Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,691   Posts: 1,482,393   Online: 800
      
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 31 to 38 of 38
  1. #31
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    15,947
    Images
    148
    Rodinal shouldn't give more grain than Dektol but with poor temperature control and a few degrees change in between stages your likely to see this excessive graininess even with optical prints. It does need a films thats affected by the hydroxide though Tmax 400 and Neopan are the only two I know where it happens.

    Ian

  2. #32

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,258
    I strongly suspect this has entirely to do with scaning, but it still looks like I might have to do yet another controlled pressure test for TMY micro-reticulation, this time with Rodinal. Not again!!!

    Hydroxide is the reason Rodinal is grainy with either exact temperatures or +/- 1C. I know Ian and I will never agree on that but the relationship between a high pH and granularity is more complicated than just softening of the gelatin (which I doubt is happening with well hardened TMax anyway).

  3. #33
    lxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Redlands, So. Calif.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,457
    Quote Originally Posted by rich815 View Post
    I'm not saying scanning did not exacerbate the grainy look, it most likely did.
    I don't see any grainy look, except at a distance. Close-up, it's not at all a grainy look.

    But only because of the other factors creating the stronger likelihood that it would do so. Scanning does not automatically mean excessive grain. Just like a sharp lens does not give people more prominent skin pores.
    True, but grain aliasing can make scans look grainier than they are. At any rate, to me any grain present is obfuscated by the pattern caused by reticulation or scanning.
    I do use a digital device in my photographic pursuits when necessary.
    When someone rags on me for using film, I use a middle digit, upraised.

  4. #34

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Daventry, Northamptonshire, England
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    6,629
    Well, stradibarrius seems to have been satisfied with the answers he got as far back as page 1 and here we are on page 4 in danger of falling out with one another.

    Isn't the key to all of this an attempt by the OP to print a neg optically. That should at least show if this is a scanning issue.

    I know as much about scanning as I know about the manufacture of a H bomb but it seems to me that in the several years I have been on APUG we are, in recent times, getting more and more photographic problems that are or at least may be connected to a Hybrid process and whose solution may lie in a DPUG area

    pentaxuser

  5. #35
    lxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Redlands, So. Calif.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,457
    Which is why I think this is next logical step.

    Quote Originally Posted by lxdude View Post
    Look at the negative under a loupe. That will tell you if it's reticulation or from scanning.
    I do use a digital device in my photographic pursuits when necessary.
    When someone rags on me for using film, I use a middle digit, upraised.

  6. #36
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    15,947
    Images
    148
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael R 1974 View Post
    I strongly suspect this has entirely to do with scaning, but it still looks like I might have to do yet another controlled pressure test for TMY micro-reticulation, this time with Rodinal. Not again!!!

    Hydroxide is the reason Rodinal is grainy with either exact temperatures or +/- 1C. I know Ian and I will never agree on that but the relationship between a high pH and granularity is more complicated than just softening of the gelatin (which I doubt is happening with well hardened TMax anyway).
    Michael as you know from previous posts I can only go by actual experience. Many people claim Rodinal causes grainier negatives, I can show negatives that refute that with superb fine grain, but then I can also show a film with excessive grain from a film batch I had no problems with processed with my equipment and chemistry by someone else.

    Some of the highest quality 35mm prints I've seen were processed in Rodinal, but then the photographer had worked (& assisted) a master of control - Minor White.

    Agfa's APX100 processed in Rodinal was probably the best film/developer combination after APX25 was dropped but Rodinal and Tmax100 was comparable although Tmax 100's true speed is EI50 a stop slower.

    The bottom line is good tight processing technique leadds to very much higher quality negatives.

    Ian

  7. #37

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    VT
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    551
    Images
    1
    That's because the negatives are really small with 35mm.

  8. #38
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,835
    Images
    57
    I have TMZ negatives with less grain that this. Standard stuff here: switch to a baseline developer: D-76 1+1 and validate grain does or doesn't exist with a loupe on a lightbox.
    Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.

    http://www.flickr.com/kediwah

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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