Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,701   Posts: 1,482,636   Online: 791
      

View Poll Results: do you like grain ?

Voters
115. You may not vote on this poll
  • yes

    34 29.57%
  • no

    11 9.57%
  • it depends

    68 59.13%
  • i never gave it much thought

    5 4.35%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 33
  1. #21
    Mark Antony's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    East Anglia,UK
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    772
    Images
    38
    I voted I like grain, not that I think its always desirable just that I don't object to it at normal viewing distances for most subjects.
    I was once (believe it or not) one of those people who didn't like 'noise' especially in sky on landscapes and tried everything I could to minimise it.
    Then a road to Damascus moment occurred. I went to an exhibition by a local photographer who uses 35mm for landscapes, I noticed that although the sky had quite visible grain it looked well.. natural
    Talking to the photographer he made me realise that there is grain in the sky (well the observer), caused by the vitreous fluid in our eyes; we both went out and looked at the sky-yep noisy.
    So rather than thinking noise is evil, as long as its random the eye will accept it as normal–to a point.
    I'm much more relaxed about it and yet my prints still sell, in fact any digi stuff I shoot I add a little random mono noise too.
    Just a personal feeling, not supposed to be a statement of superiority it just works for me.
    Mark

  2. #22

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    225
    I voted it depends....It's never been much of an issue for me, if it's there, it's there and if i don't want it to be there, i'll use the appropriate film and processing. I find the deliberate imposition of grain a bit pretentious sometimes.

    wayne

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    1,288
    It depends. I expect to see grain in enlargements from 35mm film. It's part of the process. It's not a matter of liking it or not. I personally don't like to see grain in enlargements from my MF and LF images. That's why I use the larger formats and 100ASA films. MF negs from faster films start to show grain in larger enlargements. I don't find it distracting. Again, it's characteristic of the process.

    Peter Gomena

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Independence Oregon USA at the airport
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    108
    I consider grain to be equivalent to the stroke of a brush or pen in traditional art.

    Use it to convey the feeling you wish to present.
    Its a tool like many other techniques available to a photographer.

    I don't pull it off often, but I like the "Pointelistic" (sp) effect I get sometime with a high grain negative and psuedo (or not) lith printing.


    Dan
    ... Hmmm..., f5.13 @ 1/23 should do it.

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Trinity, Alabama
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    243
    Quote Originally Posted by Chazzy View Post
    To me grain is a necessary evil which comes from working with fast films in miniature format.... I think that people have come to accept excessive grain because it has become so commonplace since the time when 35mm largely displaced medium and large format (for example, in reportage). We have gotten used to something which would have been regarded as a technical deficiency before the fifties and sixties.

    Is grain still a deficiency if a grainy picture is the look I'm going for?


    I voted "it depends." For color, I like the fine grained look. I'm not sure why, though. For me, I think the grain interferes with the smoothness of the colors. I'm really not sure how to explain it :/ I guess I just dont like looking at specks of color. I'd rather see continuous color with no "specks." (I have a headache, and that's the best way for me to explain it right now).

    For black and white, I like grain. HP5+ and Delta 3200 in Rodinal are my combinations of choice

  6. #26
    keithwms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Charlottesville, Virginia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,079
    Blog Entries
    20
    Images
    129
    Definitely depends for me. For most images I think grain is essential and really contributes, while for others it is a distraction.

    For colour photography I usually do not like grain, whereas for b&w I often miss it if it's not there. I am not quite sure why this is so but I suppose it is because I generally push enlargement much more with colour (slides) and just don't care for how c41 grain enlarges. Looks too much like digital colour noise to my eye.

    My preferred grain structure is that found in fp4+, hp5+ and the like. I haven't formed a productive relationship with the t grains. I am also somewhat underwhelmed by what the pyros do for grain. I mean, is it there or isn't it??! I need something definitive in my b&w.
    "Only dead fish follow the stream"

    [APUG Portfolio] [APUG Blog] [Website]

  7. #27
    brian steinberger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    2,243
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    100
    It does depend for me as well. As already stated, for landscapes finer grain the better, but for most of my other subjects I don't mind the grain. I shoot almost exclusively MF with Neopan 400 and find the grain very attractive in prints up to 11x14. This works well for me, and also the speed advantage is nice as I handhold most of my work. I like to see some grain in a print, it really makes it sing to me.

  8. #28
    aparat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Saint Paul, MN
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    428
    Images
    39
    I like grain in BW film. It is a part of BW aesthetics for me. However, my experience is rather limited because I have never exposed a negative larger than 6x6 and do not make prints larger than 11x14.

  9. #29
    Prest_400's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Spain
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    512
    For landscapes, I usually don't like grain. The finer, the better.
    But for indoors typically low contrast scenes, for portraiture, I love some visible fine grain.
    I agree with aparat, a bit of grain in B&W adds something to the picture.

  10. #30
    TheFlyingCamera's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Washington DC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    8,046
    Blog Entries
    51
    Images
    424
    There are images for which grain is appropriate, and others for which it is not. There are images where grain adds structure, and there are images where it detracts. It's a matter of choosing the right tool for the job.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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