[Leica] Film and Grain

["Rod Fleming" <rodfleming@sol.co.uk>]

Hi

John Beal kicked that dog called film grain again- tell us more John- mono
or colour? Neg or tranny?

Forget tranny at any speed over 100 ASA- the grain is just too much and the
colour saturation is not good. I know some picture agencies and mags still
prefer to see trannies, and if you're taking for that market, then my advice
has to be to use 100 ASA max on tranny, and if you need to go faster, switch
to colour neg and have the negs duped onto tranny film for presentation.

I like Fuji 400 colour neg, at least on 35mm. For the last couple of years
I've been using what they call "Superia" in the UK- don't know about
elsewhere. Excellent at 400 ASA and will push to 800 without noticeable
increase in graininess. For 800 colour neg, Fuji Super-G is very good and in
my view will push to 3200 better than any other 35mm colour neg emulsion,
and even better than Fuji's own 1600 ASA emulsion. (I would have to add that
I'm so pleased with the Fuji emulsions that I have not tried anyone else's
for years...........) Really, with colour neg, thre's little you can do
except make sure that you're following the makers' instructions, and your
results should be fine. I would review your technique if you're not
satisfied.

B&W is of course quite different- here the photog has a huge amount of
control.

On writing this I find myself examining the way my mono technique has
progressed- 10 years ago I would have used FP4 for choice and HP5 when I had
to. Then, about 5 years ago, I moved to HP5 as standard and had FP4 for when
the light was really brassy. Now I use HP5 all the time, and rate it at 100
or 200 and develop to suit if the light is really bright.

Most things I  want to do with the small cameras seem to need the extra
speed over a 125 ASA film, and when I'm using bigger cameras, I don't see
the grain anyway, so hey-ho, why complicate life?  I certainly don't find
the grain of an HP5 at 400 asa neg intrusive, even on 35mm- indeed I would
say it's easily as good as the result from a 125 emulsion exposed 20 years
ago (and I've got examples propped on the computer as I type.)

 HP5 Plus has a wonderful tonal gradation, and every time I do the negs, I
like it more. I should add that I am not seeking grain- I just like the
quality I see here. It will push to 1600 no problem- After that I'd  go to
Delta 3200 if I had any in the bag, or push the HP5 further. I use ID-11
(almost the same as D-76) in a 1-1 stock/water dilution for all speeds up to
1600 on HP5, and the results are admirable. If I was taking HP5 further, I'd
go to Microphen. Pretty unexciting technique, I know, but I've done plenty
of experiment, and this way suits me.

I do my own processing on all the emulsion types, and I have to say that
grain is not an issue, so a few observations- correct exposure and
development is essential. A less than fully exposed neg, especially on
colour neg, will show more graininess. In mono, using a dilute dev, rather
than a stock solution, produces a better grain.

Without knowing more about John's problems- or seeing an example, I could
not comment further; however, I would say this: consistency in technique is
in my view the route to consistency in results. My way may not be yours, but
I hope I have given some illustration of how over a decade, one working pro
has refined his technique in order to achieve better results. One of my very
first teachers told me that I should standardise on one film, one paper, one
dev as much as possible, and for over a decade I totally ignored this,
trying every new thing on the market.

Somewhere it has been said that sharpness is not the only quality by which a
lens should be judged; well, nor is graininess the only standard by which to
judge a mono emulsion.

Cheers


Rod