Film and dveloper choice for sharp grain

I need advice on choice of film and developer, exposure and development time.

I have recently acquired a film body (EOS1n) as I want to take high contrast

(with the right subject matter) pictures with a fine but very crisp grain i.e.

giving sharp texture to areas of single tone but not disrupting acutance at

the edges. It is important (again given the right subject matter) to get a

full tonal range between nice clean whites and deep blacks; in particular, I

don?t want to clip the highlights (to use a digital analogy) but don?t mind

losing shadow detail. I accept that to achieve this look I have to compress

the tonal range somewhere. Most recently, before going 100% digital (5D), I

used XP2 but that is not the look I am seeking. 20 or 30 years ago I used Pan

F, FP4 and HP5, usually processed in ID11 or Microphen. Pan F would be closest

re. tonal range, but too fined grained perhaps. My lenses, (17-40L, 24-105L,

70-200L IS and 300/4L IS are I think intermediate in contrast ? haven?t tried

new 50/2.5 macro yet.) Oh, and I don?t want to use anything messy for domestic

reasons, so limited (in UK) to DD-X, Ilfosol S, T-Max, Rodinal, Aculux 3,

FX39 ? no powders, no 2 bath.

 

As HP5 is (or was in 1980!) too ?mushy grained? I am leaning towards Tri-X, a

bit under-exposed with more development in either T-Max or DD-X developer. Or,

perhaps I should try Delta 400 or TMY 400 in Rodinal. Pan F in Rodinal might

be nice but too slow for handholding. Any views on TriX at 200ASA in Rodinal

and if so what development time?

<i>The Film Development Cookbook</i> by Anchell and Troop has all the information you need to make the choice you want.

Wow... all those lenses and not a single prime... typical. But of course we are all very impressed. Try PanF in Rodinal 1+25. Will be tack sharp, and with that film the grain will be small, and the contrast will be high-ish to begin with (slow emulsions tend to lean that way). Add development time or agitation to further increase contrast but keep in mind grain will increase with overdevlopment - so you will have to experiment with what is acceptable, preferable and on the other end of the spectrum - excessive. There is really no sure way to tell you exactly how to do what you want to do, as only you can judge which cateogory your results fall into - the best that can be done is a suggestion of a starting point. the rest is up to you.

"Wow... all those lenses and not a single prime... typical".

 

Excuse me but typical of what? And closer observation will reveal 2 primes, a 300 and a 50.

 

Thanks, but as I said Pan F too slow for handholding.

 

If I go with Tri-X underexposed at ISO 200, any ideas on development time in Rodinal?

Sharp grain? T-Max 400 at 400 in Rodinal. Dunno 'bout the "new" TMY but the previous version turned out with a very fine, sharp, gritty look in Rodinal, but with very good tonality since it wasn't underexposed and pushed.

 

There are other acutance developers and Beutler developers. Here's a previous thread on acutance developers and recipes:

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=005yOZ

I second "the cookbook". Many don't know what they're asking for when they say sharp grain. The cookbook will clearly point out that sharp grain does not equal image sharpness.

Is 1:50 dilution of Rodinal sufficient to give good acutance?

Rodinal gives good acutance at any reasonable dilution, up to 1:300. Unlike solvent or physical developers, it isn't affected by dilution.

 

However, more dilute than 1:100 we run the risk of uneven development with Rodinal. But I've had good luck with it at 1:200 for stand development of Tri-X.

 

1:50 seems like a good compromise since it's expensive to use at 1:25.

Wow, typical of what or who?

I got more lenses here than Carter got liver pills, and who cares anyways?

Why even comment like that.

HP5+ in Rodinal is great. for grain and sharpness. this was 1-100 17 minutes<div></div>

Hi Nigel

 

Try TriX, or Foma 400, or Agfa APX400 exposed at ASA1000 (at ASA 200 you'll be OVERexposing it) souped in Rodinal. About the grainiest you can get today without expensive Delta3200/TMZ/IR films. All of them will yield pretty steep contrast but different tonalities - the choice will be yours....

 

I never developed pushed HP5+ in Rodinal but I doubt the grain would be badly delineated.

 

Rodinal at 1+50 should get you quite steep negatives. No stand development nor 1+100: you want no accutance and high contrast. Don't overdevelop or more than just some highlights will get too dense!

 

Cool body you've got yourself, albeit LOUD!

 

Have fun and patience

 

Pete

Oh, I overread you wanted "..._fine_ but crisp grain". Then at least don't push much, especially not with Rodinal. And work at 20?C.

Sorry,

Pete

FP4 at 50 ASA, Delta 400 at 160 ASA, Fuji Neopan 400 at 160 ASA - all in Rodinal at 1:50. Times are 9 minutes, 6.5 minutes and 6 minutes respectively.

Acutance developer alternatives to Rodinal are FX-39 and Neofin Blue.The latter is similar to the Beutler and is a liquid , from Silverprint or Retrophotographic. These two give more speed,finer grain than Rodinal, some would say not the look.

Ralph Gibson used to use Tri-X @ EI200 in Rodinal (approximately 1+25). Development

time was 11 min. Agitation every 1.5 min. T 68f. (this data is from his article in Darkroom).

He admitted that the highlight were blocked (to some extent), but it is the way he like it.

 

You may want to try.

 

Personally I Use apx 400 (EI 320) in rodilal 1+25. Time 6 min. Agitation every 30 seconds.

