What could cause grain to be great on roll, & suck on another roll? Same Film/ISO/Dev

DNG

Film Friendly
Local time
3:11 AM
Joined
Jul 9, 2009
Messages
2,981
Location
Indianapolis, Indiana. USA
What could cause grain to be great on roll, & suck on another roll? Same Film/ISO/Dev

I shoot Tmax 400 at 250
I use HC110 (H) 1:60
I use filtered water for mixing and washing
I use one-use chems.

Kodak of FreeStyle HC110
Water stop bath
Kodafix fixer (1:3)
Kodak Photo Flo (2min a few drops 5-8)
Air dry

With one roll I get great small grain with great sharpness
with my next roll I may get very large grain and poor sharpness

Anyone else experience this, and did you figure out what was happening and how to fix it?
 
If your temperatures for all your chemistry, including water stop, aren't within a degree of each other, you can get more grain.
If your water pH changed between development of the different rolls (running the water through the pipes can have a slightly different pH than the water that has sat.
If you overfixed some, either with time or agitation, you can get reticulation which looks like large grain.
If you underexposed a roll accidentally but didn't pull it in development your gray tones could look grainier than you want.
If your film is of different vintage you can get different grain.
As for the images, that grainy TMax is really grainy for a nearly grainless film.

Good luck!

Phil Forrest
 
Often incorrect focus on the subject (missed focus) will look like the grain is worse. Both your photos show missed focus, and where the image is actually in focus is sharp and relatively grain free. In the first one you can see that the building between the men is in correct focus, and has fine grain. In the second shot, the package to our right of the young man (with the words 'frosty' on it) is in focus and has fine grain.
 
Often incorrect focus on the subject (missed focus) will look like the grain is worse. Both your photos show missed focus, and where the image is actually in focus is sharp and relatively grain free. In the first one you can see that the building between the men is in correct focus, and has fine grain. In the second shot, the package to our right of the young man (with the words 'frosty' on it) is in focus and has fine grain.


What Huss said, plus: Underexposure greatly increases grain in black and white or color negative films. The first image is definitely underexposed, and the second one appears to be as well. You can tell by the muddiness of the darker tones, like the areas of the cowboys' faces shaded by the brims of their hats.
 
Uh he shoots at 250. Is the scene metered properly.

Water stop. Not needed and serves only to save fix. I have not used it in decades.

soak all chem in water bath including wash water. The longer you wash, the bigger the grain. Use Ilford wash sequence.

One time use of fix is best which you are doing. Agitate well keep time short. Wash will not remove the color of base if fix is incomplete. Must use fresh fix, then wash, then stand washes as required to remove color if any left. You can not substitute more wash time for poor fix.

I tried and some friends to use distilled water with D76. Hugh grain. went back to tap water.
 
Uh he shoots at 250. Is the scene metered properly.

Water stop. Not needed and serves only to save fix. I have not used it in decades.

soak all chem in water bath including wash water. The longer you wash, the bigger the grain. Use Ilford wash sequence.

One time use of fix is best which you are doing. Agitate well keep time short. Wash will not remove the color of base if fix is incomplete. Must use fresh fix, then wash, then stand washes as required to remove color if any left. You can not substitute more wash time for poor fix.

I tried and some friends to use distilled water with D76. Hugh grain. went back to tap water.

I don't care what speed he shot at, the images are clearly underexposed.

Long wash times do not cause grain increase. I've never heard anyone else make such a claim, and there's nothing about it in any published information on film processing that I have seen.
 
I've found that Freestyle L110 concentrate (HC110) doesn't last long once the bottle is opened. When freshly opened it's very good but after a month or so, unlike Kodakbrand, it oxidized and activity decreases quickly. This woul also explain why you have to expose at EI250 and still get thin shadows. Typically TMax 400 is a full box speed film unlike TX.

Under exposure or over exposure can increase apparent grain. Missed focus can make grain appear more noticeable. I found in the 60's that film is sensitive to heat and increased grain. I think it's less of a problem now due to improved emulsions but just varying rolls of TX in ones pocket for a while caused increased grain. After all your body is 98.6F which is pretty warm. Rapid and extreme changes in chemical temperatures can cause increased grain. In the 70's and earlier films were prone to reticulation but not any longer. I would however try to keep all chemicals and my wash within a couple of degrees. The best practice is to run B&W like you're running color. It may sound extreme but it's served me well for 5 decades and tens of thousands of rolls.

As to longer wet times, yes technically they can cause more grain. I read an article in the 60's that's still valid. Basically gelatin that is the binder for the silver halide on the film becomes soft and somewhat fluid when wet. It doesn't flow like water but it becomes very elastic and soft. Granted prehardening film during manufacture helps this but it's still soft and semi fluid. Anyway silver halide crystals are polar and tend to migrate or clump in this semi fluid environment. The crystals migrate from areas of less density to areas of more density especially when solvents like sodium Sulfite are present. So yes technically the longer in solution, the more opportunity for clumping and increasing of grain. In the 60's and 70's it was more of an issue but today it's less likely you'll see any effect. I still however like to use a hypo clearing bath for a couple of reasons. One it reduces water use, two it removes the last residual fixer and increases perminance, three with TMax it helps remove the antihalation dye and four it reduces wet time and potentially may reduce grain.
 
If your temperatures for all your chemistry, including water stop, aren't within a degree of each other, you can get more grain.
If your water pH changed between development of the different rolls (running the water through the pipes can have a slightly different pH than the water that has sat.
If you overfixed some, either with time or agitation, you can get reticulation which looks like large grain.
If you underexposed a roll accidentally but didn't pull it in development your gray tones could look grainier than you want.
If your film is of different vintage you can get different grain.
As for the images, that grainy TMax is really grainy for a nearly grainless film.

