-76. If you mix your own, FX-37 gives outstanding results. There are other developers designed especially for these films, but I haven't tried them. You might look into FX-39 and FX-50.

 

[jmailand]

Grain Free is overrated, you want some grain so the print looks sharp not flat. Scanning Kodak B/W film seams to impart more grain in the scan than other films, but when printing them with a enlarger the grain is less. At least that been my experience. I had some Plus-x that I gave up trying too scan because of the grain, but they printed fine. See how it prints. It might not be as bad as you think.

John Sexton has article on TMAX using d76 I still think it applies because TMAX 400 was not refomulated like the other Kodak films a few years ago. Anyway you might want to read it. SEE http://www.largeformatphotography.info/articles/sexton-tmax.html

 

[stefka]

There is also reticulation from rapid changes in temperature. Your developer could be 70F and your stop could be 80F - easy mistake to make here where I live. I never allow a temp change of more than 4 degrees. I have always gotten smooth negs from TMAX400 - I always use appropriate developers; XTOL, D-76, Microphen, Microdol X, - all these developers will keep grain under control.

I find reticulation a myth I have never encountered with modern emulsions, looking back on 20 years of self-developing b+w.
Back in the newspaper lab, we pushed Neopan 400 to 1600, HP5 to 3200 in deep tanks at 18-22°C depending on the season, always washing in water from a deep well at sometimes 14°C. What happened was: nothing.
If you deliberately seek reticulation effects, go mangle some reaaly old type film like ClassicPan or Efke/Adox. Use washing water that´s close to tea-making temp. That´s what it takes. But then again, why should one ?

 

[StephenS]

You are right about the reticulation and modern emulsions. You need very radical temps to get something to reticulate and even then it's difficult. A few degrees won't make any difference.