APX100 vs. Acros 100....why so grainy?

[rich815]

I usually use Acros 100 for my slower B&W film (vs. Neopan 400 or

HP5+, occasionally Tri-X in the past) but APX100 in bulk can be had

cheaply so I was hoping it would show some of the qualities I like so

much in Acros 100: smoother tones, less grain, nicely controled

highlights, etc. I've developed some APX100 in Rodinal lately (Acros

has looked really good in Rodinal) but unfortunately the grain of

APX100 seems little better than Neopan 400, HP5+ or Tri-X and I

noticed no better tonality qualities. Maybe there are some

techniques I should use to minimize grain with Rodinal? Is APX100

just a fairly grainy film when compared to the newer Acros 100? I

developed the APX100 in Rodinal 1:50, 20C for 9 minutes with one

agitation every minute. This has given very nice negs from Acros---

(and BTW I scan my negs and find about 10-20% less than published

times to be better for scanning).

 

Right now I cannot see the justification for APX100 when it appears

it's grain is about the same as the 400 speed films, and I might as

well have the extra 2 stops. Thoughts?

[skygzr]

Hi Richard -

 

APX100 has always mystified me as well. Its VERY grainy, to the point of being able to see grain in an 8x10 print from 120 film. I shot about ten rolls of it a few years ago and never used it again for that very reason.

[silent1]

The new 400TMY is comparable with even normal ISO 100 films like Pro 100 and Efke 100, in terms of grain (though a little coarser than Acros and TMX) -- if I didn't have budget restrictions, there'd be no reason to use anything else. And yes, the extra two stops are helpful in everything but my box cameras...

[pics]

I guess its a personal thing. APX100 in Rodinal 1+100 is one of my favorite combos. The negatives are amazingly sharp although grain is slightly larger. Personally I prefer acutance and image sharpness at the expense of slightly larger grain. A extreme fine grain film/developer combo just looks too out of focus and mushy for my taste. I've recently gotten over my obsession with minimizing grain and focused more on acutance and I can't tell you how much better my negatives and prints look to my eye. Oddly enough I've never found the grain of APX100 to be especially prominent in my 8x10's with 35mm.

[StuartMoxham]

If you don't want grain with APX 100 try it in D76 1:0 it retains its sharpness but the grain is finer much finer. To be honest I developed lots of APX100 (35mm) in Rodinal and never got obtrusive grain at either 25:1 or 50:1, grain is just visible at 8x10 I never considered it to be that grainy until I tried FP4 in D76 then I saw what 100 speed films were really capable of. I get really nice results with TriX in HC110 DilB, APX400 in HC110 dilB and Tmax400 in D76 1:0 these combos actually compare very well to APX100 in Rodinal. I tend to use mostly 400 speed films TriX is my favourite but is hard to find in Finland. I personaly like the extra 2 stops of speed. I don't use Rodinal very much anymore as I find I can usually get a better result with D76 or HC110. Also be aware that scanning can cause grain to be more obvious than traditional printing and some B&W films scan better than others.

[stephen sullivan]

Acros 100 Grain RMS 7 {if I remember corectly} and APX 100 Grain RMS 9 {again, if I

remember corectly.}

 

I have yet to process Across in Rodinal, I always have it souped in D76 1:1 @ 68c I find the

results amazing. 11x14's have almost no grain and are very sharp.

 

APX 100 in D76 1:1 @ 68c or Rodinal 1:25 @ 68c, I'll take the Rodinal. Yes, more grain,

but very sharp. At 11x14's grain, for me, starts to become notiable, but still very, very

sharp.

 

Richard, have you tried APX 100 in Kodak's Xtol yet? When using Xtol stock, the results are

much finer grain with APX 100. Much finer grain than Rodinal 1:25, 76 1:1 or 76 stock.

[chris_waller]

I've used both and, yes, Acros is noticeably less grainy. Having said that I prefer the tonality of APX 100. I limit the grain of APX 100 by rating it at 50 ASA. I dev in Rodinal at 1:50. There are subjects where I like the grain of APX 100 but in general I only use it in 120 format where grain is not an issue.

[jim_appleyard]

Richard, there's a good article, "Appreciating Rodinal", by Ed Buffaloe on his site, unblinkingeye.com. I think you can find an article by Patrick Gainer, "Fog Begone", there as well. Both worth reading.

[gaius1]

Rodinal in "grainy" shocker! Film at 11!

[User_502260]

For some reason Agfa decided not to produce more modern black & white films to compete with the T-MAX, Delta and ACROS products. When APX 25 was discontinued Agfa didn't have any very fine grain general purpose black & white film left. Now with the financial problems at AgfaPhoto it may be just a matter of time before all of Agfa's films are discontinued.

