Unruly NPZ grain? What happened?

[doug elick]

Let me state first off that my use of NPZ under the following conditions was

less than optimal; it was the only color print film I had for a spur of the

moment event.

 

I had a chance to lug minimal photo gear to Tallstacks a few weeks ago. I shot

the event with NPZ in 35mm in my SLR and MF in my Rolleicord IV. I figured the

bright sun/contrast would really put NPZ to the test, but to my shock, the 4x6

35mm prints (on Kodak Endura) have visible, objectionable grain (dye clouds). I

normally shoot NPZ @ 640, which did in this case as well.

 

The sky in all pictures has very irregular grain. Even worse, the red of the

paddlewheels looks extremely blocked up/bled together in direct sunlight shots

and very grainy in indirectly lit shots. I've used NPZ and it's predecessor,

NHG-II under widely varying conditions with reasonably pleasing results in the

past, but this is the first time it's been outright objectionable. I usually

consider it to be "grainless" and reasonably forgiving for an 800 speed film.

 

I've historically had good results with the lab I use and trust them implicitly

with my Medium Format work, but the inclusion of an index print with the 35mm

proofs (a first) raises a question mark in my mind.

 

Any ideas what went horribly wrong? I took the photos purely for pleasure, but

I'm still disappointed.

 

Thanks

 

Doug

[steve_dunn2]

<p>Do the negatives look thin?</p>

[doug elick]

No, they look about right. I shot them a half stop over (metered @640).

 

Doug

[eric friedemann]

The problem is that Fuji overrates NPZ by one full f/stop. Others may disagree, but I regard NPZ as an ISO 400 film.

 

 

In flat lighting situations, I rate NPZ at E.I. 400. With proper exposure at E.I. 400, grain should not be an issue.<div></div>

[r.t. dowling]

Well, I consistently shoot it at 640 and haven't had any problems with underexposure or grain, so I respectfully disagree with those who say it needs to be shot at 400 to be considered acceptable.

 

To Doug E: if you have access to a film scanner, it might be helpful to scan the negs yourself and see how they look. It's possible that they just weren't printed very well (despite your previous good experiences with that lab). Even a drugstore lab with a Frontier on autopilot should be able to make decent prints from properly exposed NPZ -- and it does sound like it was properly exposed, unless your meter was malfunctioning.

[roger_smith4]

It sounds like poor printing. Are you sure it is grain you are seeing, and not digital artifacts (including oversharpening) from a crappy scan? If it's your first time with an index print, you could ask them if they recently upgraded, and hence are still figuring out, new equipment.

[josphy]

If they included an index print and that is something new to you, then maybe it means they have started using a new or different printer -- maybe one of the Fuji Frontier or digital Noritsu machines that is different from what you are used to. It might have the sharpening and contrast cranked up (often they do on minilab machines) which may contribute to the grain getting exaggerated and blocked up reds.

 

I would just ask them if they are doing something different than you're used to and maybe see if they can't reprint a couple of negatives or else take the negs elsewhere and have a few examples printed to see if the results come out the same.

 

I tend to agree with those that are saying it's likely an issue with printing.