Grain at Last! Ilford Delta 3200 in Rodinal.

Or alternatively (suggested by Nick in the previous post’s comment section) ‘The Search for the Holy Grain’.

Ilford Delta, Rodinal, Olympus OM2N

Worbarrow Bay with Portland just visible on the horizon on the left. I thought this very heavy grain may be caused by under/over exposure but the negative looks fine.

In an attempt to get some really grainy results I’ve been trying some faster films with little success – I want a really grainy image like those obtainable using now discontinued films such as Kodak TMax 3200, Scotch 3M 1000 or even Kodak Hi Speed IR.

Ilford Delta, Rodinal, Olympus OM2N

The central portion of the above shot. That’s a lot of grain… I was after grain but maybe a bit less than this!

At 1600 and 3200 ASA Ilford Delta 3200 is (annoyingly) very well-behaved when developed in ID11, so the next step is Rodinal which sharpens up detail at the expense of harder grain.

Ilford Delta, Rodinal, Olympus OM2N

Tyneham church entrance. The sky has overexposed – as I took a meter reading from the ground here – and the grain hasn’t shown on the scan. Interesting.

Ilford Delta, Rodinal, Olympus OM2N

The centre of the previous shot – grainy goodness in spadefulls!

All shots from one roll in an OM2N using a 17mm f3.5 lens in manual mode as the max ASA setting is 1600 – so set the exposure and take a stop off. The Rodinal was at a 1+25 dilution at 20 degrees c for 11 minutes.

Ilford Delta, Rodinal, Olympus OM2N

Centre weighted meter reading and some grain in the sky as it hasn’t overexposed. This is just about right.

The grain is most evident in skies when no exposure compensation has been set for the main subject. If a meter reading is taken from the ground (rather than the whole scene) the clouds become over exposed and the grain can’t be seen – so a choice of technique.

Ilford Delta, Rodinal, Olympus OM2N

On a fairly bright winter’s day exposures are possible at 3200 using 1/1000th of a second and f16 to f11. On a brighter day a red 25A or polarizer would be needed – unless your SLR can shoot faster than 1/1000th of a second or you lens run to f22/f32 of course.

Ilford Delta, Rodinal, Olympus OM2N

Sorry – another shot of the same building. I got a bit carried away here.

These were all taken an Tyneham and Worbarrow Bay in Dorset. The ruins are what’s left of a small village which was taken over by the army as a combat training zone in World War 2 with the promise to the villages and landowner that it would all be returned – it never was.

Ilford Delta, Rodinal, Olympus OM2N

Anyway, back to this film/developer combo. Well I can’t complain that it’s not grainy. What’s odd is how variable the appearance of the grain is. In some cases using the same exposure for different shots of the same subject produces markedly different grain, even though the negatives look fine. Shots with lots of mid-tones seem to show the most grain when normally exposed, highlights when overexposed are fine and shadows are fine too surprisingly though the darker greys are a bit ‘grungy’.

Apart from the first picture in this series, the rest of these are just what I was after so I’ll stick with this for a few more rolls. Oddly several shots earlier in the roll showed the same ultra graininess but all the subsequent shots had less obtrusive grain :-

Ilford Delta, Rodinal, Olympus OM2N

Another shot from earlier in the roll.

So – a few mysteries and mishaps, but I like this a lot (you may not!) and it’s good to finally find a film/dev combo which achieves the look I was after.

Hope you find this useful, thanks for looking!

p.s. There a reviews of lots of other films on the film, camera and lens review index tab.

 

Advertisements

AgfaPhoto APX100 Film

After doing some posts on various Ilford, Adox and Fuji films I realised I hadn’t done one on the film I use most, Agfaphoto APX100. This is an excellent general purpose film, reasonably priced, fine grained with very good contrast control. Although other films may be better in any single aspect, this emulsion strikes just the right balance for me.

