Show us your grain!

CSoars · 11-24-2008, 05:31 PM

LX & SMC-M 50 1.7, Ilford Delta 400 Pushed to 800 in DD-X.
1/60th @ f/4.

Jonson PL · 11-29-2008, 06:47 AM

Originally posted by artobest

Judging by the number of threads about film grain on the forum lately, it's obvious that many of us here see grain as one of the more interesting qualities of the archaic and unfashionable medium that we love so much. It's almost certainly the thing that most differentiates film photography from digital "image capture," with its faddish obsession with resolution, sharpness, and noise reduction.

Lately I’ve been having more fun going through the older threads here in the Film forum. I get tired of reading how many lines a certain lens resolves, and can be seen at 100 %, in DPr threads and other technicalities.

After reading in the forum, and asking; I’ve now got Tri-X 400 Iso in my cam, pushed to 1600. And got an Ilford Delta Iso 3200 in the fridge.

So till I get those developed, I’ll just post these three for now :

Missed the focus a bit, (but then we get the OOF effect :-),can’t remember if I was at f/1.2 or f/1.4. Without splitprism, its hard. But I’ll get a manual focus cam at some point.

Both of these are cropped

Some great samples in the thread.

If you have the ME Super, which only goes to Iso 1600; do you then intentionally underexpose by a stop, so actually get Iso 3200 ? (In case you wanna push e.g. a Tri-X film further)

Jonson PL · 11-29-2008, 08:29 AM

Originally posted by lithos

One hundred per cent crop of the original, 4800dpi scan here.

I've devved all the shots I've put up here in D-76. Tri-X and D-76 is like a pie and sauce.

If this is 100 % crop from the original, then I would say that you can manage to get very clean looking B&W photos ! You must be good at nailing the exposure.

What does D-76, mean ?

Nachodog · 11-29-2008, 08:43 AM

D-76 is Kodak film developer.

lithos · 11-29-2008, 09:42 AM

Originally posted by Jonson PL

If this is 100 % crop from the original, then I would say that you can manage to get very clean looking B&W photos ! You must be good at nailing the exposure.

What does D-76, mean ?

It seems that the camera I used - a Chinon CG-5 - has a better, more accurate meter, than my ME Super. Maybe I've just gotten better nailing exposure, as I used my ME Super longer ago, when I was less experienced.

The CG-5 does have an AE lock button (on the lens mount, opposite the lens release button, running parallel to the camera's length) but because of its awkward position, I don't use it much.

Dunno, maybe I'm just lucky. And remember, Tri-X has got a lot of latitude.

On a side note, if anyone sees a Chinon CG-5 up for sale, I highly recommend grabbing it. It is as good as anything Pentax made. Will probably be cheaper than an ME Super, the camera it most closely resembles in terms of features, because Chinon wasn't exactly a big name brand.

Like the ME-Super, the CG-5's got a stepless shutter in Av mode. Maybe that's how the exposure got nailed.

And Nachodog's already explained what D-76 is. D-76 and Tri-X is a great combo.

jgredline · 11-29-2008, 10:28 AM

There is some amazing work in here. Will come back later to comment on my favs.

artobest · 11-30-2008, 06:12 AM

Originally posted by Jonson PL

Missed the focus a bit, (but then we get the OOF effect :-),can’t remember if I was at f/1.2 or f/1.4. Without splitprism, its hard. But I’ll get a manual focus cam at some point.

I miss focus virtually every time. It's practically my style. The current dogmatic insistence on perfect, lightning-fast focus is really alienating to me. It ignores the fact that photographs are not always meant to be perfect records of what's in front of the camera; sometimes we're just trying to make art, for want of a better term. I guess there are two types of photographer: those who subscribe to the idea that the perfect camera is an invisible tool that never gets in the way of the image, and those who don't. I'm one of the latter, I suppose.

**ChrisPlatt** · 11-30-2008, 10:21 AM

IMO sharp focus, like proper exposure and good composition, is highly overrated.

Chris

Jonson PL · 11-30-2008, 10:34 PM

Originally posted by artobest

I miss focus virtually every time. It's practically my style. The current dogmatic insistence on perfect, lightning-fast focus is really alienating to me. It ignores the fact that photographs are not always meant to be perfect records of what's in front of the camera; sometimes we're just trying to make art, for want of a better term. I guess there are two types of photographer: those who subscribe to the idea that the perfect camera is an invisible tool that never gets in the way of the image, and those who don't. I'm one of the latter, I suppose.

