A Lot Of Grain When Scanning

[fky463]

Hello every1,

I just bought kodak Xtol b/w developer. Developed 3 rolls and fed up with that. My pictures very very grainy and I have no idea why it comes like that. I can see trough the film negative that all the details looks nice. Faces/shadows looks good. When I put my negative`s into the scanner, photos looks creepy. No details, nothing - only grain, grain, grain. So i got the question is that because of my bad developing or I need to scan it in the different way ? Because I have 2 scanners ( Epson v600 and plustek 8200i) I tried to scan in all different way`s. Plustek is giving me a lot of grain. But when I scan as a Document type (reflected light)with Epson scanner, at least I can see what is in the picture. Quality is not good, but ye, as I said, at least I can see what is inside. By the way one side of film negative looks good, a lot of details and etc. another looks not so clearly, a bit darken.

THERE IS SOME EXAMPLES:
(U HAVE TO ZOOM TO SEE THIS CRINGE GRAIN, THIS GRAIN FOR ME LOOKS LIKE UNREAL)

when I scan b/w negative with plustek - https://imgur.com/a/KJsEOn9

AND THIS IS THE PICTURES WHEN I SCAN AS A DOCUMENT - https://imgur.com/a/ylUhdZU

THX FOR YA ALL FOR ANY HELPFUL ANSWER!!!! ONE LOVE/FILM LOVE

 

[retinax]

Could you clean up your post a bit? you say the Plustek is not working, then there's a link supposedly to scans made with it. And there's overlap between pictures you linked, not clear what is what.
The basketball themed picture looks ok except for a stain could come from improper washing.
Also to identify possible development issues, a picture of the negatives, including the area around the image, is needed. Just hold the strip against the window and snap with your phone or other digital camera.
Generally, to minimize grain, scan at highest resolution possible and turn sharpening off.
Document mode sounds like it would use reflected light... probably not useful for negatives.

 

[Bill Clark]

Could it be reticulation. It’s a fancy name applied when the temperatures aren’t consistent between developer, stop, fixer and wash water. I got it when I was in a hurry and washed in too warm water.

Just a thought.

 

[Out to Lunch]

I suppose you scanned your film at a low dpi -dots per inch rate. Back to the scanner manual. Good luck.

 

[fky463]

Could you clean up your post a bit? you say the Plustek is not working, then there's a link supposedly to scans made with it. And there's overlap between pictures you linked, not clear what is what.
The basketball themed picture looks ok except for a stain could come from improper washing.
Also to identify possible development issues, a picture of the negatives, including the area around the image, is needed. Just hold the strip against the window and snap with your phone or other digital camera.
Generally, to minimize grain, scan at highest resolution possible and turn sharpening off.
Document mode sounds like it would use reflected light... probably not useful for negatives.

I cleaned a bit, I hope its better. Sorry for that, I`m not that good at English. I know about the stains and how they come, I just need to sort it out everything about this grain. Sharpening is always off, Now im scanning at the best resolution I can, but I don't think so its gonna help. Yeh and that basketball was scanned with reflected light, probably that's not useful for negatives, but why I get better pictures than when I scan normal mode?


THIS IS HOW NEGATIVE LOOKS - https://imgur.com/a/oUiW8pO

 

[fky463]

Could it be reticulation. It’s a fancy name applied when the temperatures aren’t consistent between developer, stop, fixer and wash water. I got it when I was in a hurry and washed in too warm water.

Just a thought.

Yes It could be true, I need to try another roll and wash it with cold water. Thx!

 

[CharlesDAMorgan]

Try and keep the temperatures of each stage of the process the same. It's a large change in temperature that causes it, not just heating up.

In developing grain is brought out by length of developing time and agitation, and some films (you don't say which film) are more prone to grain than others. I have never had this issue with XTOL at all.

 

[fky463]

Try and keep the temperatures of each stage of the process the same. It's a large change in temperature that causes it, not just heating up.

In developing grain is brought out by length of developing time and agitation, and some films (you don't say which film) are more prone to grain than others. I have never had this issue with XTOL at all.

Sorry that was Kodak Tri-X 400. Thx so much for your answer!