These first few were all taken on a dull, wet day to add to the challenge, using an Olympus Om1N and a 50mm f1.4 lens.

ap12s

Although the negs were fairly low in contrast it’s always easy to add some in post-processing. If they’re very contrasty to start with you’re stuck with it! I liked the vintage feel to the next shot – could have been taken 60 years ago.

ap9s

Same with this one…

ap10s

The curved distortion of the 50mm F1.4 wide open (lower part of the frame) is quite noticable here – I quite like it, but others won’t. It’s gone at F2.

ap14s

Finally one which made it to the agency – a bandstand shot through a dirty shelter window.

00273296

At about £3 for a 35mm/36 exp roll in the UK (less if bulk bought) it’s a recommended choice for an ‘everyday’ B/W film. While it doesn’t have any strong characteristics – such as Rollei Blackbird or Ilford Pan F+ – it’s a consistently well behaved film with a great range of midtones providing loads of scope for post-processing to get a desired final result.

Thanks for looking – hope you find this useful.

Adox CHS50 – My Last Roll

(Three Images). A few weeks ago, my last roll of  Adox CHS ART film was shot and developed – an ‘old school’ film made in the same way it was 60 years ago and despite a few irritations, was a bit of a special film. The Efke factory (where it was made for Adox) was closed last year, so shooting the last roll was a sad day – I used to use a lot of Efke film.

The CHS range (25, 50 and 100 ASA) had a fine grain and an unusual response to colour which gave the results a special ‘vintage’ look. The example below has been lightly layered to enhance the effect. Everything developed in Rodinal 1+50, and shot on either an OM1N or an OM2n with a variety of lenses.

00252658

The range of tones captured is impressive due to the high silver content though they may seem rather low contrast to digital photographers. A characteristic darker appearance of blue skies can be seen in the example below.

chs50_20130203_7

Its weakness is its soft emulsion which produced some very dusty negatives when compared to modern films. It also needed more care than usual during development – especially with regards to temperature. Above 20 degrees centigrade, the emulsion becomes very soft, and at 25 degrees will separate from the backing! Still, the vintage look was worth the dust cloning required – in the example below there are still a few dust spots in the sky above the church tower.

chs50_20130203_6s

All is not lost though – Adox are developing a 100 ASA replacement, made in Germany and available in 35mm (36 exposure and 100 ft rolls), 120 and every variety of sheet film size – see here.

I’m really looking forward to trying it – I just hope we don’t have to wait too long!

Hope you find this useful, and thanks for looking.

40 Years of Imaging Technology Development – how much difference has it made?

An earlier post saw me going on about how good the Olympus Trip was.  So in the interests of  ‘putting my money where my mouth is’  I got to thinking – how does it compare to a relatively recent digital equivalent – an Olympus PEN? Both are aimed at roughly the same group of  photographers, even if they are separated by a generation or two. How much has technology really improved photography at the ‘consumer end’ of the market?

Olympus PEN and EPL3

So, armed with an Olympus Trip (loaded with Agfaphoto APX100) and an Olympus EPL3 on a fine winter’s day I took the same pics with both and did a comparison – it turned out to be more of a challenge  than I anticipated.

ot9s cmp

Trip on the left, EPL3 on the right. Not bad for the Trip but the EPL3 has a bit more dynamic range.

The EPL3 has a smallish micro 4/3 12 Mp sensor, the Trip uses full frame 35mm film so can be scanned to 20 MP, it’s only advantage. The Trip has no autofocus, no image stabilisation and only has simple metering. It’s also only equipped with ‘P’ program mode, the EPL3 has all the bells and whistles – aperture priority, ISO 200 (the lowest setting) and mid aperture were used for this comparison.

The film pics are nearly all crops – it’s surprisingly difficult to compare the field of view between a LCD and a basic viewfinder when taking comparison shots. Good fun though… This is a monochrome test because – well, I like black and white. No other reason!

ot1scmp

EPL3 Top, Trip bottom. More even this time – the Trip has a slightly better look but it’s only a personal preference.

To do a fair comparison, the EPL3 pics were taken in RAW and converted using default settings to JPG and desaturated in Photoshop, the Trip shots scanned, then noise reduction, ‘dust and scratches’ and unsharp mask applied which seemed fair for comparison purposes.

ot5scmp

Trip left, EPL3 right. The EPL3 has managed to capture more DR in the water but only marginally.

The EPL3 has a nice 14-42mm (28-84mm equiv) zoom lens, the Trip a faster fixed focus 40mm lens. this meant the ‘defining’ shot had to be taken with the Trip, then an approximation with the EPL3.

ot4l cmp

Trip left, EPL3 right – these were framed as the same shot the same to me on the day. This was more difficult than I’d initially imagined!

As much reduced images size can only give a basic impression – so here are some crops:-

ot4 cmp

Detail crops from the above shots – Trip left, EPL3 right. Not much in it but the EPL3 has just won this one on sharpness (and no scratches).

The APX100 film was developed in Rodinal 1+50 for 12 minutes.

ot10s cmp

Trip left, EPL3 right. The Trip is better based on personal choice here – more subtle midtones.

It’s significant that these shots were taken in good light – the EPL3 would have such an advantage in low light that the test wouldn’t be worthwhile.

There are so many film/developer/post-processing variables that any number of answers could result from this test – I like film and digital so I’m not trying to force any conclusion – just come to a general one.

The surprising thing is that for these two ‘consumer grade’ cameras the differences aren’t that great. The Trip needs slightly more experience to get the most out of it – especially estimating focus distance, and it’s results aren’t immediately available like its modern digital equivalent. However within the restrictions imposed by its age the Trip can put up a decent performance against its modern digital descendent which surprised me.

Maybe it shouldn’t though – film technology had many decades of development before it was widely dropped in favour of digital 10 to 15 years ago. The EPL3 is a very capable camera for all everyday uses, as was the Trip in its day. I’m really surprised that the Trip can still – just – hold its own against a much younger rival.

Is the inconvenience (some might say fun) of using film worth it versus the convenience and sharp clarity of digital? B/W film + home processing is £3 for 36 (more carefully) taken shots so you’ve got around 3000 shots before the cost equation is equal (the Trip was £50 refubished, the EPL3 £300). I’d personally say yes – on aesthetic as well as cost grounds, but many would say no!

Hope you find this interesting and thanks for looking – I had loads of fun doing this!

Adox Silvermax – Second Impressions in D76/ID11

Following on from an earlier post which detailed the results from my first roll of Rodinal developed Adox Silvermax, I thought some film users might want to see the second. No artistic masterpieces here I’m afraid (are there ever?) – these are test shots!

sm1

This seems like a good result – an excellent range from highlight to shadow.

The difference here is the developer – Ilford ID11 (identical to Kodak’s D76). I wanted to see how much the Rodinal developer which enhances sharpness was increasing the graininess of the final images – so ID11 seemed worth a try as it produces results which have less apparent sharpness, but also less grain.

On with the results – all taken on an Olympus OM2N and various Zuikos, developed for 9 minutes in ID11 stock. Scanned on a Plustek 7500 scanner using the ‘Agfa APX100’ profile which seemed to give a better result than the ‘no profile’ scans of the last test.

First shot – you may have seen this location before in previous posts – and a nice clear day with a pale blue sky.

sm7

Nothing to complain about here – nice dynamic range – similar to APX100,

And a small section enlarged.

sm7sam1

The IDll developer has done a very nice job here – noticably more even than Rodinal.

Next one – again a standard test subject for me – and another sharp, fine grained result.

sm2

There’s an odd band of lighter grey along the very top of the frame here – it’s not on any other shots so I’m not sure what caused it. Easily cropped out if required though.

An enlargement from the centre of the frame.

SMsam2

Good sharpness again – this is good!

And one from the top left.

SMsam1

This small sample shows a more pleasing grain than the Rodinal developed film – more even and less ‘clumpy’.

