Film Grain and Image Aesthetics

Grain is present in all film, but as grain size relates directly to film speed, the rule is: when going for the finest grain choose the slowest film speed possible and, conversely, when looking to enhance grain choose a high-speed film. The "possible" in the low grain rule takes lighting conditions and whether or not you're working with a tripod into consideration.

This grainy rendition was created by exposing Tri-X 400 at ISO1600 and "push-processing" (extending development time) the film using D-76 at full strength (no dilution). This resulted in a dense negative that was then printed using a #3 grade paper. The background was extensively "burned in" during printing. Torrey Pines Beach, 1988, Tri-X 400 exposed and push processed to ISO1600.

        

Today there are both “normal” (random grain placement) and T (for tabular) grain films. Tabular means the grains are “cloned” to be consistent throughout the emulsion. While this may seem academic, T grain films have a “smoother” look overall when printed, while “normal” grain films have a more “photographic” look associated with them. For example, you can get Tri-X 400 or T-Max 400, the latter having grain structure that is somewhat smaller and more light efficient than the grains found in the older emulsion formulations. While these T-grain films do offer finer grain in equivalent speeds when compared to the older formulations, the faster T-grain films are still grainier than slower T-grain films.

Some photographers do everything possible to reduce grain in their images--they shoot with the slowest speed films; they keep developing times to a minimum; they enlarge on low-contrast papers; and use so-called "fine-grain" developers. (Use of these developers usually means the loss of a portion of the speed at which you rate the film.)

Other photographers go the opposite route, and do whatever possible to enhance grain for graphic effects. You can boost grain by shooting with the fastest film available; by overdeveloping film (within reason); and by printing on high-contrast papers (or multi-contrast papers that allow you to change the grade by filtering the enlarger light: for example, a magenta filter for higher contrast.). Another way to enhance or smooth grain is to choose between a condenser or "diffusion" enlarger, the latter yielding a smoother grain look. As the visual effect of grain is linked to the degree of enlargement (magnification), some photographers either enlarge their prints to huge sizes, or take small portions of the frame and enlarge that section (cropping) to increase the image magnification even further.

Smooth grain images result from using a moderate speed film or inherently fine-grain film like T-Max, developing for lessened time, being careful not to overexpose, and printing on a #2 or lower grain using a diffusion head enlarger. This scene was photographed in 1989 on T-Max 400 with exposure biased towards the highlights. The film was developed in T-Max developer at 30 seconds less than the recommended developing time with 1-minute agitation intervals.

Most photographers do not get obsessed with grain, as long as it doesn't get in the way of visual communication. There is a school, however, that expresses the opinion that grain is an inherent characteristic of the "photographic" image, and that emphasizing grain, or not being too concerned when grain becomes evident, stamps an image as eminently "photographic." Grain is also used by photographers to add a nostalgic, mysterious or even ominous note to an image.

The best way to discover ways to enhance or diminish grain is to test various film/exposure/development combinations. For example, shoot a few rolls of Tri-X and do a “ringaround” of exposure, changing ISO and even exposure compensation as you shoot. (In other words, make images in low and moderate contrast light, both of the same scene, and bracket both ISO and settings, say by one to two stops of exposure and setting ISO at 200, 400 and 800 ISO.) Do this with a few rolls and develop one in a fine grain developer (which, as mentioned will have you rating Tri-X 400 at maybe 200 or 320) and one in a more active developer such as D-76, diluting 1:1 and 1:2 with water.

After development make contact sheets and then pick a few images that are over, under and well exposed. Enlarge a few frames to a minimum of 8x10", and use a loupe to help “predict” the resultant look of the grain on future frames shot at the same settings.

Once you have done this, make notes for your future field work. These notes will become your “grain” diary and will help you make choices for various subjects, scenes, and settings, and create just the right degree of expressive grain for your work. That way you will “stamp” or embed each roll of film, making the frame an “original” that truly records your mood and aesthetics of the moment you snapped the shutter.

Note: Pushing (through development) and rating ISO 400 film at ISO 1000 and above will certainly yield more grain. You can also punch up grain by developing any film in a highly-active developer, such as a paper print developer, for about 1.5 minutes. This will yield a very dense, but printable, negative that has "popping" grain.