The table was lighted by a spot, so it would upset the metering, if I wanted the subject and background not so underexposed. I should have given it some more exposure, so I gotta remember till next time.
I love the Christmas feeling when picking up prints. And I like how to learn from mistakes, in another way than with digital. Probably with digital, I would just have deleted this one, and not thought more about it, till next time I ran into the same problem.

I love this OOF shot of yours :
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-film-slr-discussion/33905-show-us-...tml#post310274

got a dreamy look. And increases the curiosity of the viewer. The lighting and shadows help to get this feeling.
It would not have been as interesting, had it been in perfect focus.

I printed a another version of the second one of my pictures, taken a little later; and it came out good.
I’m really having fun trying out different B&W films at the moment. And picking up tips from this film section in the forum.

artobest · 12-01-2008, 03:53 AM

Originally posted by Jonson PL

I love this OOF shot of yours :
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-film-slr-discussion/33905-show-us-...tml#post310274

got a dreamy look. And increases the curiosity of the viewer. The lighting and shadows help to get this feeling.
It would not have been as interesting, had it been in perfect focus.

Thanks. I can't take credit for the out-of-focusness of that shot though, much as I'd like to. It's a very close crop of another shot, as shown here. The chief glory of film for me is the pointillist effect you get from close cropping like this. It's something that other mediums just can't reproduce.

Wombat · 12-01-2008, 05:38 AM

Lovely, Johnson PL. Reminds me very much of being a uni student in the 1960s. It gives me that that feeling of happy memories mixed with the pain of time passing. Love it. This is what grain does for me - really heightens the emotional component of a picture.
And Artobest did you hear me cheering you on with your great rant against the tyranny of sharpness? Well spoken, well spoken.

Can I chuck in another one? I'm trying out different films at present and this was taken with Kodak 400CN. I thought C41 film was supposed to be virtually grain-free. Dunno what happened...

Wombat · 12-01-2008, 06:26 AM

Originally posted by artobest

Nice shot Wombat. Interesting how the web compression seems to have added a colour cast to those clouds.

Re: C-41 films, I get absolutely tons of grain from XP2. Don't know if it's the development or what. Here's an example along with a crop. It's basically a charcoal drawing.

Thanks, mate. I forgot to ask the lab for high res. scans, so the file was a pretty crappy jpeg to begin with. Interesting to read your experience with C41 film. I was beginning to think there was something wrong with my camera's ISO settings.

You sure love that bub! I think he (she?) is going to be a yoga teacher.

Jimfear · 12-01-2008, 06:33 AM

Originally posted by CSoars

LX & SMC-M 50 1.7, Ilford Delta 400 Pushed to 800 in DD-X.
1/60th @ f/4.

That is one nice photo! Absolutely love it.

//jim

artobest · 12-01-2008, 06:47 AM

Beautiful blacks. Must be a devil to print!

Ratmagiclady · 12-01-2008, 08:14 PM

Originally posted by Wombat

Sorry, I had it confused with the *ist!

(Walks away, mumbling...).

So, what the heck is *ist supposed to mean, anyway, apart from a search string that could bring up half the dictionary? Asteriskist? (Nightmare for Sylvester the Cat to pronounce, that way)

I'm always trying to figure out what rude word the asterisk is supposed to be hiding.

Possibly "*@&# styl-ist that convinced us it was a great idea to wrap everything in ersatz-chrome plastic?"

Anyway, it seems I found the b&W negative people. Hi.

I'm not currently shooting any of my film on Pentax, but probably will be eventually doing some of it on one.