 

[Merlijn53]

It’s not grain what you see, it’s what the scanner makes of it. If you want to see grain in a scan, you have to use a good scanner, which are not made anymore, like Nikon, Minolta or Imacon. I suppose if you look at the negative with a magnifying glass, you can see the real quality of the negative. With the scanners you use you can reach reasonable results to post online, but don’t go pixelpeeping.
Regards,
Frank

 

[jim_jm]

Based on your image of the negatives, they look like they are under-fixed. They should not look that dense and opaque. The margins around each frame should be almost clear. You'll have problems scanning or printing any film like that. What is the procedure you are using to develop the film?

 

[Gregm61]

It’s not grain what you see, it’s what the scanner makes of it. If you want to see grain in a scan, you have to use a good scanner, which are not made anymore, like Nikon, Minolta or Imacon. I suppose if you look at the negative with a magnifying glass, you can see the real quality of the negative. With the scanners you use you can reach reasonable results to post online, but don’t go pixelpeeping.
Regards,
Frank

It really is unfortunate how scanning hardware and technology has stagnated the past 15 or so years. We can only imagine the difference a 1-2 generation-improved Nikon scanner today could make over the current batch of underdeveloped/old technology/just plain mediocre Plustek's and such produce.

It'd be nice to see a company like Canon acknowledge the bump in film use with an updated scanner.

 

[Erik van Straten]

It is better to work with a better developer, like Ilford Perceptol. Truly great stuff. Use a good film, Kodak Tmax400 (400-2TMY). Very fine grain combined with high speed.



Erik.

 

[brbo]

Xtol/Tri-X not being a good enough developer/film?!

Seriously?

(and not fixing the film and scanning the film as reflective material is just fine?!)

 

[Erik van Straten]

No, the modern TriX is a single layer film. The original TriX was a double layer film, one for the light tones and the other for the darker tones. The old TriX gives a very fine grain in the highlights when developed properly (in D76 for instance). But this film is no longer available.

The best film now is the Tmax400. When you soup this film (exposed at 200 ISO) for ten minutes in Perceptol (diluted 1 part developer in 2 parts water) at 20 degrees C you will get wonderful negatives. Fix it for about ten minutes in a good fixer.

Good luck!

Erik.

 

[CharlesDAMorgan]

The best film now is the Tmax400. When you soup this film (exposed at 200 ISO) for ten minutes in Perceptol (diluted 1 part developer in 2 parts water) at 20 degrees C you will get wonderful negatives. Fix it for about ten minutes in a good fixer.

Good luck!

Erik.

I can only concur. Now my favourite combination by far.

 

[brbo]

Erik, are you seriously suggesting that OP's choice of film and developer is to be blamed for the appalling results?

That's utterly ridiculous!

 

[retinax]

Your developer and film are plenty good. It looks under-fixed. That means that the scanner software or you have to increase contrast a lot because the shadows drown in the remaining silver stain. This increases the grain (as someone pointed out, you don't see the actual grain in these scans, but grain aliasing). Try re-fixing these negatives ASAP (keep away from light until then!), wash properly and report back if they scan better.

 

[Dan Daniel]

Might also look at sharpening. Some of that 'salt and pepper' look in skies and other light expanses. I turn off any sharpening from the scanner program. Then in Photoshop using Unsharp Mask, set the threshold to 2 or 3 and see what happens. It's a delicate balance because you need to sharpen scans but it can make a mess in some ways.

 

[Larry H-L]

Multiple problems here, film looks over developed or overexposed, and it is badly under fixed or fogged.

And, I'm with Peter, it looks like it was scanned at very low resolution, with jpeg compression artifacts on top of that.

Tri-X and Xtol are not the problem here, though I agree that Tmax films are very good.

 

[Erik van Straten]

Erik, are you seriously suggesting that OP's choice of film and developer is to be blamed for the appalling results?

That's utterly ridiculous!

In fact I can get a look of his results only for a few seconds. Then the image is covered by some crazy advertisement. What I saw - I thought - is the result of incorrect development: the image looks like being developed in a paper developer, like Eukobrom. I only gave the guy advise how to get a good negative, nothing more, nothing less.


Erik.