Finest grain

[manuel_odabashian]

<p> I've lost track on which was the best B&W film out there last time i looked it was fuji across. By finest grain i don't mean something like kodak technical pan which as far as i knew was a specialist film but one say with ISO 100 having the best qualities for printing. I know this is a matter of interpretation and subject matter i am merely speaking generally</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>Of the currently readily available films, T-Max 100.</p>

[larrydressler]

<p>TMX as far as I know but this also depends on the developer and how you shoot it.</p>

[john_shriver]

<p>Although TMY-2 (TMAX 400) is mighty close to TMX (TMAX 100) in terms of grain, since it's a generation newer.</p>

[peterbcarter]

<p>If everyone used the same developer, there could be a clear answer to that question. The reality is that fine grain is a result of the film, developer and method of developing.</p>

<p>I get my finest grain from reversal processing and get great results from FOMA 100, PX, UN54 and NEOPAN 400. It's a multi step process that can take up to an hour to completely process each film, so you really need to want to do it. It is so fine grain, that my 120 cameras are getting lonely.</p>

<p>(ORWO UN54 REVERSAL)<br>

<img src="http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6056/6853644240_0a542a6e5c_d.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>I like ACROS myself. It does not seam to make a good reversal, so plan b is xtol. Nice combination. In xtol, most modern films are good choices.</p>

<p>A good pyro can make any film seem fine grain.</p>

<p> </p>

[manuel_odabashian]

<p>Thanks guys very interesting</p>

[larrydressler]

<p>You opened a can of worms. :-) Define finest grain? As your fine grain may be another photographers Mush. :-)</p>

[jim_norman4]

<p>I agree with Peter. Acros in pyro.</p>

[bgelfand]

<p>Ilford Pan F+ processed in DD-X or D76 1+1 is quite fine grained.</p>

[bgelfand]

<p>Ilford Pan F+ processed in DD-X or D76 1+1 is quite fine grained.</p>

[bgelfand]

<p>Ilford Pan F+ processed in DD-X or D76 1+1 is quite fine grained.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>I've heard that Ilford Pan F+ processed in DD-X or D76 1+1 is quite fine grained.</p>

[larrydressler]

<p>Can of worms Some ISO 400 films in Xtol 1-1 are finer than better than many ISO 100 films. Delta 100 is finer grained than PanF+ in many developers PanF+ is great in Diafine up to E.I. 64 but still not in the league as the T grain films no matter what generation they are as I love shooting traditional films but at times I will use the T's fore some things. some say 100 but I see lost shadows at 100 with it where I don't see them with Delta 100 or others in Acufine ..... Can of worms.....</p>

[chris_waller]

<p>On the strength of my experience it's either Kodak TMax 100 or Fuji Acros 100. For me, the Fuji just wins by a nose. To be perfectly honest, in a blind test I wouldn't be able to choose between them.</p>

[Mike Gammill]

Try both (TMX and Acros 100). I like the Acros rated at E.I. 80 developed in HC110 dilution B for 5'.

[User_502260]

<p>This is an old question. I get finer grain from ACROS in undiluted Fuji Microfine than from TMX in any developer I have tried. Some peope use developers for ACROS which produce slightly lower film speed. Microfine gives box speed and fine grain.</p>

[mjferron]

<p>Traditional films for me are Tmax 100 and Ilford Pan F. Since Peter is throwing an interesting twist with the reversal process Ill add one of my own.</p>

<p>For 35mm I pick Kodak CN400 as my finest grain B&W film. I process here at home with Freestyle's Unicolor kit. Just as easy as traditional B&W once you get a work flow down. Shoot it at 200 and the grain is amazingly fine. It's also drys completely flat. Not a hint of curl in either direction. That makes for better scanning and no fighting loading film holders. You also get some extra hand holding speed. 200 vs 100, 50 or even 25.</p>

[peterbcarter]

<p>I'll second that. I tried it and it worked well. I just chose another route.</p>

[pc_b]

<p>Jeff, where do you get your Fuji chemicals from?</p>

<p>Michael, TMX/TMY/TMZ were the first "high-tech", tabular crystals films! Then came der Deltas, then Acros.</p>

<p>CN400 is really sweet, huge latitude. My favourite for 'careless-shooting-and-results-in-1-hour-please' situations. However, if you drum scan well-developed Techpan, CMS20, TMX or Acros (both at 64), they all come out finer grained than CN400 (even at E.I. 100). And they sport much more resolution - if the subject/lens permits. Scanning non-C-41 b&w films with negative scanners such as the ones from Nikon/Minolta just doesn't do them justice. Ah, CN400 in 120 is soooo sweet. I feel like ordering...</p>

