TriX - Rodinal: Beautiful Grain - How can I replicate it ?

[Gabino]

Hello -
I am referring to the grain in the first attached photograph. The photograph has its problems, it is a bit out of focus, and the car was moving so there is that. But the grain, is something that I care for very much and I want to replicate. Both photographs were developed with Rodinal 1:50, first minute agitation, and four agitations every minute afterward for a total of 13 minutes, as per massive chart. The film was exposed at 400 iso.
This is the catch, while developing, I moved the developing tank from the basement where I had a controlled temperature of 20C (room temp ~17C) up to my studio, where is typically warmer by ~4-5 oC (~22C).
I understand that it is difficult to compare both photographs as they are very different subjects: "indoor" vs "outdoor" for which TriX exhibits very different behavior.
My theory is that temperature played a major role in the 'look' of the first photograph, with grainy shadows, high contrast (t-shirt), with an overall look as if it were a lith print -not saying that it is.

To verify this theory I want to run a test by exposing an 'indoor' subject with controlled lighting and developing the film with 4 different approaches:

1- T=20C, agitation 1st minute, 4 times every minute for 13 minutes
2- T=22C, agitation 1st minute, 4 times every minute minutes for 13 minutes.
3- T=22C, agitation 1st minute, 4 times every three minutes for 13 minutes.
4- T=22C, agitation 1st minute, 3 times every 30 seconds for 13 minutes.

I wanted to run this by you so that I can get any comments on whether or not my reasoning is ok or if I am missing something to replicate the results of that first picture.

thanks for comments,

 

[luizjorgemn]

Scanned negs or enlarged pictures?
See, if you scan a negative, it will change the grain perception compared to a scanned picture. Actually, what we call grain is lots of grains clumped together. The real grains are invisible at naked eye.
In fact I dont like the "grain" of trix and parodinal, and prefer then in d76.
Light measurement and EI chosen affects the appearence also.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[Tom1956]

If you like grain, Rodinal is the stuff for sure. Evidently you like ketchup on your steak. Personally I'd prefer Rodinal as a weed killer. But it sure has its fanboys, for reasons unbeknownst to me.

 

[Athiril]

The most beautiful grain with Tri-X imho I have experienced with Aculux 3 1+9

crop

http://i45.tinypic.com/21ecgnt.jpg

Though in regards to your example, you need to underexpose your shots, as there is a distinct lack of detail in shadow areas.

 

[clayne]

OP's first shot just looks underexposed and scanned using a scanner which emphasizes grain.

 

[markbarendt]

Gabino,

This isn't necessarily a development question.

I think that part of what you are seeing is how grain "appears" within differing tones and "interacts" with differing subjects.

 

[chriscrawfordphoto]

The grain in your first thumbnail is because the neg was underexposed. I can tell by the empty featureless dark areas full of grain with no detail or tonal variation. The second thumb does not show such grain because it was properly exposed.

 

[markbarendt]

...because it was properly exposed.

Gabino, Chris is probably right but I would have said normally exposed rather than properly exposed.

The proper exposure is the one that gets you the result you expect, not necessarily the one the text books and instruction sheets suggest.

 

[polyglot]

The first one is not grain, but noise introduced by the scanner trying to pull detail out of blank regions on the negative.

 

[markbarendt]

The first one is not grain, but noise introduced by the scanner trying to pull detail out of blank regions on the negative.

Very probable.

 

[Gabino]

So, in summary, underexposure and slight overdevelopment associated to rise in temperature while developing, is maybe the way to go.

As scanning is part of my workflow (I don't have the benefits of having a darkroom), i will try scanning this negative in a different way in order to see an improvement in the quality of 'grain'.

thanks for your comments !

 

[Rick A]

Absolutly, underexpose and over develope.

 

[markbarendt]

Or over expose and develop normally or extra.

Normal B&W film is typically less grainy at lower exposure levels.

Scanning is a different story, not going there.

 

[clayne]

Depends on what grain we're talking about.. overexposure grain will have overall graininess over the entire photograph. Underexposure + overdevelop and post over-exposure (for correction) will result in any fog or low exposure areas revealing their grain as a result. I think the OP wants the latter.

 

[Gabino]

I think the OP wants the latter.

yes, indeed, this is what I'm after.

thanks you all.