Digital BW, The Print

Hello,
I was at an exhibition yesterday and got into a discussion with a photographer who'd used Pan F for a photo and I asked how she found Pan F and Delta 100 compared.

She said Pan F had finer grain because it was a lower ASA. I said that they were different technologies and Delta had tabular grain. Her reply was lower ASA = smaller grain. End of story.

So ... I had a look at some 10x15 prints of mine and from the few prints I've done, it looks like she might be right. It also depends on how aggressive I was with the curves on those images of course, as that accentuates grain, too ... 

Any thoughts?

thanks,
Richard
--
http://smallfield.vze.com
http://photos.smallfield.vze.com


   "Programming is an endless race between the software engineer, 
   who seeks to design increasingly idiot-proof code, and the Universe,
   which strives to produce even bigger idiots."
   --anon

The RMS grain numbers the manufactures published for their B&W films usually
coincided with my experience with the films.  I switched from Agfapan 25 to
Tmax 100 because with the T-Grains the 100 ISO film was almost as fine
grained as the 25 speed film (and it had much better reciprocity
characteristics).

These are some RMS grain numbers the manufactures published:

Traditional film grain:

Agfapan 25 - RMS 7

Agfapan 100 - RMS 9

Agfapan 400 - 14

T-Grain films:

T-Max 100 - RMS 8

T-Max 400 - 10

So, in general, I think the T-grains did give more speed for a given grain
level.

Then again there is the traditional grain film that is different:

Technical Pan at 25 ISO with Liquid Technidol developer - RMS 5.

(I use Tech Pan whenever I can.)

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Richard
> Smallfield
> Sent: Saturday, October 15, 2005 7:23 PM
> To: Digital BW Print
> Subject: [Digital BW] Pan F vs Delta 100
> 
> Hello,
> I was at an exhibition yesterday and got into a discussion with a
> photographer who'd used Pan F for a photo and I asked how she found Pan F
> and Delta 100 compared.
> 
> She said Pan F had finer grain because it was a lower ASA. I said that
> they were different technologies and Delta had tabular grain. Her reply
> was lower ASA = smaller grain. End of story.
> 
> So ... I had a look at some 10x15 prints of mine and from the few prints
> I've done, it looks like she might be right. It also depends on how
> aggressive I was with the curves on those images of course, as that
> accentuates grain, too ...
> 
> Any thoughts?
> 
> thanks,
> Richard
> --
> http://smallfield.vze.com
> http://photos.smallfield.vze.com
> 
> 
>    "Programming is an endless race between the software engineer,
>    who seeks to design increasingly idiot-proof code, and the Universe,
>    which strives to produce even bigger idiots."
>    --anon
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as
> they are often being updated.
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> 
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
> unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
> page.
> 
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
> them short.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames.
> Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the
> membership without notice.
> - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W
> printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from
> the membership.
> - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and
> guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner
> and Moderators. See Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines in the Files
> section:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
> 
> BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT
> YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE OWNER AND
> MODERATORS OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO
> YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR
> EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF
> PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE
> OWNER AND MODERATORS OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN
> ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE
> OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii)
> UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii)
> STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT
> YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE
> PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

> She said Pan F had finer grain because it was a lower ASA. I said
> that they were different technologies and Delta had tabular grain.
> Her reply was lower ASA = smaller grain. End of story.

I would say rather that is the beginning of the story. 
I'm sure you know grain depends a very much on the contrast to which
the film is developed and the exposure level, and Pan F behaves
differently from Delta in this respect.  If one  "overexposes" films
like delta "for safety" the grain can be worse than similarly
"overexposed" Pan F.  Here I am not implying any particular ISO value
for the films nor exposure technique. 
The choice of developer matters too, and the best results are unlikely
to be achieved with the same developer for both films.  I suspect the
range of variables is easily wide enough so that two photographers,
through differences is technique, can come to the opposite conclusion
about grain, and both be correct.  (Obiously one will have acheived
finer absolute grain, but if they were careful they will have gained
something else from their choice, such a shadow detail or latitude.) 
Ken

Richard Smallfield wrote:

> Hello,
> I was at an exhibition yesterday and got into a discussion with a 
> photographer who'd used Pan F for a photo and I asked how she found 
> Pan F and Delta 100 compared.
>
> She said Pan F had finer grain because it was a lower ASA. I said that 
> they were different technologies and Delta had tabular grain. Her 
> reply was lower ASA = smaller grain. End of story.
>
> So ... I had a look at some 10x15 prints of mine and from the few 
> prints I've done, it looks like she might be right. It also depends on 
> how aggressive I was with the curves on those images of course, as 
> that accentuates grain, too ...
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> thanks,
> Richard
> --
> http://smallfield.vze.com
> http://photos.smallfield.vze.com

Basically, she's right. The biggest determinant of graininess is film 
speed. Next is emulsion type. Both of these are set by the manufacturer.

Beyond that, you can effect graininess by developer choice, density 
(exposure/development time), processing temperature, etc. But these 
effects are small compared to film speed / emulsion type.
--
Bruce Watson