The grain is very sharp and highlights look great.

 

APX400

 

You want fine/crisp grain, good accutance, full tonal range, unsuppressed (not "clipped") highlights, deep blacks, high contrast, no powder based chemicals, and something not too slow for handholding. Is that all?

 

Personally, I think you need to make some choices. You simply won't get all this, especially shooting 35mm.

 

Some of the chaps have given good recommendations, but for example, Rodinal 1:50 will produce good accutance, but you'll scarifice grain and some tonality.

 

If you go with a 2-bath developer (which you say you don't want), you'll get some of the best grain, tonality, and depending on the formula, high definition/accutance. Beutler (Neofin Blue), which is a speed maintaining, compensating developer would be my next choice, though you won't get the high contrast you want.

 

Anchell's book will tell you a lot.

"Is that all?"

 

Fine/crisp grain and high acutance are not incompatible in a film/developer combination giving reasonable speed. Nor is high contrast with a deep black and clean white. I accept that the consequence is a compressed tonal range of everything in between and I can live with that. However, the charts indicate ISO 200 for Tri-x in Rodinal 1:50. Increasing exposure and reducing development usually reduces contrast so I need to start somewhere else. Delta 400 pro is probabaly finer grain than Tri-X and reputed to be the sharpest ISO 400 film so I'll try that in FX39 which is a semi-compensating acutance increasing developer, and see what the grain looks like.

 

Yes I wish I had the time to mix up powder developers like I use to, but that time has gone.

This perhaps isn't what you want to hear...

 

...but perhaps you want to shoot a larger format.

 

Getting fine but crisp grain is easy with 4x5 (or even 120 to some degree) by shooting an ISO 400 film and using a developer like Rodinal.

 

You will also get that fine gradation that you seem to value so much (and I agree that it is desirable).

I don't mind hearing it but I'm not going there! I'm just not a large format sort of person and I sold my pentax 67 because I thought the 5D was just as good up to 13x19. I originally thought I could get that inimitable LF look from using slow film with 6x7 - you can't! 4x5 and above is inimitable but I'm not going to carry one up a mountain. .So I've gone down the digital route for convenience.

 

So going back to a 35mm b&w is off on a different tack - high contrast, grainy texture but definite sharp grain (like I used to get with FP4 and Acutol, now no longer available)and nothing like the smooth gradation you get with LF. I have different idea to achieve that - FF digital file convereted to greyscale in Photoshop, output as inkjet neagative and then contact print - don't know if it will be any good.

From what I've read, and in my experimentation over the last week or so (I just built a new darkroom and making chemistry/film stock choices) developer doesn't have a HUGE effect on grain. Some film like some developers more than others, but for the most part, HOW you develop (aggressiveness of your agitation, development time, temperature) have more effect on grain than the chemical.

 

If you can stand 100 ISO give Fuji Acros a shot...otherwise Delta 400 and TMY are your best bets. I've been developing with FG7, water rinse for stop bath (no acetic acid), and TF4 fixer. As this is an all-alkaline process, there is no need for hardner with modern films, and wash times are low. You can affect the grain quality by adding 9% sodium sulfite to the developer. You get finer grain, but it's a bit fuzzier.

Have you tryed Acufine?

<p>Blarg, you indicate that developer doesn't have a huge affect on grain.

That's absolutely untrue. Anchell in <u>The Film Developing Cookbook</u> states,

"graininess can be significantly altered by the developer..." (p. 2).<br>

<br>

Given any film, the grain can vary significantly with the developer and in some

cases the dilution of the developer (e.g., D-76 stock versus 1:3). You proved it

yourself by recommending the addition of sodium sulfite to improve grain. Sodium

sulfite is a grain solvent and is a key ingredient in most fine grain (a.k.a.,

"solvent") developers, such as D-76. In non-solvent (i.e., high accutance or

high definition) developers, there is less grain solvent present. This is why

D-76 at 1:3 actually behaves as a high definition developer. The sodium sulfite

is now too dilute to effectively dissolve the grain, yielding higher grain and

in turn higher accutance.<br>

<br>

Certainly, if you start with a fine grain film in the first place (such as my

favorite Fuji Acros), you will get very acceptable grain with a non-solvent

developer.   And I think this what Nigel was <i>trying</i> to say. 

While there are compromises, you can get acceptable results with the right

combination of film & developer.  Nonetheless, the fact remains there is an

inverse relationship between grain and sharpness.  Per Anchell (p. 2):

"...solvent developers emphasize fine grain at the expense of sharpness;

non-solvent developers emphasize sharpness at the expense of fine grain."</p>

<p>By the way, Anchell recommends D-76 1:1 as an "unbeatable compromise

developer" for small format film.  It is neither fine grain nor high

accutance, but can yield very pleasing results with the right film. </p>

Correction - Fuji Neopan 400, at 250 ASA, Rodinal 1:50, 20 C, 6.5 minutes.

I am working on a book project in black and white with a Hasselblad using Pan-F and FP-4. I

just got done a few minutes ago souping two rolls of Pan-F in Rodinal, 1+50, 12 minutes at

68F. The negs look good and contrasty but not overly so. I do wish the grain were a bit

tighter, but that is the trade off for acutance, yes?

 

By the way, I had no problem hand holding my Hassy with Pan-F...:-)

OK, the film is dried and sleeved now...I have to say on this batch, the grain is tighter and yet

sharp.