XP2 grain puzzle

[Tim B]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi,

 

I've used Ilford's XP2 since it was invented. I like its smooth tones, latitude and convenience. I used to process it myself, but recently have used a lab. The same lab developed these two films, although a couple of months apart.

 

One film has considerably more grain than the other. There were differences in lighting conditions, but although with chromogenic films grain varies with film density, I would not expect such a huge difference. There may possibly have been a slight difference in exposure value (i.e. one film shot at 320 ISO and the other at 400).

 

Can anyone account for this difference? It makes the grainier film real "pepper and salt" and hard to scan and print. The other film is what I expect and produces lovely smooth prints.

 

I have tried to scan and process identically and have used the same, small amount of Smart Sharp on both.

 

Both crops are at 100%:

 

[ATTACH]145278[/ATTACH] [ATTACH]145279[/ATTACH]

 

Any suggestions - could it be the processing?

 

Thanks,

 

Tim

[cbretteville]

If this had been home souped rolls I'd say the second one was cooked. But it is rather hard to think a lab machine allows that to happen. Severe underexposure is the second idea, but if that is out to I really don't know. Sorry...

 

- Carl

[pop]

... was cooked. But it is rather hard to think a lab machine allows that to happen.

 

Strangely enough, that very thing happened to me just the other day. Apparently, the people in a very small and rather expensive lab had neglected some adjustment or other. There was no end to their apologies, but the film was gone.

[Tim B]

Thanks, both, for your comments. They follow my own thinking.

 

Yes, it is hard to think that the lab, which is one I use regularly and has always been excellent, hitherto, has made a mistake, but I can't think what else it could be.

 

The negs are all well exposed with full tonal range. What "some adjustment or other" could be, I can't think. The only adjustment apart from having the chemicals right is temperature.

 

I think I'll get in touch with the lab and see what they say.

 

Tim

[Michael Hiles]

I love XP2 and I get results that normally look like your good negative - fine grain, sharp, wonderful tones etc. Fabulous film.

 

You do not say if this problem is an issue for all negatives on the substandard roll, or it varies by negative. I expose XP2 for 200 ASA which produces optimum exposure and easily printable and scanable negatives. If I am guessing exposure (M2) and I seriously overexpose (by 2+ stops), I have trouble scanning and get an effect similar to your second shot. Seems that think/dense negatives scan poorly, at least on my machine. Can't comment on darkroom printing. I have never printed a seriously over exposed XP2 negative - but other's darkroom tests suggest that the grain gets finer with more exposure in XP2.

 

I would not suspect procesing if the film went through a machine. Could be a screw up, but this is not very likely since everything is programmed.

 

I think scanning of very dense negatives is difficult.