The Photo Darkroom: Considering an Effective Enlargement Size

A negative can be printed in any number of ways: you can make contact (same size) prints, or reduce or enlarge as you see fit. How big, or small you make a print depends upon a number of factors, including negative sharpness, subject matter, and the end use of the print itself. Also, you're not limited to the original proportions of the negative in the printed image: although you start out with a rectangular or square format you can crop as you see fit and change a horizontal to a vertical, or turn a 4x5 negative into a 4x10 composition.

The first step is to determine just how much enlargement a given negative can take. Place your selected negative in the carrier and bring the enlarger up to the desired height. Check image sharpness--if the image becomes unsharp, lower the enlarger height until it becomes sharper. The next step is to consider grain. Naturally, the bigger the enlargement, the more the appearance of grain. If you have a fairly grainy rendition at 8x10 you can bet that the grain will really pop as you go bigger. It may be hard to see grain by eyeballing it on the easel: a better path is to use a reflecting magnifier placed on the easel to get a better look. Personally, I don't find grain objectionable, but if you do it will certainly become a major factor in determining enlargement size. Grain can be deemphasized somewhat by printing on a lower contrast grade paper or using a diffusion enlarger head (as opposed to a condenser head, which tends to enhance contrast, thus grain).

This crop was made from a medium format negative (2&1/4" square) to yield an 8x20" print. Making larger size prints from medium format or large format negatives pose less of a  problem when it comes to sharpness and grain. This "panorama" crop best served the image.

The main consideration in enlargement size should be the subject of the picture itself. In some cases, the power of the image will overcome any of these considerations. Generally, some images lend themselves to big prints; others call for a more intimate approach. This is a personal matter. However, don't think that a picture has to be big in order to have impact. If you find that you always need to make big prints to make a big impression you should rethink your subject matter and question your motivation. An image should stand on its own, regardless of size. All a big print does is make the viewer stand back a bit more to study it. If it's a solid image it will make it even in 5x7 size. As to size and price, as one sage photographer told me, “Pictures are not pork chops and should not be sold by the pound.”

If you're printing for a gallery show let your subject matter be your guide. Too many people feel they have to go really big for a show, but it just isn't necessary. I've seen very effective and beautiful 5x7 prints hung for a show: the more intimate presentation can work wonders. Then again, 16x20 prints can be real knockouts. All I can say is do what's comfortable and fitting.

Of course, the negative size from which you're printing will have an important effect on how large the print can be made. Making a 16x20-inch print from a 4x5 negative requires much less enlargement than does the same size print from a 35mm negative, which translates to higher sharpness and less grain. In general, you'll be hard pressed to match print quality between 35mm and large format negatives, especially if both are shot of the same scene. Of course, both formats have their purpose.

Last but not least, film speed and quality have an effect on how big you can go and still have an effective print. Some films are simply sharper and finer-grained than others. And, how you expose and develop the negative will also have a profound influence on enlargement quality. A poorly handled negative will never yield anything approaching one that's been well exposed and processed.

Customizing Black-and-White Film Processing: The Ringaround Test

The processing instruction sheet packed with most film tells you to develop for, say, 8&1/2 minutes at 68-degrees F. It outlines an agitation schedule and advises on adjusting times for variations in temperature. Though following these guidelines should yield printable negatives, they don't necessarily result in optimum negatives for each person or more importantly for each type of scene. In some cases, the times and temperatures given are an average, and only through testing can you arrive at what's best for you. Also, everyone's in-camera meter or handheld meter--and way of reading light--is different. 

Coupled with idiosyncrasies in processing, such as faster or slower agitation, is the fact that some thermometers aren't totally accurate; also, chemical mixing may be off, with dilutions varying as much as +/- 10%. The result is that two people may shoot the same scene with the same film, and develop in essentially the same way, and still get slightly different looking negatives. Though following procedures strictly is one way out of this problem, you may also have to modify your developing technique to get the most printable negatives for your style of printing. Before we examine a way to gain this personal touch, let's get one thing straight: there's no sense getting involved with your own printing unless you handle your own negative developing.

Below: Hong Kong Market, 1976. Tri-X 400. Exposure: Spot reading on highlights, +1.5 stop compensation. Processing: D-76 1:1, 8 minutes (-25% recommended), 30 second agitation cycle.

