How to reduce grain and contrast in developing (never thought I'd ask that)

[PaulJohn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Just a question, which scanner was used? It seems to me (and I realise these are internet jpgs) the scanner doesn't quite resolve the grain.

 

In my humble experience, with Tri-X (edit: in 135) there will be grain. Sure it can be reduced by using different developers, but Tri-X won't look like fine-grained films.

 

 

An Epson V550. Obviously you think the grain doesn't look right. Please can you post a link to a photo where the grain is properly resolved so I can see the difference. My searches on flickr for 400TX haven't revealed anything different to my own scans so far (as far as I can tell).

 

I do appreciate that Tri-X is not fine grained but it is less coarse than some other popular 400 speed b&w films. From my research of film and developer recipes I am looking forward to trying TMAX with XTOL for a subtle grain and HP5+ with Rodinal for a stronger grain. 

[philipus]

Thanks for writing back Paul. And I apologise if my post appeared critical. I actually don't think the grain looks 'wrong' (and it is a nice photograph too btw). Personally I don't think there is a right or wrong when it comes to grain. It looks as it does for a number of reasons. Of course, how one wants an image to look is another matter and grain is an important part of a film image, particularly for small format film.

 

I am not familiar with the V550 but in case it helps below are a few images scanned on my Coolscan 9000. I should say that I usually edit my images. For my b&w that means running a script with Levels, Curves and Unsharp Mask which evidently affects contrast and grain. But I picked the first three because I didn't process them much at all. The fourth one I did more, in particular with USM so that's perhaps not so representative. I should also say my developing skills aren't the best so that definitely accounts for flaws.

 

The Coolscans have a very sharp light source (though the 9000 less so) so that may not be comparable to the V550. But even on a more mid-range scanner like the V550 the advice to scan at fullest resolution and downsize will have a big positive impact on the appearance of grain. That said, grain can be very good for scanned images since it can, with skillful sharpening, make them appear sharper than they are. There are many ways to sharpen - it's a skill in itself the beginning of which I'm only beginning to understand - and one usually has to perform it both in several steps during editing and at various places of an image. I was once given the general advice to use Amount at 60-100% and the Radius at 0.6-0.8 (with Threshold at 1) to snap up the grain without it looking too artificial. One can also flip the Amount and Radius values, i.e. set a very low (10-12) Amount and a very high Radius (40-80) which will work a bit like adding contrast to the image but in a better way. Anyway there are lots of different ways and it's a matter of picking one or a few that give results which one likes.

 

br

Philip

 

Flickr (2000ppi)

 

Flickr (2000ppi)

 

Flickr (2000ppi)

 

Flickr (2000ppi)

 

An Epson V550. Obviously you think the grain doesn't look right. Please can you post a link to a photo where the grain is properly resolved so I can see the difference. My searches on flickr for 400TX haven't revealed anything different to my own scans so far (as far as I can tell).

 

I do appreciate that Tri-X is not fine grained but it is less coarse than some other popular 400 speed b&w films. From my research of film and developer recipes I am looking forward to trying TMAX with XTOL for a subtle grain and HP5+ with Rodinal for a stronger grain.

Edited January 4, 2016 by philipus

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[PaulJohn]

Hi Philipus,

 

You certainly get a lot out of 35mm and I can see what you mean. I am impressed with the resolution you are getting.

 

When I bought the V550 I intended to get a plustek for those shots that deserve better resolution. I understand that the Nikon Coolscans are discontinued and I almost bought one off ebay last month.

 

How many can you scan in one go on the 9000?

 

Thanks for your illustrations.

 

Paul

[philipus]

Hi Paul

 

The 35mm tray of the 9000 takes two strips of 6. This is good for a few reasons. First the obvious that the scanner needs no supervision for 12 frames. Secondly that the frames are lined up properly. One preview on frame one and then the scanner will scan the full image of each frame. On my Coolscan 5 ED I always struggle with getting the framing right on the last frames of a 6-strip. Thirdly, the 35mm tray has a lid which presses the negs slightly which helps with curved negs (though for the most bent ones the corners will still be a bit soft). Fourthly, one can scan single negs, should one such (that's impossible on the V ED unless one tapes them to another neg strip). 

 

Yes the 9000 (and the 8000) are discontinued though the 9000 is still being serviced by Nikon (though to what extent it is possible to carry out repairs depends on availability of spare parts which are becoming scarce). Probably the best place to buy used scanners is Ffordes in Inverness (which you probably know). Personally I wouldn't buy a used scanner in a private sale because I'd want the return privilege and warranty to be able to test it properly in use.

 

br
Philip

[PaulJohn]

I've just uploaded a few samples of TriX developed in tetenal parasol s. This stuff is a Rodinal type of developer and is very contrasty. You can see the difference in the negs compared to my previous developer Ilford Ilfosol 3. The grain is much stronger but adds to the photos very nicely in my opinion. C&C very welcome.

 

 

 

 

I know that this post is actually how to increase grain but the reverse is therefore also true. Choosing a low contrast developer should reduce grain.

[NJH]

The grain and contrast really works wonderfully on the last one. Like the look of that a lot.

[dgc]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

PaulJohn, how much, if any, post processing was in the final image of the building, assuming you you did a 'flat' scan ?

 

David

Edited January 24, 2016 by dgc

[PaulJohn]

PaulJohn, how much, if any, post processing was in the final image of the building, assuming you you did a 'flat' scan ?

 

David

 

 

Scan on standard settings then Lightroom adjustments:

Highlights -99

Contrast +29

Clarity +37

Vignetting -42

Slight Crop and straighten

Edited January 25, 2016 by PaulJohn

[Martin B]

I was just thinking the same thing.  For softer grain and contrast agitate very gently like you are holding a newborn baby.  And not more than you need to.   

 

I do just the opposite with D76 in stock concentration - constant agitation and inversions, and I get very fine grain (TMax and Tri-X 400 films) and a wide tonal range, not too contrasty. Did the same process now a few times always leading to the same good result. At least it works for me I guess.

[A miller]

I do just the opposite with D76 in stock concentration - constant agitation and inversions, and I get very fine grain (TMax and Tri-X 400 films) and a wide tonal range, not too contrasty. Did the same process now a few times always leading to the same good result. At least it works for me I guess.

I think we may be talking past each other.  I wasn't commenting on the frequency of agitation but rather the intensity.  You seem to be focused on the frequency and not the intensity.  My main point was that gentle agitation (putting aside the frequency) will generally lead to lower contrast. 

[gsgary]

This is HP5 developed in rodinal starting off with cold tap water and stand developed in the fridge

 

[gsgary]

HP5 normal development in DDX

 

[Martin B]

I think we may be talking past each other.  I wasn't commenting on the frequency of agitation but rather the intensity.  You seem to be focused on the frequency and not the intensity.  My main point was that gentle agitation (putting aside the frequency) will generally lead to lower contrast. 

 

You are right, I didn't know that this can make a difference (frequency or intensity). Certainly I am not shaking the development tank as if I made a cocktail ! Yes, my approach is more frequent but not as intense. 

Edited February 2, 2016 by Martin B

[gsgary]

Here's shaking it like it's a cocktail

 

Grain on Grain