<p> </p>

[zack_zoll]

<p>CN400 (and other C-41 films, like Portra) have very fine grain, but this is largely due to the thicker film base that supports the dye used to create your images. This base (and the way dye works in general, vs. silver) obscures a lot of the grain, but in doing so often makes the film less sharp; the same as if you'd just cranked up the noise reduction in post. If you're processing by hand anyway, I honestly don't know why you'd bother.</p>

<p>PanF+ is potentially the lowest grain 'popular' film, but only if developed with Perceptol, or another low-speed, low-grain developer. PanF+ is also very sharp and has amazing tonal range; my 120s looked like 4x5s. But the contrast is WAY up there, and it's a very difficult film to work with. I only use it on overcast days, with a tripod.</p>

<p>Acros is almost as finely grained as PanF+, almost as sharp, and has almost as good of a tonal range. It also can achieve these with XTol, Rodinal, D-76, or any other good developer, while the PanF+ really only shines with special developers. Acros also isn't nearly as hard to work with. It does have a thinner protective coat though, making it a little easier to scratch, and harder to keep flat.</p>

[User_502260]

<p>The japanexposures webshop in Tokyo still lists Microfine. Most of my supply comes from friends who happened to be in Tokyo on business trips.</p>

[jay_de_fehr]

<p>This is one of the few questions that arise here to which there is a quantifiable answer, but that shouldn't suggest I know what the answer is! Kodak publishes Diffuse RMS Granularity figures for their films, and Tmax 100 scores an 8. Kodak also claim Tmax 100 is <strong>"the world's finest grain 100 speed B&W film"</strong>. Fuji's claim for Acros is a little more attenuated:<strong> "..</strong><strong>features the world's highest standard in grain quality among ISO 100 films."</strong> , and Ilford is more restrained still, claiming only <strong>"exceptionally fine grain." </strong><br>

My guess is that for most practical purposes, it would be very difficult to pick a winner among these films based on grain. Acros and Delta 100 have a nice, straight line characteristic curve, while Tmax has a wonky hump in the middle. I have 100' of TMX waiting for me at home, so I'll be experimenting with a few different developers. Normally I use Acros in this speed, but I wanted to take a bulk roll on vacation with me, and couldn't find 100' of Acros. In any case, I brought all 100' back with me, so I have it to experiment with, alongside my regular use of Acros. </p>

[cj8281]

<p>Of all the films that I have in current stock, I would say Panatomic-X in D76 at 1:1. I have not yet mixed up a bag of Microdol-X to try it in that but one of these days I may. Of course Panatomic-X has a speed of only 32 ASA.</p>

[pc_b]

<p>Clay, it's 2012; Panatomic is not on sale anymore. Since before the turn of the millennium, actually.</p>

<p>To another one from the past: With the advent of TMX in the 80ies the ISO rule of thumb about graininess had to be dumped. Today, the superb TMY-2 is less grainy than the *two stops* slower Fomapan 100, Fuji SS, LuckySHD100, and APX100!</p>

<p>About the eternally recurring 'PanF+ is so contrasty!': E.I. of around 20 and the use of Microdol-X/Perceptol diluted 1+3 or Xtol 1+2 or 1+3 tames the film perfectly. Unless you overdevelop.<br>

(But one has to have the guts to change dev times, experiment, fail at first, ...)</p>

<p>Zack, claiming that a thicker film base in C-41 films is the cause for loss of resolution in output is simply wrong. Read up in books about it. Most important in that matter (resolution/sharpness) is the fact that dye clouds (C-41) and balls of silver filaments (conventional b+w films when developed) are very different starting points to build visual information from. Bayer (or not) sensor arrays are yet another way to record/quantify an image - with yet another differing set of math/physics behind them. Except for straight resolution measurements based on finely tuned drum scans it's very much apples and oranges (and mangos). The professional analog color printers of yore (I'm not one of them) knew from experience that *some* b+w films just had more microcontrast/resolution than the best E-6/C-41 film. </p>

<p> </p>

[Fotohuis RoVo]

<p>As the OP asked for a regular iso 100 film, my fine grain combination is <strong>Fuji Acros 100</strong> (E.I. 50) in <strong>CG-512/RLS</strong> , an Ultra Fine Grain type developer.</p>

<p>You can only have <em>slightly</em> finer grain with an iso 25 film or a micro film like Copex, ATP1.1 or TP but the OP would not try a special film.</p>

<p>The differences with Tmax 100 or Delta 100 are not very big but in grain Tmax 100 and Acros 100 are just finer in grain then the Delta 100 variant from Ilford.</p>