                                   

 Personalizing Negatives

The first step in gaining control over your negatives is knowing the look of the negative you want to produce. Some printers like dense negatives (slightly overdeveloped and/or overexposed), while others prefer thin negatives (slightly underexposed and/or underdeveloped.) This preference has to do with a number of factors, including the type of light source you print with (generally, printing with a condenser type head means you'll go for thinner negatives, while denser negatives are preferred by those using a cold light head); what a favorite negative looks like (by accident, one negative prints perfectly for you; though you can't put your finger on what made it happen, you know you want to have it happen again); and the feeling a negative imparts to a print (this may have to do with contrast, but it also can be the grain or the amount of detail in shadow areas.)

All these preferences are valid, but they are too often a subjective matter, one that can't be quantified or qualified by graphs and charts. The point is to be able to reach your goal consistently, and be able to produce the kind of negative you want without having to resort to luck. This can be accomplished by running a few tests, and then sticking to a technique you'll follow again and again.

Givens: Stick to the Plan

The first given in this procedure is that you'll stay with a set time and temperature: we do this to cut down on the number of variables in film development. Then we'll use a certain way of reading exposures. For example, if you read through-the-lens (TTL), with a handheld incident meter, or with a spot meter, stick with it; if you meter highlights and shadows and average, spot meter shadow or highlight readings and compensate, or allow your in-camera autoexposure meter to average readings, keep it the same throughout.

Once you've set up your “house” rules you can begin to make subtle changes in film processing. 

Agitation, Pours, and Dilution

While it's known that agitation can have an effect on film development, it's not generally understood that the fashion in which film is agitated can result in thinner or denser negatives. Some agitate gently, while others shake film cans as if they're mixing a martini. Some may use drums mounted on electric rollers, while others agitate every 30 seconds or once a minute. Again, stick to your method, but understand that changing it slightly can have an effect on results.

Removing chemistry from a film developing tank after each step is done in various ways--some people start their pour 15 seconds before the end of each step, others wait until the total developing time is elapsed. If you wait until time is expired you're actually adding from 10 to 30 seconds developing time. There's no right or wrong here--we're just interested in controlling the process. Be consistent.

The same goes for developer dilution--some dilute 1:1 for more even tones (or whatever your developer solution requires), while others use a lower dilution ratio than suggested for the added "punch" it gives negatives. Stick with a dilution time after time until you find out how it alters the look of the image; try another if you're dissatisfied.

Once you've lined up all your procedures, and made sure that you follow them consistently, you're ready to begin a test that will help you determine how to apply your personal disciplines to getting the best results from your film. You'll need three rolls of film and developing tools and chemicals.

Below: White Sands, 1982, Kodak Plus-X, shot at ISO 100. Exposure: f/11 at 1/500 second, spot reading on highlight with +1 exposure compensation. Developed in D-76 1:1 for 8 minutes, 30 second agitation cycle.

Film Test: Ringarounds

Load your preferred film in your camera and set the meter at the film's rated speed--ISO 400, for example. Find a scene, or set one up, that has a 5-stop brightness range. For example, use a scene with f/4 for a shadow reading and f/16 for a highlight, with all tones in between. Don't pick a high-contrast scene where you have a bright highlight and deep shadow. Set the shutter speed so that the "correct" (or averaged) exposure is f/8. (Thus, if the meter reads f/5.6 at 1/500 sec, alter the balance to get a reading of f/8 at 1/250 sec.) Do this with three rolls of film. On each roll make three five-stop brackets of the scene; shoot one set at ISO 100, one at the normal setting of ISO 400 and the last at ISO 1600. In other words, shoot a series at f/4, f/5.6, f/8, f/11 and f/16 at ISO 100, 400 and 1600. This is your exposure ringaround.

Load each onto a separate reel. Develop one roll in your normal fashion, with whatever time, temperature and dilution you normally use. Develop the next roll at 50% over your normal developing time, then the last roll at 30% less than your normal time. Keep time, temperature and agitation cycle constant throughout. In other words, if your normal time is 10 min, develop roll #2 at 15 min and roll #3 at 7 min. After the negatives are dry, make contact sheets (on a “normal” or #2 grade paper or by using a variable contrast #2 filter) of each set or simply check the negatives with a loupe.

Study the negatives and/or contact sheet; find the negative that has the richest tonal range, with detail in the shadow areas and controlled, printable highlights. Once you've chosen the negative, note where it appears on the ringaround and see how it was obtained.

