Grain on slide film and print film the same?

Is the grain on slide film and print film the same if they are of the same
speed?
Just wondering if it would be cheaper or better to go to slide film
thanks for everyones time

Mike K

 

Hi Mike

Nope. It varies by specific film.

Also: slide film is much fussier as to exposure. Negative
film is much less so.

Stan

 

This is an interesting question. It is my understanding that 100 ISO
slide (E6) film has finer grain that 100 ISO print (C41) film, and is
sharper for sharper lenses, but 400 and higher ISO print film has finer
grain than 400 or higher slide film. Can anyone clear this up? Thanks in
advance.

Cody H.

Jhn 15:11 These things have I spoken unto you, that my joy might remain
in you, and that your joy might be full.
==================================


Group: rec.photo.equipment.35mm Date: Fri, Sep 19, 2003, 5:55pm (CDT+5)
From: (Stanley Krute)

Nope. It varies by specific film.
Also: slide film is much fussier as to exposure. Negative
film is much less so.
Stan

Hi Mike

Is the grain on slide film and print film the same if they are of the
same speed?


http://community.webtv.net/AnOvercomer02/Truth

 

The conventional wisdom (and my experience) is that --
at low ISOs, at least -- slide film is less grainy thant print film.


rafe b.
http://www.terrapinphoto.com

 

I can vouch for the kodak HD400 and the plain gold 400 having finer grain than Elitechrome 400.
Never did a comarison on the 100asa though.

Martin

This is an interesting question. It is my understanding that 100 ISO
slide (E6) film has finer grain that 100 ISO print (C41) film, and is
sharper for sharper lenses, but 400 and higher ISO print film has finer
grain than 400 or higher slide film. Can anyone clear this up? Thanks in
advance.

Cody H.

Jhn 15:11 These things have I spoken unto you, that my joy might remain
in you, and that your joy might be full.
==================================


Group: rec.photo.equipment.35mm Date: Fri, Sep 19, 2003, 5:55pm (CDT+5)
From: (Stanley Krute)

Nope. It varies by specific film.
Also: slide film is much fussier as to exposure. Negative
film is much less so.
Stan

Hi Mike

Is the grain on slide film and print film the same if they are of the
same speed?


http://community.webtv.net/AnOvercomer02/Truth

 

There are many variables that effect apparent graininess of a film. While it
used to be consistently true that slower films had finer grain this is not
always the case any more. There have been great advances in emuslion
technology such that many 400 speed films, particularly color negative
films, have much less apparent grain than older 50 speed films and are
indistinguishable under most circumstances from 100 speed films. Subject
matter, over/under exposure, quality of development are major factors also
in the appearance of graininess in a slide or negative.

 

Film grain is getting more and more subjective. At the beginning it was the
shape of silver halide, then it was the dye arrangement of layered colour
film. There is no grain I can perceive in clear transparency so the grain
must therefore be in the layers of the dyes. Having said that, I regularly
scan 120 negative film and the grain is obnoxious in darker areas. I use a
product called "GEM" from applied science fiction to smooth it out. So I
guess it depends on wether or not you do your own printing and how,
precisely you do it, if grain is to become a problem.

Kodachrome is supposed to be the lowest grain film in the realm. In recent
times, negative films have gotten better and slide films gotten worse but as
a general rule of thumb, Trannies are finer grained but have less of a
contrast range than print film. Getting Cibachrome prints from a
transparency is a very costly proposition so if you intend to print your
work... Stick with print film, you can scan this too.

Doug

 

That would have to be a pre-1950 50 speed film. Every 400-speed film I've
scanned has been total crap. Konica Impressa 50 is the only color negative
film I've tried that's even close to the Fuji 100F slide films, and it's
color rendition is problematic, to say the least.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

 

My general impression is that they're fairly comparable, but not
exactly the same. The main difference is that the mask of a negative
film allows th mfrs to get away with things in sensitization that
cannot be done with slide films, mostly though, this benefits faster
films. I other words, 400 speed negative materials are somewhat better
than 400 speed slide films, but at the other end of the scale, the
slow slide films 25-100 ISO) are decidely superior to negative
materials. In the 100-200 speed range, it's about even.

 

SNIPS

Not true at all. I have no idea how old you are or what your experience is with
slide films Doug, but your average everyday 100 speed slide film used to have
an RMS of 11. Now that number would be considered quite grainy as every new
slide film seems to have an RMS of 8 (or even 7?). It is unfortunate that
supposedly Kodachrome has increased in grain over the years (don't have the
link handy but) K64 used to have an RMS of 10 (considered to be quite fine, now
its probably 11 if not 12. Whether this is due to a change in the film,
development, or something else I don't know. I do know that at one time K64
used to be _nearly_ as fine grained as K25. I've even seen K25 that was grainy
but that was only under certain conditions (I believe it was a friends low
light city scape, but that was years ago, so I'm not sure about it).

As per the original posters question, unless you are doing large blow ups
(11x14"/16x20" and beyond) almost any slide or color negative film should be
more than satisfactory for fine enough grain - unless you examine grain w/ your
eyeball scraping the print or with a magnifier/microscope ;-) over the print -
if your that much of a stickler for finr grain at such a slow speed you'd be
better satisfied with both the finer grain and smoother tonality of alarger
(medium) format film.

I still find 400 speed color negative film not as sharp or fine grained as the
200 speed color neg film, but I am an "eye scraper" who refuses to go up to
medium format unless I have to.

