Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,042   Posts: 1,560,785   Online: 1112
      
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 41 to 49 of 49
  1. #41
    Chris Lange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    764
    Images
    33
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Cole View Post
    "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.
    See my work at my website CHRISTOPHER LANGE PHOTOGRAPHY

    or my snaps at my blog MINIMUM DENSITY
    --
    If you don't have it, then you don't have it.

  2. #42
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,029

    Wish list: production of a grainy film

    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.

  3. #43

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Southern USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,005
    Quote Originally Posted by frobozz View Post
    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.
    A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral.

    ~Antoine de Saint-Exupery

  4. #44
    Chris Lange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    764
    Images
    33
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Cole View Post
    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.
    See my work at my website CHRISTOPHER LANGE PHOTOGRAPHY

    or my snaps at my blog MINIMUM DENSITY
    --
    If you don't have it, then you don't have it.

  5. #45

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Mundelein, IL
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    996
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Gerald C Koch View Post
    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

  6. #46
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,029
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris Lange View Post
    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.

  7. #47
    cmacd123's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Stittsville, Ontario
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,091
    Quote Originally Posted by frobozz View Post
    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.
    Charles MacDonald
    aa508@ncf.ca
    I still live just beyond the fringe in Stittsville

  8. #48

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Mundelein, IL
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    996
    Images
    1
    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

  9. #49

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Switzerland
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    376
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    28
    I've found that Fomapan 200 in Rodinal 1+50 produces some very grainy negatives, like this one (cropped):

    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 7128847489_8261c031ed_c.jpg  
    And the sign said, "long haired freaky people need not apply"

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin