# Is iso 400 really grainy?



## zamanakhan

i just developed some iso 400 b&w and WHAO is it grainy, i thought at first that its because i messed up the chemistry but i was looking at a developed version of iso 400 color film that i didnt develop and its very very grainy as well. On my dslr at iso 400 there are very very few specs of grain but on film its crazy how much grain there is. So is iso 400 normally really grainy compared to iso 400 on a dslr? also would iso 100 be ALOT less grainy? because on dslr going from 200 (thats the neutral setting on my d5000) to 400 is not much of a difference.


----------



## Early

You can lessen the grain in b&w film somewhat with a fine grain developer, but if it bothers you that much, stick with digital.


----------



## tirediron

What 400 ASA film was it, and how did you develop it?  What are you using for your comparison?  I used to routinely print HP5 to 8x10 without any significant degradation from grain.


----------



## Christie Photo

zamanakhan said:


> ...would iso 100 be ALOT less grainy?



Yes.  You'll see a marked difference in grain.

There are several things that affect grain.  As Early said, you can use a different developer.  I think exposure will be your best first concern.  Overexposure will exaggerate grain.  A properly exposed negative will yield the best results.  And of course, maintain tight tolerances in processing...  in chemistry temperature, development time and agitation.

That's where I'd start.

Good luck!

-Pete


----------



## Christie Photo

BTW...  what format are you shooting?  35mm?


----------



## compur

If grain is a concern and you wish to shoot ISO 400 film I suggest using either 
Kodak T-Max or Ilford Delta films, expose at box speed (or under) and develop 
with XTOL or TMax developers.


----------



## Sw1tchFX

Welcome to film!

35mm is pretty much always grainy, regardless of film speed when printed 8x10 or larger. 

If you want really fine grain, you have to shoot medium format or large format.


----------



## zamanakhan

shooting 35mm, iam guessing its grainy because i got a short date from some lomo site just to mess around with. Also i didn't truly monitor the developer temperature, i think for the next  batch iam going to try and get the developer to the proper temperature and then develop. I feel its my inexperience that caused the film to be really grainy, it may be grainy on its own but a scanned version looks like it was shot at 3200 iso on dslr


----------



## compur

zamanakhan said:


> i didn't truly monitor the developer temperature ...



Not good.  Developer temperature is very important and the other baths 
should match it.


----------



## usayit

i used to use Kodak Tmax 400 a lot and the grain is very fine.  Yes... the quality of the processing plays a very important role.  I once screwed up a role of T-max ISO 3200 and the grain was so bad you could barely make out the photo... Done correctly even the ISO 3200 can be beautiful.


----------



## flea77

Lets start with your terminology. There is NO grain with your digital camera, none, zip, nada. Grain is the actual silver crystals on the film. No film, no silver, no grain. You are probably comparing digital NOISE to grain, which while they act and look similar, are two completely different things.

Next, there are several things that can affect how the grain looks. First is the type (quality) of film you are using. I love Ilford, even where there is grain, it is well structured. Delta 400 is good, HP5 is great although it does show it's grain a bit more, it is beautiful grain.

Exposure is the primary concern. Incorrect exposure can cause emphasized grain, make sure you nail it.

Next, developer. I tend to use Ilford DDX. While not a fine grain developer it does promote wonderful tones and great structure. Not to mention it is fast and easy to work with.

Then we come to the development. You have to mix exactly right, keep your temps exact, and use a digital timer if you can. Follow the directions exactly and if nothing else at least you can adjust other aspects and know that the development will be consistent.

Now to answer your question about different ISOs, yes, dropping down to Ilford Delta 100 will show a dramatic decrease in visible grain. Personally I prefer the look of Ilford FP4 at iso 125. Pan F at 50 iso is nice and pretty grain free although I don't like the tones as much as FP4.

Allan

PS. Also, when scanning in and processing B&W film, be VERY careful of sharpening. Unlike digital where you can cover up a not-so-sharp image to some degree with Photoshop sharpening, if you do that to a film image you will sharpen and amplify the grain!


----------



## djacobox372

Yes 400 iso is almost always quite grainy, similar to the noise levels at 1600iso with a aps sensor DSLR.

However grain doesn't look as bad as noise, so it's more acceptable.

If you want to shoot 400 iso film and get low grain, shot t-max and move up to medium format.


