"Debugging" a Grain Problem...

[al_divenuti]

I'm trying to figure out why my 400TX negs developed in my 'kitchen

setup' are so much grainier than those developed in my 'classroom

setup'.

 

Classroom Setup:

We soup 400TX in D-76 1:1 for 10 minutes. We use a water stop bath

and Kodak Rapid Fixer with Hardener, Heico Permawash, and PhotoFlo

solution. Temperature is not well controlled (sometimes close to 80

degrees F!) and the purity of the solutions is sometimes suspect

(e.g. the odd bit of Permawash lands in the Fixer, Fixer splashes in

the Stop Bath, someone sneezes in the PhotoFlo, etc.). I also do

things 'by the book' and agitate the film for the 1st 60 seconds and

10 seconds each minute.

 

Despite all the chaos, my 'Classroom Setup' negs are always

substantially more fine grained than the 'Kitchen Setup'...

 

Kitchen Setup:

 

- Developer is Edwal FG7 w/ 9% Sodium Sulfite OR Gainer Metol C w/

Sodium Ascorbate & Borax

 

- Fixer is Photo Formulary TF-4 Rapid Fixeer w/o Hardener

 

- Heico PermaWash as a washing aid

 

- No wetting agent

 

- All of the above are mixed using Deer Park distilled water

 

- I use a tap water pre-soak and stop bath. The pre-soak lasts 60

seconds with *a lot* of tapping to dislodge the air bells. Stop

bath is for 60 seconds with constant agitation.

 

- Developer agitation is by slow inversion with a rotary twist for

the first 30 seconds then 2 slow inversions (occupying a total of 5

or 6 seconds) each minute.

 

- My fix is for about 4 to 4 1/2 minutes with 30 sec of vigorous

agitation each minute.

 

- Developers are within 1 degree of 70 degrees (Edwal FG7) or 68

degrees (Gainer). All of the other solutions (including pre-soak

and stop bath) are within 2 degrees of the developer.

 

- I wash the film by performing 12 tank fills with 20 inversions

each using tap water

 

- After washing the film I hang it and spray it down generously with

Deer Park distilled water from a spray bottle. No liquid other than

Deer Park distilled water has other reside in the bottle.

 

Given the pretty meticulous steps I apply above, I can only think of

two reasons why my 'Kitchen Setup' negs are grainier than the devil-

may-care 'Classroom Setup'...

 

- My tap water is unfiltered

 

- I realize I have not been doing a quick rinse in tap water between

dumping the Fixer and pouring in the PermaWash

 

Otherwise, I'm stumped. Thoughts?

[al_divenuti]

Couple other things missing from above:

 

-The FG7 w/ 9% Sodium Sulfite is diluted 1:15 and developed for 7 minutes

- The Gainer Metol-C is diluted 1:3 and developed for 8 minutes

[ronald_moravec1]

First , use the same chemicals. Second my experience with distilled water for developer produces grainy negs. Don`t know why, but my buddies have confirmed with their experiments. This is the scientific way, publish and third party verification.

[tim obrien]

'Solution' seems pretty simple to me. 'Borrow a tankful of D76 and develop a batch at home. While lots of things cause grain, the over riding one is developer. The method for isolation is to change one thing at a time. I would try your 1:1 setup at home with all the same chemicals you normally use in the kitchen.

 

BYW - I have always found D76 1:1 to be relatively fine grained on Tri-X.

 

tim in san jose

[al_divenuti]

Guess I'm guilty of replying to my posts a la Hans Beckert....but:

 

I *do* realize that 400TX is a pretty grainy film by nature and that FG7 (without sulfite, at least) is pretty grainy - but there's a pretty big difference in these negs vs D-76

 

For what it's worth I shoot 400TX at box speed

[__stu_evans]

Any pellets in the Deer Park?

[titrisol]

have you tried using it with tap water instead of distilled water?

[garrylewis747]

Let me agree with others that you should be comparing apples to apples.

 

Bring some D-76 for home processing or take your FG-7 to class processing. One thing strike me~D-76 (1:1) 10 min. @ 80 degrees? Seems a bit high for that temp even for 1:1 dilution.

At 1:3 I'd expect Gainer metol-C to be higher grained~ acutance bias. FG-7 should be equal to the D-76 (1:1) at that dilution with 9% sulfite. So I can't figure that one.

Best start with some class D-76 (1:1)at home (where you seem to have more control). Develope simular exposures ,from 1/2 a test roll of Tri-x,and compare with class processing of the other 1/2.

If the home negatives are more grainy, then it might just be a synergistic effect of all the sloppyness at class. };^)>

Keep us informed-please

[bruce watson]

I've got to ask - no disrespect intended. How are you judging that one is more grainy than the other? The reason I ask is that in my experience, it is difficult to judge negatives. What looks really bad in a negative can be hardly noticeable in a print.

