My 35mm shots always seem to be grainy?
When I use my 35mm camera may shots always seem to have a lot of grain in them. The exposure can look great but when I scan the negatives they are grainy.
Is that soemthing that happens when I scan. I know that 35mm does't have to be grainy unless you enlarge it too much.
Here is an example. TMAX 400 in R09
Scanning can make negatives appear grainy, the same negs printed optically may not be. In addition I wouldn't use RO9 - Rodinal with a film like TMax 400.
I have used Tmax 400 which is really a 200 EI film with Xtol in 35mm and you get excellent fine grain.
If you don't want grain, try XP2 film.
“The contemplation of things as they are, without error or confusion, without substitution or imposture, is in itself a nobler thing than a whole harvest of invention”
Your sample looks like the film is reticulated, if not under inspection by loupe, then I would say you scanner is set with a medium amount , high radius and you are oversharpening the scans.
that is not grain you are seeing , if so you have huge problems with reticulation.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Originally Posted by stradibarrius
Without delving too far in things digital, B&W silver negatives are more difficult to scan than color negatives because of something called Q-factor scattering caused by the silver grains.
But in this case, I agree with Bob - it looks like reticulation.
I agree with Bob, something about that image looks like either reticulation, or a scanner issue (you'll have to print the neg to eliminate the scanner issue).
Reticulation, in simple terms, results from varying (usually by a lot) temperatures from the beginning of when the film gets wet till it dries (yes, including the drying temperature). Do a search on the word in this forum and you'll find plenty to read.
The approach most use is minimum wet time (from presoak or development through drying) and all temps within 1 degree F.
I am becoming convinced this is the reason for so much of the preoccupation with graininess.
Originally Posted by Ian Grant
Many if not most of my scans appear "grainy" .. the moment I get the negatives into the enlarger, it magically disappears ...
Actually Tmax400 also suffers from micro-reticulkation if not processed within tight temperature tolerances +/- 1ºC with developer like Rodinal/R09 due to the hydroxide in the developer which significantly softens the emulsion.
Originally Posted by pdeeh
Kodak have tried to say it doesn't happen but their Patents and research show quite the opposite, they had huge problems with early digital minilabs and excessive grain with Kodak colour films caused by the micro-reticulation/surface emulsion artefacts with poorly hardened films and variations in temperature.
Combination of things, most of which have been said, but it's all of them working together against you:
a) Rodinal is not a good idea if you don't like grain. I've pushed TMax 400 to 3200 in Xtol and gotten the same or less grain than PanF50 in Rodinal.
b) scan is oversharpened. Was it from a shop or at home? Best way is to do it at home, use something like Silverfast, take 20 scans of it and experiment to actually learn how to use the damn program, and do it as manually as possible.
c) also looks like a few jpeg compression aretefacts in the plain areas topleft and topright (may have just been from downscaling to post here though). Scanning to max-resolution and saving as tiff will give you a 50MB file but you won't have compression problems. (ok, that's overkill, I scan to 3200dpi and save as 100%-quality jpeg, ~10MB/35mm, that's good enough for me).
But otherwise, the shot (lighting, subject, comp, etc) looks good...
An awful lot of electrons were terribly inconvenienced in the making of this post.
f/64 and be there.