The verdict then – as a confirmed Rodinal user I’m reluctant to admit that ID11 has done a better job. The grain is more even and less obvious, but the sharpness isn’t noticably reduced. The difference isn’t huge, but it’s significant. As an aside, to see just how good Adox CMS20 is (at the expense of 3 stops of film speed at ISO12) check here which is the same subject.

One odd thing – the film counter numbers on the film edges of this roll were ‘doubled up’ so the roll finished on shot 78. This obviously makes no diffence to the final shots.

Whatever you develop it in, Silvermax is an excellent B/W film, with a good balance of speed, grain and sharpness with some evidence from this second roll of it’s increased dynamic range. The weather being as it is at the moment, it might be a while before I can give it a test under really bright sunshine….

Hope you find this useful.

p.s. if you need development times for any B/W film with any possible developer try here – The Big Dev Chart – a truly useful website!

Adox Silvermax First Impressions

It’s not often a new film comes along these days, so when one does it’s almost impossible to resist trying it – so, here are some of the results from my first roll. There has been no post-processing on these images other than resizing, so they look a little more ‘raw’ than the images I usually post.

sm8

It’s been snowing in Dorset (as you can see!) so the conditions for a test aren’t exactly bright. However there are lots of subtle graduations in the snow which some films struggle with. I’ll do another test in brighter conditions, but until then this is what we’ve got.

Adox lost their monochrome CHS ART film lines after the closure of their supplier’s Croatian factory, and ‘Silvermax’ is the replacement film, manufactured in Germany. Adox claim it has a higher silver content than ‘regular’ film resulting in greater dynamic range.

sm6

Initial impressions are that it’s a quality film, light grey in colour, rather like APX100. The 35mm cassette feels well made with a substantial felt light trap and a hefty weight. The film, maybe because it’s thin and quite stiff, winds smoothly onto a plastic film spiral for development.

This film was developed in Rodinal 1+50, rather than the specific developer Adox supplies. There are development times for most common developers here on the Adox website. All shots scanned on a Plustek 7500 and taken on an Olympus OM2N with exposure compensation as required.

sm10

Below is a small section enlarged from the right side hanging branches.

sm10_bit

The grain is moderate for a 100 ASA film – no surprises either way really.

The dynamic range under these limited conditions was very good, the film picking up a good range of midtones. Quite a bit better than AGFAPhoto APX 100 (which is my favourite general purpose film), and handling the range from deep black to white so well that the scanner just needed to do a straight scan with no adjustments or pre-canned film profile which is very impressive!

sm9

Initial impressions are very good. I think the dedicated developer might be worth a try rather than Rodinal, which has maximised edge sharpness but hasn’t done much for the grain. However many photographers only use Rodinal so it’s been a useful test.

So – next step is a roll under brighter conditions – blue skies, sunshine etc. I may need to wait a while for the weather before it’s done though!

Thanks for looking and I hope you find this useful.

Click here to see my second impressions, this time developed in ID11/D76.

p.s. I have no connection with Adox in any way – other than buying some of their film of course….

Recent Film Stuff

These are some film shots which were recently accepted by the agency, proving there’s still life in the Olympus OM1 yet. All taken on Agfapan APX 100 film rated at box speed, developed in Rodinal 1+50 for 12 minutes.

This didn’t seem that good through the viewfinder – a bit of post-processing worked nicely though.

00274938

This  was shot on an overcast day on the 50mm F1.4 at max aperture. Looking at this now I should have cropped away the roof at the lower left just leaving the tower.

00273317

Same lens with the narrow depth of field blurring the closed leaves into a nice soft mush.

00254056

This is a covered walkway with plants trained over arched supports. As this was taken in autumn, most of the leaves had fallen off and the gaps allowed dappled light to filter through which gave a nice effect. Zuiko 28mm.

00273309

This shallow puddle was full of fallen leaves – providing a way to break up the bare tree branch reflection. 28mm lens again.

00273312

It’s strange – I take shots on film equipment which are very different from those on digital kit. Maybe it’s the fixed focal lengths or the slower approach. Anyone else find this?

Thanks for looking – hope you like them and they give you some creative ideas for your photography.