Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Einst_Stein

Horrible Grain of Delta 400 according to Flickr

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Advertisement (gone after registration)

250swb - you must come down to the gallery sometime and lecture all my customers about how terribly benighted they must be - to possibly be attracted to my film prints (all of them produced from Kodak T-grain films in HC-110).

I, of course, just keep taking the checks to the bank.... ;) 

HC-110 1:31, Tmax 100 (top row) and 400 (bottom row). Fuji GF670, Hassy/Zeiss 50, Hassy/Zeiss 50, Agfa Super Isolette 75.

Generally speaking, I've found HC-110 - properly used - to be on the fine-grain side, with TMax, or most other film types.

Properly used meaning understanding that: HC-110 is not a "speed developer" and should not be used for trying to chase max. shadow detail (DD-X or Microphen are better for that); that T-grain films themselves are not good "pushing" films (TX or HP5 are better for that); that Tmax negs exposed and developed correctly look about a stop thinner than other films and should not be overdeveloped or overexposed to "look like" other negs; and that Tmax films are very picky about exact processing - and thus one has to be extra-vigilant about temperature, and nailing HC-110's rather short times to within 10 seconds or less. (And UASBD!)

If one plays by Kodak's rules, HC-110 and Kodak's T-grain films produce beautiful results. So did the late-lamented Fuji ACROS.

The Ilford Delta films, however, are not at all clones of Kodak TMax film (not all tab-grains are the same), and I've always found Delta films to be grittier and grainier (if slightly more tolerant of exposure and processing errors, and scene brightness range). They fall in-between TMax films and "cubic-grain" films (TX, HP5, etc.)

Edited by adan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, adan said:

250swb - you must come down to the gallery sometime and lecture all my customers about how terribly benighted they must be - to possibly be attracted to my film prints (all of them produced from Kodak T-grain films in HC-110).

I, of course, just keep taking the checks to the bank.... ;) 

 

 

Don't mind if I do, but I'll start my lecture by telling them to beware of the scoundrels who manipulate the rules of the discussion to suit themselves. It is a common occurrence that context means everything, and a discussion based on the search term "leica HC110 delta 400" shouldn't be illustrated with 6x7cm medium format photographs as if there is a direct connection with the quality of the 35mm images being talked about. So I'll explain to the class they are being conned, an ego trip, 'look at me, my medium format pictures are considerably less grainy in the print than your puny 35mm negatives, I win!'

I took the time to check the same search path the OP had taken, and the images are grainy. My honest and transparent advice was to try a different developer if the grain bothered him in 35mm, a developer made for the film. I did not tell him to go out and buy a 6x7 camera, neither would I have been so underhanded to say 'I've never had a problem (subtext - but I'm working with a vastly larger negative). So keep cashing the cheques if this is the standard of teaching you give, people have always paid for snake oil.

Edited by 250swb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Scoundrels...conned...ego trip....snake oil"? My, my, my.

However - following images all from TMax 400 in HC-100 B

"35mm picture area" from a 6x6 neg, as large as this forum will run it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you could try a different dilution and aim for a bit more acutance if you wanted to use HC110 with 35mm because it looks a bit anemic and mushy, otherwise it's good for medium format.  You could consider matching the developer to both the film and the format and avoid the 'one size fits all' approach. You can then get the most impact out of each format, a bit more tonality for larger formats at the expense of acutance, and a bit more acutance for smaller formats to make the edges pop. But I appreciate that like Rodinal you get a lot of HC110 shots in a bottle so maybe you feel obliged to plough through it, but it lasts ages. You've got some weird posterisation going on in the background, is that on the negative, it looks like the film and/or developer has given up trying to render tone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I don’t see many talks about PMK or Purocat-HD on Tri-X and HP5+.

Back when I shot Tri-x in medium format, I used PMK and Tri-X, hoping to smooth out the grain clouds and to improve the micro contrast. I gave up after the first trial of HC110. It is much easier to get the tonal appearance that I liked. I am sure by working harder to sharpen my handling of the film and the developer combination, either one can be dramatically improved.

I don’t see much talk about PMK or Pyrocat-HD here. I did see a lot of discussion and sample images from other forums. A lot are from the inventor of the Pyrocat-HD, and most of them are about large format, but none of them get along with my taste. 

Any comment about PMK or Pyrocat with 35mm format? Particularly for Ilford or a Kodak in 400 ISO?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Question is probably not aimed at me but assuming you are still asking about T grain films I've found Pyro developers actually work very well with any 35mm film type if you want fine grain. The one I use most is 510-Pyro but only with the slower film speeds, as the film gets faster I think there comes a crossover point between obsessing about fine grain and trying to make a silk purse out of a sows ear. When grain starts to become clumpy or soft that is when the eye stops enjoying it, the graphic nature of the best 35mm photography isn't an accident and the grain is an inherent part of the image, look at the work of Sebastiao Salgado for example.

The advantage however, especially using semi-stand development, is that Pyro developers are fantastic if you have a wide variety of exposure situations on the roll, the developer protects the highlights and fully develops the shadows. So it's a trade off should the grain become blotchy with faster film speeds (I think a bit more so with T grain films), and just because the grain is fine it doesn't necessarily mean it helps the image. Of course in larger formats this is hardly a problem at all unless aiming for vast prints.

Edited by 250swb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rollei RPX 25 exposed in flat, overcast light and processed in Pyro produced some astonishing 35mm negatives for me.  Using my MP with a 28mm summicron asph and green or yellow filters on a tripod in the way I would use larger format cameras, the detail and tonal ranges I found in my negatives came close to mf standard with some careful post processing of the scans for printing (my film workflow is 'hybrid', I do not make wet prints).

My point being is that all of this is about experimentation and experience, there are no shortcuts to enlightenment.  You have to get out out there and do it over and over again until your experience tells you how and when to match your processes to the equipment you are using, the subject you are photographing and the light you are working with. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For slow film, I find no incentive with Pyro stuffs, particularly compared with Rodinal. 

I have used PMK with Verichrome in wet printing and was excited about it. Not so much with Tri-X and Acros. The tonal appearance does not suite my taste. 

I have tried stand development with Purocat-HD,    It indeed has very special appearance as seen from the posts of experts, to me I would call it boring or ugly.  

If any of you have something to share here , that would be fantastic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Einst_Stein said:

For slow film, I find no incentive with Pyro stuffs, particularly compared with Rodinal. 

I have used PMK with Verichrome in wet printing and was excited about it. Not so much with Tri-X and Acros. The tonal appearance does not suite my taste. 

I have tried stand development with Purocat-HD,    It indeed has very special appearance as seen from the posts of experts, to me I would call it boring or ugly.  

If any of you have something to share here , that would be fantastic.

You seem to ask questions and then contradict replies, so shy don't you share something?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Ouroboros said:

You seem to ask questions and then contradict replies, so shy don't you share something?

I would when I dig them out of the old  folders. I no longer use PMK for many years, and nothing from scanner.

I don’t understand what you mean contradict replies. You sound upset for what I said about my personal taste. It is not necessary. 

I was asking the sharing of films developed by PMK or Pyrocat stuffs that would let people see how good it could be by all means and by anyone. I am particularly interested in ISO 400 35mm format, but other people may be interested in any film and any format.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue., Read more about our Privacy Policy