<p>

This seems to be especially true of scanning. Trying to judge graininess in Photoshop is nearly pointless for me.

<p>

That said, the things that seem to make grain worse are (in no particular order), developer temperature being higher, faster film, longer time in the developer, greater density, and acutance developers. Clearly some of these are connected and changing one will change others. None-the-less, when you study the published literature such as Grant Haist's two volume tome <i>Modern Photographic Processing</i> this is what you find. And of all these, the biggest contributor to grain size is film speed, just to keep it all in perspective.

<p>

As another poster suggested, start with as equal a setup as you can, and vary one thing at a time until you find out what you want. Take good notes. Make prints. Good luck.

[al_divenuti]

I had already purchased some D-76 1:1 to perform comparison tests at home. Certainly varying one thing at a time is the only approach for controlled experiments.

 

Howard, the difference in graininess between the Setups is quite detectable on the negs using a cheap-o Peak 7X loupe. Negs from several FG7 rolls (all identically processed) were compared to the D-76 rolls.

[rowland_mowrey]

Al;

 

I think an earlier post here was right. You are comparing apples and oranges.

 

Until you do an exact crossover, you are grasping at straws.

 

Oh, and even if the room temp at school was 80 F, that does not mean that the solutions reached that temp. For example, I find that I can mix 80 deg developer with cold tap water and come out at 68 deg, then use and dump.

 

Another thought. How do the two sets of negatives look otherwise for speed, contrast, sharpness, etc? Even comparing apples with oranges, we can often pick out the finest pick of the barrel or the rotten ones, as it were. Give us an idea of how the negatives looked for those other qualities.

 

Ron Mowrey

[tklim]

Hello there,

 

Could anyone pls cast some more light on one of the statements made above, namely that using distilled water promotes the negative's graininess. Distilled water to mix the dev, I presume, or just at any step of the whole process? I am shocked since having 25 years of darkroom practice behind me I would never think of such a possibility. Is there a scientific explanation to it? Thanks in advance - T.K.

[patrick_gainer]

If the classroom developer is reused with or without replenishment, it accumulates bromide which can make for finer grain by reducing fog density. Old timers would mix a certain amount of an old batch with the new batch to "season" it.

[lex_jenkins]

Tomasz, in another thread Ron Mowrey recently wrote about the water factor in development. See:

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=008Yy1

 

For example, the method used to treat water in Europe is typically different enough from how was is treated in the U.S. that Kodak produces different versions of HC-110 to account for the different effects on film.

 

I use only distilled water to mix developers because our rural well water here in Texas comes from a limestone basin. Even with a water softener and filter the well water is troublesome for some darkroom uses. (I'm assuming the distilled water I get from the grocery store is conventionally distilled and not "ozonated" or whatever the alternative method is, otherwise I'd expect the label to specify the method.)

[tklim]

Lex,

 

I also use distilled (or rather 'deionised') water, the kind sold by gas stations and supermarkets commonly used to refill the car battery or add to the cooling system. I wouldn't even think of using tap water to prepare my developers, regardless whether they are of the commercial pre-packaged category, or mixed from scratch. I only dread to think that for all those years I might have been doing something entirely wrong giving my negatives too much grain (which, BTW, I have never noticed). I'm now going to retrieve the thread you're referring to. Many thanks - T.K.

[robert_davis2]

"Could anyone pls cast some more light on one of the statements made above, namely that using distilled water promotes the negative's graininess."

 

I wouldn't take it seriously. Think about it. If you don't use distilled water then you use tap water. Okay fine. But what the hell is tap water? Pilsen water? Fairly soft and low in minerals. My water out of the lake? Full of calcium carbonate? Or some of the even harder waters out there?

[al_divenuti]

First a couple quick items:

 

Patrick - The D-76 developer stock solution is mixed anew each class. Water from the tap (possibly filtered) is used to mix the Stock Solution.

 

Rowland - We mix the working D-76 1:1 solutions ourselves by diluting the Stock Solution with tap water. So the solutions are going to be pretty close to the tap temperature at time of use.

 

Based on some of the responses, I think I probably should have made the intent of the post a bit clearer. I *will* be performing tests with the FG7 & 9% SS alongside D-76 (I'm using the FG7 blend over the Gainer mix because I have more experience with it) - but I would like guidance on what parameter to vary first. My plan is to use the following battery of tests:

 

Cycle 1: Process rolls in FG7 blend and D-76 1:1 in Kitchen Setup. Only departure from existing setup is to make certain to do a tap water tank fill rinse of the tank between fixer and washing aid.

 

Cycle 2: Same as Cycle 1 with additional modification of using filtered tap water (will install a filter) for all cases where I was formerly using unfiltered tap water. All solutions will continue to be mixed with distilled water.

 

Cycle 3: Same as Cycle 2, except developers will be mixed with filtered tap water instead of distilled water.

