___Need Big Beautiful Grain

Discussion in 'Black and White' started by -= shtativ, Sep 23, 2006.

  1. Hello!


    Advise how to process Tri-X, HP5 + and Neopan1600 for reception the big
    beautiful grain of the round form. The grain should be round- it`s very
    important. I did not like results with T-grain films- as though on a negative
    have scattered needle sand... If to you it is not difficult, share please
    examples of photos.


    Yours faithfully, Andrew Shtativ
     
  2. Tri-X rated at 1600 3 minutes in Dektol diluted 1-1 as a starting point. Tri-X in Rodinal 1-50 Rated 3200. 33 minutes as simi Stand.... Adj. for the first 10 seconds the 2 inversions every 10 minutes. last 3 minutes wait to drain.

    Use these as starting points then adjust from there

    Try this.

    Larry
     
  3. There was a AP sports photographer named Sam Houston , who would shoot night sports on tri-x at 1600 ,and develope the film in Dektol at 100 degrees for 30sec with constant agitation. He had pretty good images with BIG GRAIN.This was with the old tri-x, your results may vary.
     
  4. Hi Andrew,

    if you're looking for BIG FAT ROUND GRAIN,try the Chinese "LUCKY 400"!

    Regards

    Rainer
     
  5. I'll second that vote for Lucky 400. It's cheap, but it's a pretty nasty film. Expecting an EI of 400 from it is probably unrealistic. A very nice film, though by no means inexpensive, for big fat round grain is Delta 3200. It does not have the "scattered needle" like look that you describe getting from the other films. Exposed at 1600 and developed in a common developer like D-76 for the recommended time will get you a somewhat low contrast negative. But that's not a problem. It will hold shadow detail very well and if you choose, the contrast can be bumped up during printing or digital post processing with the photo editor of your choice.
     
  6. FWIW I've gotten very sharp, but not the typical popcorn unsharp grain out of Delta 3200. IIRC I used dilute Xtol or Microphen.

    I've never seen round grain. I don't think grain can be round, but would be nice to see if you can get it rounded.
     
  7. I'd agree with Frank, Delta 3200 is the king of big, round, somewhat fuzzy grain.
     
  8. Might try high-sulfite developers as well. They dissolve grains' edges.
     
  9. Try the Rodinal and TX trick for sure, or HP5, either pushed a couple of stops. IF the grain isn't quite what you want, adding a bit of sodium sulfite will do two things-- "round" the grain a bit and also boost the effective film speed. However, without the sulfite it should look very nice, and by using higher dilutions such as 1:100, and agitating only every 3 or 4 minutes, you should get an enhanced effect in the grains.

    I suspect this would work with a 3200 speed film in the same manner but without pushing.
     
  10. The neatest grain I've gotten in my limited experience was shooting Tmax 3200 (at EI 3200), I think just D76- a neat salt-and-pepper look, enhanced by high-contrast printing.
     
  11. The attached was done with Ilford Delta 3200 rated at 3200 and developed in Kodak D-76 with 10% more development time given to add to the contrast. The scan pretty much shows the grain.
     
  12. http://www.photo.net/photo/3894446
     
  13. Dan

    I like that one.

    Larry
     
  14. Thanks. That one was done IIRC in either very diluted Xtol or diluted Microphen, or stock Xtol. I can't remember, but the print has very sharp, detailed grain, and it's not popcorny, fluffy, round or very large.
     
  15. Shucks we need .JPGS here LOL
    00IBZ5-32603784.jpg
     
  16. I don't care for notes or perfection. Just the results. Some day I'll be forced to develop a certain film organization discipline (If I start finally producing inspiring work). It makes a lot of sense to simplify as well.