----------



## usayit

IIRC, the B&W samples in the following thread were shot with Tmax ISO 400 and scanned.  For a long time, I almost always shot ISO 400 on B&W negative.. it was most versatile.

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/digital-discussion-q/62119-epson-v700-experiences.html


----------



## Freelancephotog25

Sounds like ("I didnt monitor the developer temp") your developer was too warm (hotter developer reacts faster ) effectively pushing or over developing your film.  correct me if I am wrong I know in the print part of the process this would give you a lot of grain I havn't played with it with the negatives to see if it would do this.  Film is cheap try some different films, monitor your temps and times accurately and if your results arent what you want then try some 100 speed film.  thats what Id say.


----------



## j-dogg

I was given a roll of cheapo Kodak 800 speed and I had some grain but not a terrible amount.

The Portra I like to shoot so much produces images that rival my digital. Seriously quality stuff, worth the 10 bucks a roll I pay for it (although now I get a massive discount for being a college student)


----------



## Freelancephotog25

Where do you get a discount for being a college student?


----------



## Sbuxo

Early said:


> You can lessen the grain in b&w film somewhat with a fine grain developer, but if it bothers you that much, stick with digital.



:lmao: because noise is so much better.


----------



## Sbuxo

1. Always take the temperature of your developer and have your other baths be consistent. 
2. If you photos are not exposed properly, chances are grain will be more pronounced, especially in the darker areas of your photos.

Most of my work has been done with Kodak Tri-X 400 and for my Body Project series, grain was not even an issue in nearly all my prints. Proper exposure is key as many have stated before me. I also shoot Tri-X at 200 and compensate for it in developing times and beautiful tonalities have been produced. 

However, for my latest project: TeenEDGE, I was forced to shoot at 400 because of limited light and lying to my camera wasn't working. When I did my contact sheet, images were very contrasty and had more grain than I'm used to, but it did not hinder the photos at all. 

Do you print by hand as well? If you do, I suggest printing it the best you can and see how it turns out. I scan my prints and those are what I have on my Flickr. Feel free to check it out for examples!
Some people believe in perfect negatives, and some believe in perfecting them through printing. I believe in both but mostly the latter. [:

Wow I sound like a representative for Kodak. :lmao: 
I demand free film at once! [:


----------



## Early

Sbuxo said:


> 1. Always take the temperature of your developer and have your other baths be consistent.
> 2. If you photos are not exposed properly, chances are grain will be more pronounced, especially in the darker areas of your photos.
> 
> Most of my work has been done with Kodak Tri-X 400 and for my Body Project series, grain was not even an issue in nearly all my prints. Proper exposure is key as many have stated before me. I also shoot Tri-X at 200 and compensate for it in developing times and beautiful tonalities have been produced.
> 
> However, for my latest project: TeenEDGE, I was forced to shoot at 400 because of limited light and lying to my camera wasn't working. When I did my contact sheet, images were very contrasty and had more grain than I'm used to, but it did not hinder the photos at all.
> 
> Do you print by hand as well? If you do, I suggest printing it the best you can and see how it turns out. I scan my prints and those are what I have on my Flickr. Feel free to check it out for examples!
> Some people believe in perfect negatives, and some believe in perfecting them through printing. I believe in both but mostly the latter. [:
> 
> Wow I sound like a representative for Kodak. :lmao:
> I demand free film at once! [:


Before I was forced to close my darkroom, I was getting ready to shoot a roll of 400 ASA film, Tri-X or TMY at 600 ASA.  I might have even shot the roll, but never got around to developing it.  Anyway, I read that underexposing B&W slightly would give you less grain, and if a 1/2 didn't work, I'd try a 1/3 stop.  I was planning on experimenting with different developers until I found a concoction that held detail in the shadows.  (I was mixing my own from scratch back them)


----------



## zamanakhan

iam not printing the film myself just scanning it. I've got a bunch of rolls exposed now and gonna try and develop them all at once (2 at a time.) Iam pretty certain the film is exposing to the correct exposure, iam shooting with a f90x and it meters well. I'ev also started using red and yellow filters. Going to pick up a thermometer to properly monitor temperatures. 

i would love to print but i just cant afford all the extra gear and chemicals also no location for me to do so, ontop of all this i may be moving in the near future and woulr rather not invest in more gear and end up having to sell it all again.


----------



## Kiron Kid

Fuji Neopan 400 and Ilford Delta 400 delivers very fine grain in the 35mm format. 






Neopan 400 (35mm)


----------