Judging Results and Making Adjustments

If the prime negative was of the averaged reading developed normally, then your technique is right on target and you can go on your merry way. But if the prime negative is, say, the averaged reading negative developed plus 50%, then you've got some adjusting to do. Adjustments can be made in either your camera meter setting or your developing time. Let's say that the best negative is obtained at the f/5.6 setting with normal developing time--in this case, you can rate the ISO 400 film at EI 200 when using your metering system. Don't be afraid of "fooling" the camera--all you're doing is recalibrating your system for optimum results.

Or, if your best results were obtained with the plus 50% developing time at the f/11 setting you can adjust your meter to EI 800 for an ISO 400 film and adjust developing times accordingly. After you've made the necessary adjustments, refine the test even further by shooting a few rolls of everyday scenes at the new settings and developing times. You may end up clipping a few seconds of the time, or changing your meter setting by 1/3 or 1/2-stop (changing ISO is the easiest way to do this.)

Each camera/metering system you own should be subjected to this test, as each one represents a variable. However, if your results are really out of whack have the unit serviced. No amount of fine tuning can make up for a truly faulty system. Also, you can change results somewhat by going from a once a minute to a 30 sec agitation cycle (this increases developer activity); adding a degree or two to solution temperature; or switching to a different dilution. Whatever you do, be consistent.

Below: West River, 1982, Tri-X at ISO 320. Exposure: f/8 at 1/125 second, CWA metering, no exposure compensation. Developed in D-76 1:1 for 8 minutes, 1 minute agitation cycle.

                             

One side benefit of this test is that it can open your eyes to how negatives can be manipulated with time and exposure variations. You may find yourself having very strong feelings about a particular scene and decide to expose and develop it accordingly. The test will give you a reference catalog of all the variables and their consequences. You'll see negatives that are overexposed and overdeveloped, underexposed and overdeveloped, underexposed and underdeveloped, and so forth. This can also become a guide for tracing mistakes and problems. In any case, knowing the procedures that will give you the negatives you need gives you a real sense of control over your photography.

Roll and Sheet Film

Note that these procedures are easily done when using sheet film, as you can customize processing and settings for each frame. On roll film my procedure was to have one camera for "normal" contrast and one for high-contrast scenes. (I even swapped film mid-roll at times using a changing bag or simply finished a roll in the same general lighting conditions.) 

Be Consistent to Get Consistent Results

Everyone is an individual, and each person's technique should be a tool, rather than a hindrance in expressing that singular vision. By customizing your procedures and shooting for your individual tastes you'll be getting the most out of every situation. There's no need to have every piece of equipment you own calibrated, or to make graphs and charts of developing curves, but you need to be consistent and know the consequences of your actions. If you follow this course you'll gain the most photographic freedom and produce the best possible negatives for your printing.

    

The Scanning Project-4: Editing Black & White

With color slides you can make a fairly quick assessment of quality and edit out hopeless causes (or dupes, etc.). This is not always the case with black and white. True, you do not have issues of color to deal with, and this in some ways makes it easier to separate the good from the bad and the plain ugly. You do, however, have to understand and work with density, the "thickness" or "thinness" of the negative. Those who have done darkroom work will have the advantage here in recognizing a "good" negative, but even if you don't you will quickly gain an understanding of this issue.

Here's an example of a "thin" negative. There is very little shadow detail and the contrast required to bring detail up will be excessive. If you definitely need to scan such a negative do not attempt to fix the contrast in the scan, but do so later in an image editing program. 

You also should consider quality issues such as the possible deterioration of the film base onto which the emulsion is laid (cracking, splitting, severe curvature due to roll-up storage). Other possible destructive forces can be poor processing (failure to clear hypo properly, thus staining and even loss of original converted silver) and the use of destructive storage materials or containers. 

This is a "thick" or overly dense negative that resulted from overexposure and/or overdevelopment. My suggestion is to batch these and work on them as a group as you will be using certain tools to hopefully cut through that density, although larger and unpleasing grain and contrast problems will be present.  Not all dense negatives are lost causes, but they will be challenging.