    I use Diafine and Microphen mostly for pushing interchangeably, and I think I'll drop Microphen. PC-TEA for non-pushed film, and now trying out 510-pyro to replace PC-TEA, but many people seem to be "testing" or "experimentation"- oriented shooting test charts and other garbage, keeping a zillion bagillion developers, a million cameras and a billion lenses. Testing developers for ages instead of trying to create artwork. I just don't see the fun in that :).
     
  17. Dan Life is a test on us so we may as well test it... I think I will hold onto 3 of them long term. D-76, Diafine and Rodinal. I shoot Sub Mini to 4x5. 4x5 camera is gone but working on getting a new one.... I will shoot almost any type of B&W film and I find I have more choice these days than I did in the 70's Keep shooting and the worst that can happen is you and I get it right. Larry
    00IBZr-32604184.jpg
     
  18. Hello,

    I tried 120 film Delta 3200 rated at ISO 1600, contrast of the scene was 2 1/2 stops so I expanded development of 25 percent in ID11 1:1, the print was made with condenser enlarger on Ilford Multigrade with filter 2. The enlargement is 8x10 so you clearly can see the grain in the print (especially the dark background), the scan just gives an idea, but my intention was big grain for this sujet. on 35mm film grain would be even more.

    http://www.photo.net/photo/4989479

    regards Richard
     
  19. In addition to keeping photos you wish to appear within the context of a thread to 511 pixels wide or narrower, please try to keep them smaller than 100 KB in file size. A JPEG of those dimensions seldom needs to be any larger. It's inconsiderate to folks using slower connections.

    Linking to photos posted elsewhere, either in ones photo.net folders or personal website, is a good alternative to posting them within the context of a thread. This way readers aren't forced to wait for photos to load, or to change the behavior of their browsers by arbitrarily locking out all images.

    Try to keep photos strictly relevant to the topic. For example, a JPEG that has been resized/resampled downward will not demonstrate the grain characteristics of the original. Only a 1:1 example from the print or scan will demonstrate the grain characteristics reasonably well. The photos linked by Jeffrey and Dan appear to show the grain characteristics of their photos more accurately than others posted here.

    Thanks.
     
  20. Hello,

    so here's a part of the original, sorry for above mistake.

    http://www.photo.net/photo/4999878

    regards Richard
     
  21. Hmmm! Here's a thread on big grain, and nobody's mentioned Rodinal yet. What's wrong with you people?

    Take ANY fast film you like, and soup it in Rodinal @ 1:25. Job done.
     
  22. Sorry did you see my post on the top? I did mention it and also another poster did agree with me.

    And as for the problem LEX I am sorry that I made it sized to your limits and thoes of the current Management. I will limit them in future to a link and self limit that is within the limits of paying members that I am.

    Thank you for your kindness.

    The Red Neck Jew
    Larry
     
  23. Thanks a lot for all! Very beautiful photos you share! For me most prefer photo by Larry Dressler! The grain is sharp and fantastic! How you dilute rodinal for this negative and in what temperature you develop the EFKE?
     
  24. Thank you Andrew

    I used it at 1-50 20C shot for adverage lighting with the in camera meter of a cheap assed Vivatar 4000 with the lens that came with it a 35-70 mm. I traded with a fellow on WWW.nelsonfoto.com for a Yashica range finder camera to get the 4000. I used the times on Massive Dev Chart.

    Larry
     
  25. -= Shtativ

    Sorry I said Andrew I ment that for you ...

    Translation into my language was almost correct.

    Larry
     
  26. here is another great big grain photo series I used Double-X film in D-76 and know it would have been sharper in Roninal.

    Here is the ON LINE LINK TO IT.

    http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=626964

    Larry
     
  27. I just did Tri-X in Rodinal 1:100 semi-stand development, and I got finer grain than with X-tol! Agitation was 1st min then 1min every 10mins. Here's an example, printed on Fotokemika VC Fiber paper.
    00IF87-32685284.jpg
     
  28. Joe

    Simi Stand is the bomb... If you have some APX 400 you may even like that better.

    Larry
     

Share This Page