Digital BW, The Print

Bruce wrote,

>I'm not sure there is a good answer for this.
>
>First, some observation. To get 4-6 pixels per film grain clump, either 
>your grain is just huge, or you found a drum scanner with a one micron 
>aperture. IIRC (and it's been a long time -- I'm sure someone will 
>correct this if it's wrong or out of date) film grain clumps usually 
>range from about three microns on the small side up to about 12 microns 
>on the huge side with the median being closer to about six microns. And 
>if you are getting 4-6 pixels per grain clump, you are getting a huge 
>amount of pixels that contain the "nothing" that is the film base 
>*between* the grain clumps. IOW, it must be a really big enlargement. 
>IOW, the Photoshop people probably didn't plan on this happening a lot.
>  
>

I don't have samples like 4-6 pixels per grain but it was more to 
emphasize the issue.  I was working on 4000 PPI scan of a 35 mm Tri-X  
film with much grain and while working on it there were things happening 
that could only be explained as the grain interfering. I didn't find it 
contrasty enough in a sense and either I could sharpen the scan or 
increase the contrast. In a way the sharpening was more in line with 
Tri-X analogue than the contrast increase. But the sharpening resulted 
in a lighter image in total. That led to writing this message. In 
practice it will be less of a problem than I described it but I wonder 
how many of us are aware that there's some conflict in editing grainy 
scans.

>
>Not much help is it? Sigh... I think it all comes back to the "basics" 
>of needing an exceedingly high quality scan, manipulating the image as 
>little as possible, and careful use of sharpening. These are the same 
>things we generally do for every image though. I wish I could offer more 
>help.
>  
>
There's no real problem at my end. A bit more proofing and it will be 
alright. By trying to get the best scan it backfires more or less when 
that scan is made of a grainy film. Which essentialy is noise but of a 
kind that we are used to and learned to appreciate. Taking the grain out 
one way or another (lousy scan for example) makes more garbage. The 
print is grainy at less than A4 size so it must have been Tri-X with 
Rodinal 1:25 or something like that, no record of it.

Ernst