Film Grain and Agitation

[marcr1230]

How much agitation is best for minimal grain ?
will I lose contrast is I agitate less ?

I tend to do 5 inversions every 30 secs. (Tri-X ,TMY or TMX and TMAX developer)

do people use inversions or swirls/stirring ?

what works for you ?

 

[Bruno Gracia]

I use the same as You, will be expecting...

 

[crawdiddy]

I agitate by swirling the tank for 5 sec every 30 sec. A single inversion halfway through. Too many inversions cause surge effects through the sprocket holes.

 

[Fraser]

agitate for 30 secs then two inversions every minute.

 

[John Bragg]

It is very much a case of what works for you. "Standard" agitation is what you are doing, but some folks, myself included, use way less. It is kinder to the highlights, especially when combined with higher dilution. I have limited experience with T-max developer, but with the HC-110 that I normally use, I find that agitation is the third variable. (Time/temp/agitation). I also rely on a higher dilution to get me the look I want. I use HC-110 @ 1:63 dilution and, after an initial 5 inversions, only agitate every 4 minutes during development, with 2 gentle inversions. I find the grain is crisp and kept at a pleasant level, and sharpness is improved, with highlights in the right range. Overall, development time will need extending with this technique, but a few tests will sort that. What's the worst that can happen ? A negative with less contrast that can be expanded in pp or printing? That's a good fault to have, and you can extend development, or add back some agitation until you achieve the desired look. Remember, expose for the shadows, develop for the mid tones, and agitate for the highlights.

 

[Clint Troy]

I dont know for you guys but for me, 5 inversions every 30 seconds gives md grade 3 prnts altough it is supposed to give a grade 2 print. I should inverse and agitate even more!

 

[Bruno Gracia]

I Found mines shortly in crontrast with the 5 sec every 30 sec..

 

[sevo]

How much agitation is best for minimal grain ?
will I lose contrast is I agitate less ?

There is no general relation between agitation and grain - but usually, high acutance (where the oxidation product acts as an inhibitor) and semi-physical action (where some or all silver is dissolved prior to reduction and precipitated as a cloud around the grain) developers characteristics are agitation dependent. But they have opposite impact on grain (or rather, its visibility), and there is not really a uniform trend proportional to agitation - the choice of developer, film, concentration and temperature will determine whether a change in the agitation regime will cause a decrease or increase in visible grain (or do nothing at all)...

As far as agitation patterns are concerned, do yourself a favour and invert (or rotate, with an automatic processor) as intended by the manufacturers of all current tanks - there is nothing to be gained from odd motion patterns. Stirring in tank development would be rather ineffective even in the dark, as the reels get into the way. And swirling has just as many problems with uneven development as the reels and walls will affect the developer flow. There were some non waterproof lid (mostly daylight loading) tanks in earlier years where swirling or stirring was the only possible agitation method, and their results were generally underwhelming (unless you used high capacity compensating developers, which are quite unaffected by agitation).

 

[starless]

I agitate non-stop for the first minute and then 4 inversions every minute + tap the tank twice to dislodge any bubbles. (That's for Tri-x in D76 1+1)

 

[Roger Hicks]

Sevo has (as usual) summarized it superbly.

Cheers,

R.

 

[matt_mcg2]

For me, personally, I use a similar agitation pattern to starless, above. Constant agitation for the first 30 seconds or so, then 4 inversions every minute (which usually takes about 8 - 10 seconds). I find that works for me, and with the developers I use. I expect it's largely about finding what works for you. I personally find that if I agitate more vigorously, or more often, I get less consistent results (for me).

Matt

 

[matt_mcg2]

Also, if I am looking for fine grain, that's about choosing the right film and developer. It also helps to use larger formats.

 

[Roger Hicks]

It's also important to distinguish between fine grain and sharpness. Pan F is finer grained than Delta 100 but Delta 100 is sharper. In choosing developers, it's always a choice between finest grain and maximum sharpness (edge contrast/acutance). Surprisingly few people are aware of this.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Clint Troy]

Also, some people don't understand the purpose of agitation. The sole purpose is to shake off exhausted developer on the film's surface to have it replaced with new developer. Or bromide drags, streaks, and uneven development will occur.

No "new special" look involved with exotic agitation styles. Shaking is all about efficient and quality development. This is why I absolutely despise the stand-development method. This should have never been propagated on the internet as being a valid method. except if one is happy with sub-sub-substandard results.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Also, some people don't understand the purpose of agitation. The sole purpose is to shake off exhausted developer on the film's surface to have it replaced with new developer. Or bromide drags, streaks, and uneven development will occur.

No "new special" look involved with exotic agitation styles. Shaking is all about efficient and quality development. This is why I absolutely despise the stand-development method. This should have never been propagated on the internet as being a valid method. except if one is happy with sub-sub-substandard results.

Although I entirely agree with the rest of your post, I'd say that stand development can give good results. It's just that this very, very rarely happens, especially when taken to ridiculous extremes.

All too often, stand development is tried as a magic bullet by those who have failed to get good results with more conventional processing and who then -- surpriser, surprise -- fail to get good results with stand development too, especially if they have failed to understand your very clearly stated and entirely accurate observation that "The sole purpose is to shake off exhausted developer on the film's surface to have it replaced with new developer."

Cheers,

R.

 

[Haigh]

I gently rotate the tanks first minute then 2 inversions every minute thereafter.

 

[Ronald M]

People have come up with all kinds of schemes they think work. Some work to a certain extent. Some don`t.

Grain is controlled by a few things. Film sensitivity, developer type, and more than anything else, time in the developer. Developer dilution controls time in developer. So if you dilute it, you get more prominent grain because you are in the soup longer, if you push you get more grain.

Given you do not want to change format or film, the best thing is to pull process.

Example , tri x at EI 200, cut development 20 %.
d76 1:1 is around 5.25 minutes , I would have to check my records. You get results similar to slow speed film. It is shocking and people do not believe me until they see the prints.

Continuous or standard agitation only come back to time in developer. Continuous means shorter time.

Water stop or ss also make grain if you used a concentrated developer . Just skip it.

Use developer and fix. Fix will stop development at the expense of shortening its useful
life. I use it one time only so it makes no difference.

So now it up to you to run the tests because all science can be duplicated by someone else. That is the scientific method.

 

[starless]

Example , tri x at EI 200, cut development 20 %.
d76 1:1 is around 5.25 minutes , I would have to check my records.

That seems unrealistic. My time for Trix@200 in d76 1+1 is 9 min.

 

[charjohncarter]

It's also important to distinguish between fine grain and sharpness. Pan F is finer grained than Delta 100 but Delta 100 is sharper. In choosing developers, it's always a choice between finest grain and maximum sharpness (edge contrast/acutance). Surprisingly few people are aware of this.

Cheers,

R.

Barry Thornton has a chapter on this (with prints) in 'The Edge of Darkness.' As Roger said, 'few people are aware of this.' I sure wasn't.

 

[Ronald M]

That seems unrealistic. My time for Trix@200 in d76 1+1 is 9 min.

Brain freeze, senior moment. But I did say I would have to check. 9 or 9.5 is correct for 1:1 and a condenser enlarger. So take off 20% from 9 and use EI 200. It will print the same. Multiply .8 times 9 for the answer.

What has to be balanced is you do not get too short and risk timing errors, although I can do color at 3.25 and that works fine. I did do monochrome one time at very short development cycle and it worked ok too.

I would urge anyone interested to try 1/2 box speed . I have never had anyone not be extremely pleased with the results.