 As one of my mentors, Bob Schwalberg, used to say, “density defends density,” which means that old negatives which have been processed and exposed properly and have a rich range of tones will always do better in the long run. Well, there isn’t much you can do about that at this point, but it is self-evident that rich negatives will always yield a better scan than “thin” negatives, since the thin get thinner as time goes on. There is a another caveat: if the material was grossly overexposed and/or over-developed (thus making for a “thick” negative), many scanners may have trouble penetrating the silver (density) and harsh and possibly useless scans may result. There are ways around this (multi-scanning is one), which will be covered in the step-by-step scanning posts, but opaque negatives will always be bothersome.

Here's an example of an excellent negative that has been properly exposed and developed and shows no deterioration. This will yield a very good full tonal print and poses little challenge to get right. Shot on Tri-X 400, the scan was made using that film's "profile", a topic that will be covered in the step-by-step scanning sections in later postings. Photo copyright George Schaub.

If you have made satisfying prints from some of your negatives in the past you might think that scanning the “positive” print will deliver a better result. The problem is that darkroom printing always and necessarily compresses the full tonal values available in the negative. If the negative is truly poor or if you have only prints remaining this is the obvious way to go, but in my experience a decent negative scan will usually allow you much more creative leeway (and yield a better result) than a scanned print from that negative.

Of course, if only the print has survived and you don't have access to a negative you will be doing flatbed scanning to make a digital copy. Post scan processing can often do wonders with original prints, but in all cases you will get better results should you have access to the original negative, given that it is in good shape. This photo of "doughboys" from World War I was found in an old postcard album purchased in a flea market.

Depending on the film used or the way it was processed, you may run into grain issues. This is something you have to live with, although there are certainly ways to reduce unwanted grain when scanning and later. However, keep in mind that all grain reduction methods (called “noise” these days) entail a certain amount of image softening. Check your negatives with an 8X loupe to see if that grain will be ruinous. (It can of course be “charming” as well.) Keep in mind that scanning etches grain unlike anything you might have seen in your silver printing days, especially if you printed via a cold light head. Scanning, like a magnifying mirror, can be cruel.

Another issue to consider when editing is dirt and scratches embedded or etched into the emulsion surface. Unfortunately, many dirt reduction procedures and software programs do not work on black and white (although they do work on color film, except for Kodachromes). Retouching this stuff can be tedious, but it can be done, and in some cases you might be able to remove the objectionable material from the film itself by rewashing or using a kind of fluid as a kind of diffusion mask on the frame when scanning, a technique we’ll cover later. You might consider using a chamois cloth to clean surface dirt off the negative, and while this can help you should be very careful so as not to scratch the film in the process.

Every film type has a certain characteristic curve, and identifying the type of film you have is very helpful when making scans. Using this "profile" when scanning can eliminate a number of steps in the process, particularly with contrast selection. This is a Kodak Tech Pan negative of ice flows on the Long Island Sound. The film yielded very low grain and high sharpness. However, it tended to develop out with higher contrast than other panchromatic films, so setting its profile when scanning can eliminate guesswork later. Photo copyright George Schaub.

 Like all film, each type of black and white film has a “characteristic curve” and gamma, which means a certain contrast, density and relationship between tonal values. For example, Panatomic-X and Ilford HP5 have a distinctly different character. When editing, it is wise to batch all similar film types together. Even though there may be variations in different stocks (dates of manufacture) this allows you to set up various responses to maximize the film’s character when scanning and certainly helps in the time spent in setting up each frame. Many times a film type is not shown on the frame edge. There are web sites that track these numbers (http://www.taphilo.com/Photo/kodakfilmnumxref.shtml is one of them) although you may still have to make an educated guess in some instances. I’ll go over the importance of ID’ing film types in the step-by-step posts later.

There are other types of black and white film you may have in your collection, including black and white positive film, chromogenic film, IR film, high-speed (at the time) surveillance film, Polaroid “Instant” B&W, etc. While some of these can be challenging they can be managed, so do not disregard them in your selection process. However, they don’t usually respond in the way a “regular” panchromatic film does to scanning, and require some special setups, so batch these as well in your edits.

There are many tools you can use when scanning black and white, as well as those you can apply when processing the image in image-editing software later, so do not be discouraged if you have some marginal negatives or prints. I encourage you to work with those negatives you think are lost causes and see just how far you can take them. However, understand that they may require considerably more effort and work. Start your work with "rich" negatives and then move on to those that are more challenging.

Next posting: Color Negative Film Edits