11-29-2008, 06:47 AM	#47
Jonson PL Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Copenhagen Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,842	Originally posted by artobest Judging by the number of threads about film grain on the forum lately, it's obvious that many of us here see grain as one of the more interesting qualities of the archaic and unfashionable medium that we love so much. It's almost certainly the thing that most differentiates film photography from digital "image capture," with its faddish obsession with resolution, sharpness, and noise reduction. Lately I’ve been having more fun going through the older threads here in the Film forum. I get tired of reading how many lines a certain lens resolves, and can be seen at 100 %, in DPr threads and other technicalities. After reading in the forum, and asking; I’ve now got Tri-X 400 Iso in my cam, pushed to 1600. And got an Ilford Delta Iso 3200 in the fridge. So till I get those developed, I’ll just post these three for now : Missed the focus a bit, (but then we get the OOF effect :-),can’t remember if I was at f/1.2 or f/1.4. Without splitprism, its hard. But I’ll get a manual focus cam at some point. Both of these are cropped Some great samples in the thread. If you have the ME Super, which only goes to Iso 1600; do you then intentionally underexpose by a stop, so actually get Iso 3200 ? (In case you wanna push e.g. a Tri-X film further) Last edited by Jonson PL; 11-29-2008 at 08:31 AM.

11-30-2008, 10:34 PM	#54
Jonson PL Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Copenhagen Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,842	Originally posted by artobest I miss focus virtually every time. It's practically my style. The current dogmatic insistence on perfect, lightning-fast focus is really alienating to me. It ignores the fact that photographs are not always meant to be perfect records of what's in front of the camera; sometimes we're just trying to make art, for want of a better term. I guess there are two types of photographer: those who subscribe to the idea that the perfect camera is an invisible tool that never gets in the way of the image, and those who don't. I'm one of the latter, I suppose. The table was lighted by a spot, so it would upset the metering, if I wanted the subject and background not so underexposed. I should have given it some more exposure, so I gotta remember till next time. I love the Christmas feeling when picking up prints. And I like how to learn from mistakes, in another way than with digital. Probably with digital, I would just have deleted this one, and not thought more about it, till next time I ran into the same problem. I love this OOF shot of yours : https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-film-slr-discussion/33905-show-us-...tml#post310274 got a dreamy look. And increases the curiosity of the viewer. The lighting and shadows help to get this feeling. It would not have been as interesting, had it been in perfect focus. I printed a another version of the second one of my pictures, taken a little later; and it came out good. I’m really having fun trying out different B&W films at the moment. And picking up tips from this film section in the forum. Last edited by Jonson PL; 11-30-2008 at 10:55 PM.

12-01-2008, 03:53 AM	#55
artobest Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Swansea, Wales Posts: 455 Original Poster	Originally posted by Jonson PL I love this OOF shot of yours : https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-film-slr-discussion/33905-show-us-...tml#post310274 got a dreamy look. And increases the curiosity of the viewer. The lighting and shadows help to get this feeling. It would not have been as interesting, had it been in perfect focus. Thanks. I can't take credit for the out-of-focusness of that shot though, much as I'd like to. It's a very close crop of another shot, as shown here. The chief glory of film for me is the pointillist effect you get from close cropping like this. It's something that other mediums just can't reproduce. Attached Images

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Landscape Farm and grain	MikeS	Post Your Photos!	1	10-14-2010 10:37 PM
Architecture Grain Elevator	zman	Post Your Photos!	1	08-24-2010 02:31 PM
People grain?	krystalgem85	Photo Critique	1	05-27-2010 09:22 AM
Fun with Grain	benjikan	Photographic Technique	8	03-18-2008 12:23 AM
I Love Grain	benjikan	Post Your Photos!	12	07-28-2007 04:39 PM

11-24-2008, 05:31 PM	#46
CSoars Inactive Account Join Date: May 2008 Location: Edmonton, Canada Posts: 322	LX & SMC-M 50 1.7, Ilford Delta 400 Pushed to 800 in DD-X. 1/60th @ f/4.

11-29-2008, 08:29 AM	#48
Jonson PL Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Copenhagen Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,842	Originally posted by lithos One hundred per cent crop of the original, 4800dpi scan here. I've devved all the shots I've put up here in D-76. Tri-X and D-76 is like a pie and sauce. If this is 100 % crop from the original, then I would say that you can manage to get very clean looking B&W photos ! You must be good at nailing the exposure. What does D-76, mean ?

11-29-2008, 08:43 AM	#49
Nachodog Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Montreal, Qc Posts: 472	D-76 is Kodak film developer.