 

The information that ACROS has an RMS rating of 7 while APX 100 has a rating of 9 doesn't tell the whole story. Different films respond in different ways to the choice of developer. The fact that we can get so many different looks from the same film is one of the things which makes traditional black & white photography so interesting. With digital photography you can use image editing software and simply click your way to any look in black & white or color. Traditional film photography is more old fashioned now and we can compare the use of different film and developer combinations to the chemicals a potter would use to get different color glazes on a piece of pottery. There is no right or wrong color. It is up to the artist to decide what look best to him/her.

 

I find Ilford FP4+ to be more versatile, easier to use and preferable to APX 100. Maybe if I use more APX 100 I will change my mind. ACROS has such fine grain you can develop it in almost anything and get good results at least as far as grain goes. I usualy develop it in Fuji Microfine. This combination gives extremely fine grain and also gives very good sharpness. Much of 35mm photography is done without a tripod. A film/developer combination which gives more grain and especially sharpy defined grain will give an impression of sharpness even if the particular negative isn't perfact in that respect. When you use a very fine grain film/developer combination your lens and technique has to be very good because the impression of sharpness that extra grain might give in a more grainy combination will not be there. The combination of ACROS and Microfine is capable of extreme sharpness if your technique is good and you are careful.

 

When I started taking pictures many years ago my two films were Tri-X and Kodachrome II. I would have to say that I took different types of pictures with each film and I respected the fact that KII was a slow film and wouldn't work in every situation. In the end, the choice of a film/developer combination is an artistic one and each person should use his/her favorite.

[titrisol]

APX 100 is a beautiful film, while it maybe a bit grainy I don;t find that objectionable. 9 minutes sounds a tad long (IMHO), I'd try 8 or so.

 

I believe APX 100 in Rodinal prints well (up to 11x14 IMHO) but scans poorly due to the film structure.

While Acros prints and scans wonderfully.

 

Also I'd try developing APX100 in DD-X, Ilfosol, Paterson FX-39, Xtol or something like that instead of Rodinal for scanning.

[stefan heymann]

I am unable to get decent scans off APX100 developed in Rodinal. I always get a lot of grain and strange gray tones. However, APX100 is my primary film in the 100 ASA class because the wet prints are just great.

 

The recommended time for APX100 in Rodinal 1+50, 20C is 17 minutes. I rate it at 64 ASA. Maybe your film is underdeveloped with 9 minutes?

[jeff_drew4]

For APX100 in 35mm try less agitation and 1:100 dilution. Lots of good advice above, and there is no reason to expect APX100 to be the same as Acros. Comparatively, APX100 is an older film recipe from an earlier generation than Acros - 2 different films. Older silver based films usually "wet-print" better than they scan. If you are scanning a lot and printing less, you may want to stick with newer films & processes recommended for scanning or wet-print then scan. I use Rodinal a lot, but scan rarely. Lately I've been trying different Rodinal enhancements, but APX100 is what it is and some like it and some don't. Then again, about anything looks good just before the bar closes! (Jeez, it must be near the weekend!)

[al_divenuti]

I'd caution anybody from placing any trust in RMS numbers. They are compiled by the manufacturer and little (if any) information is ever released about the conditions of testing.

 

RMS itself may not map exactly to grain size in the developed film. Ilford lists an RMS of 8 for Delta 100 - the same value as Kodak does form TMX 100 but TMX is definitely a bit finer-grained than Delta.

[robert_grasing]

To add to Al`s comments on manufacturers` RMS granularity figures...

 

Fuji gives Acros a rating of 7 when developed in undiluted Microfine (similar to Perceptol or Microdol-X). That drops to 7.5 when developed in Fujidol-E, a standard developer. I add that many have observed that Fujidol-E gives noticeably finer grain than D76. OTOH, Kodak rates 100TMX at 8, developed in undiluted D76. Developed in Microdol-X, 100TMX might actually be as fine grained as Acros. In the developers I use, I see virtually no difference between them.

 

One more thing. Fuji used to sell Ilford Delta 100 as Presto 100 in Japan (Neopan 400 is called Presto 400) and claimed that, according to their tests, it was the world finest grain ISO100 speed film. I don`t think many would agree. Not even Ilford.

[sava_rajkov1]

I am using both in medium format, developed in Rodinal 1+50 at 20C (10 min for Acros = EI64, 15 min for APX100 = EI125). Compared to low grain film/developer combos, both films will give a visible but nice grain at 10x enlargments. APX100 is more grainy than Acros, but much less than HP400 in Rodinal, and less than Neopan 400 in Rodinal. What was your EI for APX100? For 9 minutes development, I would expect it to be around 50, so you may have underexposed negative for your development time if you shot it as 100.

[leicaglow]

I use DD-X all the time with Acros. You won't see a lot of grain. In fact, it's very hard to see the grain through my micro-sight focuser at times because it's so fine (120). I prefer to live with a little more grain, but more contrast and range with Rodinal though.

 

My friend uses D-76 and it looks fantastic too. That's my next step.

 

BTW, I find with Acros that it prints much better if you under expose and over develop (even if you just under expose by a stop it seems easier to print). Otherwise it seems awfully flat to me.<div></div>