Is grain really visible on prints ?

[alexz]

With my recent foray into hand-processed B&W, haven't yet printed a single picture out of about 8-10 developed rolls. Now, picked 4 images I'd like to print out.
These are scanned on Nikon LS-40 (IV ED), moderately PS (Level/Curves, USM). Films: Tri-X, Tmax 400 and Plus-X 100.
Obviously, high-res scan shows grain clearly (probably even somewhat exaggerated due to possible grain aliasing with Nikon scanners LED approach). Somehow, I have the feeling the grain may not be as obvious on prints as it is on high res scans observed on the screen, am I wrong ? I intend to print in commercial lab from my scan files...

So, does the grain pops out on prints (made from files) as it often does on on-screen, high resolution images ? If willing to print with as little grain as possible, shall I mask it somehow (probably applying NeatImage filtering followed by a smart sharpening afterwards) ? Or printing will smooth out the grain so a certain level ?

Thanks in advance, Alex

 

[40oz]

it really depends on the image and the print size. I have some TriX prints from my inkjet that, on 8.5x11 paper, show almost no visible grain. Part of that is the image itself, with no expanse of continuous tone. But the same image printed on 8x10 B&W paper shows no grain at all.

I'm not sure if the small amount of visible grain in the inkjet print is an artifact of the printer or the scanning process. My monitor is larger than 8x10, so viewing the image there is going to show more detail than would be visible at the same viewing distance in an 8x10 print, but it also isn't at full resolution since to display the entire image on my screen, Photoshop has to downsample the image (my screen resolution is only 1280x1024, while the image is something like 2400x3600).

Your best bet is to pick one print where the grain would be most intrusive, and one print where there are few areas of continuous tone (such as an expanse of sky), and just print those two at the size you prefer. Use those prints to determine if further action is necessary. I've found most people, even dedicated digital shooters, find even the visible aliased grain in my scanned images to be rather pleasant. I do not have a Nikon LS-40 scanner however, so you might find the aliased grain is not as pleasant.

Grain isn't a bad thing. Visible grain is what some call "the integrity of the medium." When you shoot traditional B&W film, the grain is part of the image. It's not something I'd fight.

 

[markinlondon]

It can also depend on the paper surface. In traditional papers Ilford Pearl will have less apparent grain than the same print on Gloss as the less reflective surface "softens" the graininess. This is of course an optical illusion as both prints will have the same graininess at the same enlargement.