Good luck!

Phil Forrest

Above noted areas that could be the cause....

My water in the winter is 15c to 17c out of the tap.... but, by the time I mix and set up my area, the mixed chems are around 18c-20c, but the wash water is still 15-17c... This could be the culprit.

the first picture is underexposed, I was set for "sunny 16" and did not add one stop for the backlit men. Focus was for 4' to info my 35mm lens... I may have been at the close end or closer by a tad
 
Often incorrect focus on the subject (missed focus) will look like the grain is worse. Both your photos show missed focus, and where the image is actually in focus is sharp and relatively grain free. In the first one you can see that the building between the men is in correct focus, and has fine grain. In the second shot, the package to our right of the young man (with the words 'frosty' on it) is in focus and has fine grain.

This may be right, but I wear my 28mm lens was set for f/8 and 3-10 feet on the Dof scale on the lens... added note, I used flash, and my flash sync speed is 1/90 on my Nikon F2... carry shake also?
 
What Huss said, plus: Underexposure greatly increases grain in black and white or color negative films. The first image is definitely underexposed, and the second one appears to be as well. You can tell by the muddiness of the darker tones, like the areas of the cowboys' faces shaded by the brims of their hats.

The first one is underexposed, I did not compensate for the backlight

The second one is exposed per flash settings... ISO 250, f/8, 1/90 Flash sync. I have always had good exposures with my Nikon SB27,
Yes, the ISO on the flash was 250, not 400, so I had the correct exposure information.

Although on my second picture, (a different roll from the first picture), the whole roll was underexposed or under-developed... they were a tad thin... not terrible, but a 1/2 stop maybe. I may need to add 15% to my developer time for rolls that are mainly flash exposed.
 
Chris is right, by the time your film is in the wash the grain is fixed in place.

My bet goes with temperature difference between developer and water stop-bath and fixer.

B2 (;->

This may be one of the culprits....

Mix Developer, Mix fixer, Mix Photo-Flo.......ALL are getting warmer at the same rate..... BUT..... my water stop is 3c-4c colder because I use tap water, and in the winter, it is 15c-16c normally... any other time of year the tap is 21c-24c. By the time I am ready to pour my developer in, they have reached 18c-19c.

I also pre-rinse in tap water (15c-16c) for a minute or two before I develop...... I should eliminate this, or pre-soak (not pre-wash) in warmer water that is the same temp. as the mixed chems.

MY FIX: Use a proper stop bath... (I have Ilford stop, but haven't used it for a while. (eliminate the COLD water stop wash and pre-wash)
 
I've found that Freestyle L110 concentrate (HC110) doesn't last long once the bottle is opened. When freshly opened it's very good but after a month or so, unlike Kodakbrand, it oxidized and activity decreases quickly. This woul also explain why you have to expose at EI250 and still get thin shadows. Typically TMax 400 is a full box speed film unlike TX.

Under exposure or over exposure can increase apparent grain. Missed focus can make grain appear more noticeable. I found in the 60's that film is sensitive to heat and increased grain. I think it's less of a problem now due to improved emulsions but just varying rolls of TX in ones pocket for a while caused increased grain. After all your body is 98.6F which is pretty warm. Rapid and extreme changes in chemical temperatures can cause increased grain. In the 70's and earlier films were prone to reticulation but not any longer. I would however try to keep all chemicals and my wash within a couple of degrees. The best practice is to run B&W like you're running color. It may sound extreme but it's served me well for 5 decades and tens of thousands of rolls.

As to longer wet times, yes technically they can cause more grain. I read an article in the 60's that's still valid. Basically gelatin that is the binder for the silver halide on the film becomes soft and somewhat fluid when wet. It doesn't flow like water but it becomes very elastic and soft. Granted prehardening film during manufacture helps this but it's still soft and semi fluid. Anyway silver halide crystals are polar and tend to migrate or clump in this semi fluid environment. The crystals migrate from areas of less density to areas of more density especially when solvents like sodium Sulfite are present. So yes technically the longer in solution, the more opportunity for clumping and increasing of grain. In the 60's and 70's it was more of an issue but today it's less likely you'll see any effect. I still however like to use a hypo clearing bath for a couple of reasons. One it reduces water use, two it removes the last residual fixer and increases perminance, three with TMax it helps remove the antihalation dye and four it reduces wet time and potentially may reduce grain.

My developer times are in the 7m-12m range with HC110 1:60 H, and Tmax 400 @ 250. I never had problems in the late 60's with times in that range with Plus-X or Panatomic-X, I used Microdol-X and D76 back then.
 
My developer times are in the 7m-12m range with HC110 1:60 H, and Tmax 400 @ 250. I never had problems in the late 60's with times in that range with Plus-X or Panatomic-X, I used Microdol-X and D76 back then.

Those aren't particularly long development times.
 
I don't think your wash water temperature matters much, as the grain is fixed into the emulsion at that point. I once turned on the tap to wash my film in the tank for 30 minutes and accidentally turned on the hot water instead of the cold. That film sat in water that was over 115 degrees for a half hour and it came out perfect (don't try this at home).

If everything is staying the same from roll to roll, I would look at developer freshness (perhaps it was almost kaput on the first roll and gave out on the latter), differences in agitation, and what the scenes were on the images. If one roll has a lot of indoor images and the other a lot of outdoor shots, it could be your metering. 250 should be fine for your film, assuming your meter is accurate, so that is something else to confirm. Don't discount the fact that maybe you just got a bad roll of film either. More testing, and confirming all these possible variables, will give you the answer. Some people are not that fond of your developer w/ the film you're using, so maybe experiment w/ different ones for different looks.
 
Back
Top Bottom