Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/03/27
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]George Hartzell wrote: > > Hi, > > I've been enjoying my M6, shooting at small poorly lit folk music > venues. > > I don't do my own processing at the moment. > > I've run three rolls of Delta 3200 through a lab that's processed them > in D76, 1:1 (I think), with good but grainy results. Another roll of > Delta 3200 that went through a different lab was less happy, I'm not > sure that they've ever seen the film before.... > > I'm curious about grain in high speed film: > > a) all other things equal, will a film (say, Delta 3200) shot at 1600 > have less grain then when shot at 3200? First of all you want to shoot is at the speed which would give you adequate shadow detail at with the developer/Dilution/Temp you are using. If you are going to forgo shadow detail in lieu of shooting speed and you are going to push your highlights up a notch or two and expose for them that's called pushing and is usually thought of as the road to grain. You develop more. But if you are super Bullish on shadow detail and are then in effect pulling your film by giving it more exposure than most people and less development that also leads to more grain because you have more overall density. Pulling gives you in some senses a less "cleaner" neg. The logic for pushing of pulling does not overwhelm me. I like an optimum neg but others would say that is an optitium neg for "me." Is there an objective reality? I'm not the one to ask. > > B) given a particular film, can I control grain by specifying > particular developers, dilutions, temps, Etc??? That is the name of the game. You've got whole categories of developers: Super-fine Grain, Solvent (Fine Grain) Non-Solvent Developers (High Definition). (Terminology as in the "The Film Developing Cookbook" just out as discussed by Anchell/Troop). The film is the big thing, then the developer, then the dilution and now there are temperature issues which I am new to with the T Max developers. And these guys are talking about getting better results using a slower film but with a developer that brings the real speed up to the next films level. (Plus x becomes Tri x in effect) This is revolutionary stuff! Get the Book! > C) of the high speed B&W films (Ilford D3200, Kodak TMax3200, Fuji > Neopan 1600), are there significant differences in their grain? A big magazine article came out which someone will reference you to and which seems reasonably credible as an opinion. I got a vibe which said the New Ilford would change the rules of the game but as usually its not that clear cut. It does get the Brownie Film Vote as the only game in town. For what its worth: Fuji is the cheapest. The votes are still coming in on this one and I am all ears although some of the votes will be coming from me. Mark Rabiner PS I used to teach Guitar in the '70's at "Music Folk" in Webster Groves Missouri. It's still there. It was a center of sorts for folk music those days maybe now. The Boyer Family. I played Guitar at weddings before I photographed them. Not the same wedding though. And now I don't do either much.