400 speed film for scanning

[fotorr]

Searching for a 400 speed film that will produce fine grain and range of tones in an image printed on an Epson 4000 using imageprint software. I have tried Kodak Tri-x, T-max 400, c-41 B&W film as well as Ilford Delta 400 and HP-5. Also tried Fuji 400. They all have too much grain in the final print- appears in plain tone areas such as sky in landscape images. I am using a multi-pro scanner and silverfast software to scan my R2A negatives. Scan as a positive and invert in PS.Is it worth it to try a fuji CN 800 -exposed around 640- film and then convert back to B&W?
fotorr

 

[dazedgonebye]

The first attachment is Kodak Porta 800, scanned and converted to black and white.
The second is Kodak 400UC.

I've not shot the fuji 800 yet, so I cannot offer a comparison.

 

[John Rountree]

foto, One reason you are having trouble with your scans is the silver emulsion on these films. The silver forms microscopic peaks and valleys that make the scan somewhat irregular. I have had have very good success with Ilford XP-2 film. It is a C-41 processed black and white film. Because it is basiclly a color film, the image is recorded in layers of dye rather than silver, thus leaving a smooth substrate for the scanner. I think you will find that many others also like this film for scanning.

 

[nicholas]

I use Ilford HP5+ shot in a Contax G2 and scan with an Epson 700V. I scan, usually, at 4800 dpi. I don't see any atvantage in scanning at 6400 and infact that might increase grain. I use Epson's software and grain simply is a non issue. I print out of Photoshop CS, generally 11X14's and love the quality. For me it equals 11X14's done by a friend in his wet darkroom. He shoots with a Leica and we see no difference in graniness. He's thinking of closing the darkroom and going the scan route, printing with inkjets.
nicholas

 

[ferider]

On my 2 scanners (Canon 9950 and Minolta Multi II), the best way to reduce scanning noise has been to use Fuji Superia 400 or 800 and then convert to B+W in PS. I always had problems with Kodak and Ilford B+W films and Kodak Porta. I am hoping that the new Porta behaves better.

Roland.

 

[srtiwari]

Considered using a "noise remover" such as Noise Ninja or NeatImage ?

 

[dmr]

This was done with Fuji color negative, desaturated, and cleaned up with Neat Image. (Yes, I know the flash is harsh, I was trying for a Weegee type look here.) A glossy 8x10 of this looks flawless!

 

[Simon Larbalestier]

I've found Vuescan produces scans with less grain from TriX negs than Silverfast. For me i prefer some kind of grain in 400 films otherwise i'd use the Fuji Acros. If i really want grain free images i shoot Fuji Acros with a 6/9cm Fuji.

 

[lZr]

Fotorr,
Why scan the negative as positive and invert in PS? Point to rethink about

 

[kully]

I've tried the noise reduction programmes, but (personally) I find they add a sort of sheen to the image which gives it a look of digital artificiality. This is probably down to me not using the right setting or wotnot.

For low grain B&W try XP2 Super I was amazed at the lack of grain when scanning in on my Nikon V ED - much less than Superia 400 or Centuria 200. I don't use it any more because I rather like grain.

 

[mrtoml]

I've tried the noise reduction programmes, but (personally) I find they add a sort of sheen to the image which gives it a look of digital artificiality. This is probably down to me not using the right setting or wotnot.

For low grain B&W try XP2 Super I was amazed at the lack of grain when scanning in on my Nikon V ED - much less than Superia 400 or Centuria 200. I don't use it any more because I rather like grain.

I recently tested a lot of different options because I was getting a lot of grain with scanned 400 speed films. I use a Minolta 5400. I tried vuescan, multipass scanning, different scanning resolutions, grain dissolver in the minolta software etc. The best solution I came up with was to use noise ninja, but you have to reduce the strength by about half and turn off the sharpening algorithm or the plastic digital look dominates. I find that any 400 speed film (neopan, delta 400, hp5 or trix) gives me this problem (grain aliasing). I do not have this problem at all with slower films like acros or fp4 where I don't need noise ninja at all.

I haven't tried chromogenic BW films yet, but I expect these will perform better being dye based. It also makes a difference which developr is used. I use staining developers which are supposed to reduce grain and make for easier scans.

 

[dmr]

I've tried the noise reduction programmes, but (personally) I find they add a sort of sheen to the image which gives it a look of digital artificiality. This is probably down to me not using the right setting or wotnot.

I've found that you can get that artificial "plastic wrap" look when using Neat Image if you OD on the settings or if the image is small to begin with. I've found this works best for grain control when you scan the image at maximum resolution and apply Neat Image before any size reduction. Yes, it takes longer that way.

 

[schaubild]

Scanning as positive and then inverting in Photoshop guarantees that Silverfast is exactly doing the things as you define them, with Negafix I've never felt comfortable. The positive way gives definitively better working base scans with a Nikon 9000 and Silverfast.

For ISO 400 I can highly recommend the new Rollei Infrared, amazingly fine grain and good tonality.

 

[fotorr]

Thanks to all the answered my request. One thing to remember is that I am coming from the digital world and before that 5x7 and 4x5 cameras. My definition fo "too much grain" is perhaps different than yours! Now I am aware that 35mm will never be 5x7/4x5 but certainly can be "better" then I am now getting. Yes, I have tried Vuescan and I perfer Silverfast. Neg-fix is Silverfast's way of giving me a film profile. I would rather construct my own film profile- scanning as a positive enables me to do that. Several suggested that to obtain a "400" speed film use a higher speed CN film-Fuji 400 and/or 800 and convert to B&W. This is my next project. Off to a local "big box" store to find some fast Fuji- there are no camera stores in this town of 35,000-another story/rant!
Thanks again and if you have any other suggestions please respond.
Fotorr

 

[kaiyen]

Well, what developer(s) are you using with these films? Are you after the kind of sharpness you were getting with large format? Are you comfortable with a bit less sharpness to go with decreased grain?

allan

 

[fotorr]

I have used Kodak HC 110 Dil B and Ilford Perceptol 1:2.
Fotorr

 

[kaiyen]

Have you tried Perceptol at 1+0 or 1+1? You're going get pretty low grain with that, even with TXT (which has finer grain than TMY, IMO), though at the expense of sharpness.

allan

 

[fotorr]

No I haven't tried Percepol straight or the 1:1. Rather then give up sharp images my next move is to use Fuji CN 400 and 800 at reduced ratings and convert to B&W in CS2. The faster silver films and scanning are not up to par for me. The lower speed Acros100 and Pan F are fine grained enough to produce acceptable -for me-images.
Fotorr

 

[kaiyen]

Good luck with the C41 approach. Keep us posted.

allan