Wish list: production of a grainy film

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roger Cole

"Warm" has nothing to do with it in most normal developers, it's time+temperature. Adjust the time to suit the temperature and results will be so similar as to be indistinguishable. I routinely develop all my black and white at 24C/75F because I use a Jobo CPE2 that will heat, but not cool. In the hottest months of summer sometimes I'm running at 76-77F because of the ambient temperature. I adjust times a bit to suit. Results are fine, no particular grain - and ALL my Delta 3200 is run like this too (albeit in T-Max developer, but it's grainier than D76.)

What you have here is a very long development time for the temperature. Ilford specs give only 13.5 minutes at 24C for D76 at EI 12500.

Not that you aren't getting the grainy results the OP is asking for. But you could just as well get it at 20C with a suitably longer time. Ilford publishes a temperature conversion chart that gives equivalent times at different temperatures (this is what I use when I'm a degree or two too hot in the summer - it's close enough for such small differences.) It only goes to 17:15 at 24C, but the equivalent time at 20C is given as 25:00 minutes. Some extrapolation shows the equivalent to 24C/18 minutes would be about 26:30.

Some older films could reticulate if temperature varied too much and developer was warm and then you went into cool stop or the like, but that's a different thing and very unlikely with modern films.

---

To be fair, the Ilford times for D3200 have long been regarded as off base, giving thinner than desirable negs, although I do generally develop my film for slightly longer than recommended anyway. I target my negatives for a grade 4 or 5 print, generally, so it doesn't bother me.

I always make sure to warm up the stop and fix a bit if I do this, too, to avoid reticulation. If I do in fact want to reticulate, I keep a container of water in the fridge, then moved to the freezer for an hour or so before developing. I then heat some water up in the microwave or on the stove, and I start developing. Perhaps halfway through development, I'll empty the tank into a beaker, and shock the film with the freezing water, followed by the almost boiling water, and then resume developing. You can do this as many times as you like, and with the fixer and stop, too.

I agree the times for D3200 (and Kodak's times for TMZ too) are too short. I develop both for the times given for one stop more speed, generally shooting at 3200 and developing as listed for 6400. I do it all at 24C too but don't get anything like your grain!

"Over develop D3200 for grain" is certainly a viable way to get grain, but you will get a lot of contrast too which you may or may not want.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by frobozz

Kodak 5222 Double-X (B&W movie film) is almost too grainy for my tastes, but if grain is what you're looking for then you should be able to get all you want, depending on what developer you use. You have to buy it in 400' rolls and spool it down, but it relatively cheap that way. See other threads here and elsewhere for everything you could ever want to know about Double-X!

Duncan

---

If you compare Kodak's published values for the RMS Granularity of Eastman 5222 and Tri-X you will find that 5222 is actually finer grained than Tri-X.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roger Cole

I agree the times for D3200 (and Kodak's times for TMZ too) are too short. I develop both for the times given for one stop more speed, generally shooting at 3200 and developing as listed for 6400. I do it all at 24C too but don't get anything like your grain!

"Over develop D3200 for grain" is certainly a viable way to get grain, but you will get a lot of contrast too which you may or may not want.

---

I should add that I agitate at a normal rate (10 seconds once a minute), but I do it very, very vigorously.

To the OP: really the best way to find the results, and grain character you like is to just buy a few rolls and try different developing regimens on each one. Pick the one you like the most and refine it from there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gerald C Koch

If you compare Kodak's published values for the RMS Granularity of Eastman 5222 and Tri-X you will find that 5222 is actually finer grained than Tri-X.

---

As it should be, as it is supposedly lower speed (250 vs 400). I'm just saying that in my tests so far, Double-X seems to be grainy, whatever I'm doing wrong without trying... so I bet if one were to try, one could get some pretty amazing grain out of the stuff. See the restroom assault scene near the beginning of Casino Royale (2006) for an example of extreme Double-X grain. I suspect they pushed the heck out of it, because it got pretty contrasty too.

Duncan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chris Lange

I should add that I agitate at a normal rate (10 seconds once a minute), but I do it very, very vigorously.

To the OP: really the best way to find the results, and grain character you like is to just buy a few rolls and try different developing regimens on each one. Pick the one you like the most and refine it from there.

---

Vigorous agitation will make a difference.

Mine are all done in a Jobo, so agitation is continuous but not vigorous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by frobozz

Kodak 5222 Double-X (B&W movie film) is almost too grainy for my tastes, but if grain is what you're looking for then you should be able to get all you want, depending on what developer you use.

---

I would second that, although as someone else pointed out the spec sheets give it a par with TX, it LOOKS a bit grainyer than TX. Pushing and such could probaly build the effect. It is not that expensive in the 400 foot roll, and keeping up the demand is a good thing.

Interesting quote in an article in the December 2012 American Cinematographer. In an article by Jean Oppenheimer about the short film Swimmer, director Lynne Ramsay and cinematographer Natasha Braier are discussing their choice of film stocks: "We originally had this romantic idea of shooting on black-and-white stock and playing with filters, but the only black-and-white stock we could get, Eastman (Double-X) 5222, was much grainer than I remembered."

So we're not the only ones who feel that way about it :-)

Duncan

I've found that Fomapan 200 in Rodinal 1+50 produces some very grainy negatives, like this one (cropped):

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7193/7...61c031ed_c.jpg