Color neg film has more lattitude for over and under exposure and loves
over-exposure whereas a slide film will just white out with detail
unretrievable lost in over exposed areas so, besides the obvious caveat that
you should stick with print film when your final output is prints (depspite the
fact that some scanned slide outputted onto photographic prints look awfully
good nowadays), you are probably better off w/ color neg film if your exposure
habits are beginner level and/or sloppy.

Each film is unique and should be chosen for its unique characteristics. Try
both and see the kind of results you get. Judge for yourself. Go for the look
(and best attributes of a particular film) that suits you best.

Martin Parr shoots color negative film (he used to shoot Agfa Ultra 50, a now
defunct ultra saturated color neg film) which is about as far from slide film
and classic black and white (not to mention digital) that you can get. But he
is more in the range of an "artist" (not to start up that debate again :-() and
so chooses what works best for his style and vision. So should you - regardless
of which general type and/or specific brand of film you go with ;-) .

Regards,

Lewis

Check out my photos at "LEWISVISION":

http://members.aol.com/Lewisvisn/home.htm

Remove "nospam" to reply

 

Subject: Re: Grain on slide film and print film the same?

I don't know if this is true for Impressa 50. Rated at E.I. 32? or below (I
believe my friend may have rated it at E.I. 12 or 16) it outshone Ektar 25 in
the fine grain department. But Fuji's newest slide films are rated at RMS 8 or
7? so they may be catching up in the fine grain department.

A word of note - RMS ("root mean square" ameasure of granularity/changes in
density?) is not the same for color negative films and color slide films. There
is a _rough_ conversion of 2 or 2.5 times but I'm not sure exactly. So a "9"
RMS color slide film is not equivalent to a "9" RMS color negative film, the
"9" color slide film might be more equivalent to a "4". But these are
manufacturer ratings and don't alway hold to actual experience. My past
experience is that Agfa films seem much grainier than their rated RMS - whether
this has changed more recently, well, I don't know...

Regards,

Lewis

Check out my photos at "LEWISVISION":

http://members.aol.com/Lewisvisn/home.htm

Remove "nospam" to reply

 

Where can I find the RMS of various films? On the mfrs. websites? You've
really got my curiosity up, now that you mention Agfa. Their films that I
was using a few years ago did seem rather grainy, but the newer 100ISO
"Ultra" seems very low in grain. I'd be interested if the RMS ratings have
significantly changed.

 

Subject: Re: Grain on slide film and print film the same?

You'd have to check at each manufacturer's website for either a webpage or a
PDF file that could be downloaded with the data information. If you're in the
mmod you might consider calling Kodak (1-800-242-2424) or Fuji (don't have the
# handy) for a tec/spec/data sheet on the film(s) your interested in and/or
just ask when you call and they might be able to llok them up on their database
or something (hopefully, sometimes you might get a tech rep who knows nothing
or can't find it on a database and will have to transfer you to someone else.
And to be honest with you I'm not sure if one manufacturer's RMS rating for
color neg (or whatever type of film) is perfectly in sync w/ another's - its
just Agfa that's one example of how (whatused to be anyway's) their RMS claims
seem a bit off to me. Order/see a tec spec/datata sheet and see and/or shoot
two different films of the same type from different manufacturer w/ the same
supposed RMS and test it out for yourself. Their scales are logarythmic (I
believe, but am not sure about this) so even within a so called/claimed number,
two films with the same "number" might be vastly different in graininess ie.
both films can be rated at RMS 4 but actually be a rounded off 4. One in fact
can be a 4 or a 3.8? and the other film can be a 4.4 yet both are rated at an
RMS of "4". RMS is a rough gage. The best way to tell if a film meets your
granularity level needs is to actually shoot it and blow it up/magnify it.
Apparent grain might also increase or decrease dependent upon individual color
rendered, lighting levels/conditions, pcontrast of paper printed on (if color
negative), sensitivity to development factors, what kind of scanner you used
(if you scan the film before printing it out), the wind, and who won the World
Series last year. In other words, you need to make your own tests/assesments
and not just rely on manufacturer's data for any subtlety or real life
correspondence.

Regards,

Lewis

Check out my photos at "LEWISVISION":

http://members.aol.com/Lewisvisn/home.htm

Remove "nospam" to reply

 

Speaking of grain... Take a look at the back cover of CHICAGO magazine
(curent issue) KORS perfume ad - for those who can get a look at it.. B&W
head portrait..
Was it done all digi, or film and then scanned for printing?...
Looks like film to me... Look at the grain of the back ground...
Let the jousting begin...

Denny
BTW, she is just plain gorgeous...
<you probably couldn't stand to live with her, but gawd is she gorgeous>

 

Thanks, that sounds like something to do on a slow Saturday afternoon...

 

As Lewis pointed out, each manufacturer has PDF files for film data, including
RMS values. The Kodak stuff is easier to find in their professional areas of
their site. The Fuji stuff sometimes can be tough to find, depending upon which
film.

A direct link to AGFA film information is at:

<http://www.agfa.com/photo/products/film/>

Also, I though you might be interested in their B/W photo competition, which
might be something to try:


Nelson's is no longer carrying the AGFA transparency films, due to slow sales.
Does North County Camera have these, or do you order from B&H?

Ciao!

Gordon Moat
Alliance Graphique Studio
<http://www.allgstudio.com>

 

Thanks, Gordon!

 

Subject: Re: Grain on slide film and print film the same?

My pleasure, Skip .


Check out my photos at "LEWISVISION":

http://members.aol.com/Lewisvisn/home.htm

Remove "nospam" to reply