 

I intend to perform all three cycles - *regardless* of the outcome of each. Might as well learn as much as I can.

[al_divenuti]

Rowland -

 

As to your final question, I think the FG7 + 9% SS negs are showing better shadow detail than the D-76. I haven't used the Metol / Borax Gainer C enough to do a real comparison to either.

[conrad_hoffman]

On the distilled water question, I can offer this- Kodak has specific limits on hardness and the like that they recommend for photo processing, and the minimum isn't zero. Distilled water is a surprisingly aggressive solvent compared to that with a bit of mineral content. Tap water is a complete unknown unless you have it checked. I have trouble believing there is any problem with distilled water, and at least you know what's not in it. Maybe someone should do a comparison test between distilled water and, no, not tap water, but distilled water with known amounts of hardness purposely added to it. Any other test using tap water would just add to the confusion.

[rowland_mowrey]

For those interested in this, EK supplies 3 water taps in our laboratories at KRL. They are 'tap water', 'deioinized distilled water' and 'sweet water'. The last is a very special purpose hard water for various uses, and IIRC it is at 40 deg F. There are two other water supplies. One is 40 deg tap water, another is about 140 deg tap water (in F) and there is also pressurized steam. (quite an assortment for the researcher) The 40 deg tap water and steam are used to control precision temperature baths.

 

Anyhow, I have mixed formulas with the distilled deionized and tap water, and have seen absolutely no difference in results in any process with commercial mixes or mixes containing the appropriate ingredients such as calgon or quadrofos. This was mostly color work however.

 

I have used the 'hard water' for certain photographic purposes as well, and the presence of calcium and magnesium (common hard water ingredients) presented no problem for the tasks as long as no precipitate was formed. When making coatings, I made up the emulsions and dispersions with distilled deionized water to the coating weight. I have even used tap water erroniously making up coatings, and it was not a disaster, but I wouldn't do it commercially.

 

I would like to add that tap water across the country, in addition to variations in hardness, also contain ingredients to inhibit corrosion and are adjusted for pH in some cases. The amount of antibacterial agent, chlorine, bromine, or ozone varies as well from country to country and region to region.

 

Virtually all published formulas that I have seen on this forum and elsewhere eliminate the ingredients present in pre-packaged formulas to compensate for or normalize for variations in water supply. This includes sequestrants and antifungal or antibacterial agents. These also vary from country to country or may be said to be regional to a certain extent. They also give no mention to anti caking agents.

 

In fact, there is a special 'tropical' packaging and formulation for some developers and fixers. I know this from the time I spent in the tropics, where temperature and humidity was a daily battle. These are in hermetically sealed containers and some contain added hardener such as alum and sodium sulfate and extra anticaking agents.

 

None of this, in my personal observation, affected grain, sharpness, or tone scale, as long as the manufacturers instructions were carried out. This included water supplies in countries in the far east, and 'field' water in the tropics as well as the 'cloistered' environment of KRL.

 

Al's observations then are 'probably' due to the developer formulation differences more than anything else, IMHO. Good luck Al figuring this out. I have been faced with some similar problems and had to design experiments to iron out the differences.

 

Hope this helps.

 

Ron Mowrey

[al_divenuti]

Ron,

 

Interesting stuff concerning the water.

 

I haven't dismissed the possibility that the grain differences are strictly attributable to the developer differences. In fact, I might just throw in some FG-7 at 1:3 without Sodium Sulfite to have a go at trying to induce graininess.

[titrisol]

just a thought.... FG-7 works great with conventional films (tri-X, HP5, APX) but I'm not sure how will it work with tabular films (TMaxes, Deltas)

Edwal has a TG-7 for those films.

 

Maybe that's why your apparent graininess is increased

[garrylewis747]

>Classroom Setup: We soup 400TX in D-76 1:1 for 10 minutes..... >Temperature is not well controlled (sometimes close to 80 degrees >F!)

 

Little things bother me to action. Are you sure about the 80 degrees

F temp. for the deverloper? All sources call for 5.5'@75 degrees with your agitation pattern. At that 10"@80, you're cooking the hell out of those neg.s. Bugged minds want to know.

[al_divenuti]

It actually is almost 80 degrees. I've placed two diffrent Patterson metal dial thermometers in the graduate on two seperate occasions and they read 76 to 78 degrees. I made certain the probe part of the thermometer wasn't contacting anything other than the liquid. It's possible the water could cool a degree or two prior to completion of development, but it's still pretty warm.

 

I can't explain why the negs are not overly dense and grainy. They print just fine on a Condernser enlarger, with a Kodak Polymax #2 filter on Kodak Polymax II paper.

[al_divenuti]

Pablo, I'm using 400TX (Tri-x) so FG-7 should be just fine.

 

I'm not sure that Edwal has manufactured TG-7 since the Falcon Safety days...