11-29-2008, 09:42 AM	#50
lithos Inactive Account Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Brisbane, QLD, AUS Posts: 3,261	Originally posted by Jonson PL If this is 100 % crop from the original, then I would say that you can manage to get very clean looking B&W photos ! You must be good at nailing the exposure. What does D-76, mean ? It seems that the camera I used - a Chinon CG-5 - has a better, more accurate meter, than my ME Super. Maybe I've just gotten better nailing exposure, as I used my ME Super longer ago, when I was less experienced. The CG-5 does have an AE lock button (on the lens mount, opposite the lens release button, running parallel to the camera's length) but because of its awkward position, I don't use it much. Dunno, maybe I'm just lucky. And remember, Tri-X has got a lot of latitude. On a side note, if anyone sees a Chinon CG-5 up for sale, I highly recommend grabbing it. It is as good as anything Pentax made. Will probably be cheaper than an ME Super, the camera it most closely resembles in terms of features, because Chinon wasn't exactly a big name brand. Like the ME-Super, the CG-5's got a stepless shutter in Av mode. Maybe that's how the exposure got nailed. And Nachodog's already explained what D-76 is. D-76 and Tri-X is a great combo.

11-29-2008, 10:28 AM	#51
jgredline Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: LosAngeles, Ca. Photos: Albums Posts: 10,628	There is some amazing work in here. Will come back later to comment on my favs.

11-30-2008, 06:12 AM	#52
artobest Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Swansea, Wales Posts: 455 Original Poster	Originally posted by Jonson PL Missed the focus a bit, (but then we get the OOF effect :-),can’t remember if I was at f/1.2 or f/1.4. Without splitprism, its hard. But I’ll get a manual focus cam at some point. I miss focus virtually every time. It's practically my style. The current dogmatic insistence on perfect, lightning-fast focus is really alienating to me. It ignores the fact that photographs are not always meant to be perfect records of what's in front of the camera; sometimes we're just trying to make art, for want of a better term. I guess there are two types of photographer: those who subscribe to the idea that the perfect camera is an invisible tool that never gets in the way of the image, and those who don't. I'm one of the latter, I suppose.

11-30-2008, 10:21 AM	#53
ChrisPlatt Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Rockaway Beach NYC Posts: 7,692	IMO sharp focus, like proper exposure and good composition, is highly overrated. Chris

12-01-2008, 05:38 AM	#56
Wombat Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: South Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 901	Lovely, Johnson PL. Reminds me very much of being a uni student in the 1960s. It gives me that that feeling of happy memories mixed with the pain of time passing. Love it. This is what grain does for me - really heightens the emotional component of a picture. And Artobest did you hear me cheering you on with your great rant against the tyranny of sharpness? Well spoken, well spoken. Can I chuck in another one? I'm trying out different films at present and this was taken with Kodak 400CN. I thought C41 film was supposed to be virtually grain-free. Dunno what happened...

12-01-2008, 06:26 AM	#57
Wombat Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: South Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 901	Originally posted by artobest Nice shot Wombat. Interesting how the web compression seems to have added a colour cast to those clouds. Re: C-41 films, I get absolutely tons of grain from XP2. Don't know if it's the development or what. Here's an example along with a crop. It's basically a charcoal drawing. Thanks, mate. I forgot to ask the lab for high res. scans, so the file was a pretty crappy jpeg to begin with. Interesting to read your experience with C41 film. I was beginning to think there was something wrong with my camera's ISO settings. You sure love that bub! I think he (she?) is going to be a yoga teacher.

12-01-2008, 06:33 AM	#58
Jimfear Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Uppsala, Sweden Photos: Gallery Posts: 576	Originally posted by CSoars LX & SMC-M 50 1.7, Ilford Delta 400 Pushed to 800 in DD-X. 1/60th @ f/4. That is one nice photo! Absolutely love it. //jim

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

12-01-2008, 06:47 AM	#59
artobest Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Swansea, Wales Posts: 455 Original Poster	Beautiful blacks. Must be a devil to print!

12-01-2008, 08:14 PM	#60
Ratmagiclady Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: GA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,563	Originally posted by Wombat Sorry, I had it confused with the ist! (Walks away, mumbling...). So, what the heck is ist supposed to mean, anyway, apart from a search string that could bring up half the dictionary? Asteriskist? (Nightmare for Sylvester the Cat to pronounce, that way) I'm always trying to figure out what rude word the asterisk is supposed to be hiding. Possibly "*@&# styl-ist that convinced us it was a great idea to wrap everything in ersatz-chrome plastic?" Anyway, it seems I found the b&W negative people. Hi. I'm not currently shooting any of my film on Pentax, but probably will be eventually doing some of it on one.