Hi all. I'm just starting to get into "serious" use of my 35mm camera (Minolta XD-11) and am trying to learn by experimenting and reading as much as I can. I shot my first couple rolls of film and had them developed but I have some questions about the results. Even in similar shooting conditions (outdoors, mid-day, good lighting) and the same lens, some of the pictures on the roll were sharp while others were extremely grainy. What are some of the possible causes of this? From what I've read this has a lot to do with ISO but the woman at the camera shop gave me all kinds of reasons this could happen (most of which I didn't believe...). Could it be something as simple as old film, which it was fairly old film? Thanks for the advice! I have some examples I could post if that would help.
tony

I shot some 20 year old Tri-X about 2 months ago and my end result was very grainy. I do my own darkroom work (when I can), and I showed the print and negs to my photography teacher and he spotted it right off the bat. He could tell the film was old, and he also noticed that it took a great deal of time to make a print (90 seconds, no filter, f16 on the enlarger head) So, with my experience age does have something to do with it. ISO does play role in grain issues, but only in high speed film or pushed film.

What kind of film and what speed were you using?

Z

Age of the film, ISO speed of the film and whether you set it to a higher ISO for push processing (basically exposed ISO400 film at ISO800 and had it overdeveloped by one stop) can all contribute to graniness.

However, if some shots were good and others not, I'd probably rule all of those out because you should see it with the whole roll of film - at least to some degree. Were a few shots underexposed? Look at the negatives of the shots that look bad - are they very light compared to the negatives of the shots that look good?

Thanks for the quick responses. The film was Kodak Gold 200. It was whatever I had close by in the house and I'm sure it was several years old. I'm pretty sure I set the ISO correctly on the camera but these were my first trys wtih this camera. Looking at the negatives they seem to be fairly equal...I don't notice a big difference in them. I just finished shooting a new roll so I'll be curious to see if I get similar results. Thanks again!

Almost sounds like you pushed the film higher than its rating, but you would notice it on all the negs. I would bet it was because its old film, color neg film seems to date quicker than say BW film, especially when it isn't stored correctly.

Z

Color film changes quicker than b&w does - both before and after developing, same story with prints too. Pro films are designed for refridgeration but consumer films aren't - almost like "preservatives" that they put in them so that they can be stored at room temperature without changing. Not that pro films are always better because of this - but that could be a thread in itself...

For consumer film, store it at room temperature or cooler (fridge won't hurt anything and is a constant temperature). Storing it in the trunk of the car or anywhere else that it can get really hot is a bad idea. Sometimes when you're using your camera you can't avoid storing the equipment (including film) in less than ideal conditions, but limit it as much as you can.

Color film changes quicker than b&w does - both before and after developing, same story with prints too. Pro films are designed for refridgeration but consumer films aren't - almost like "preservatives" that they put in them so that they can be stored at room temperature without changing. Not that pro films are always better because of this - but that could be a thread in itself...

For consumer film, store it at room temperature or cooler (fridge won't hurt anything and is a constant temperature). Storing it in the trunk of the car or anywhere else that it can get really hot is a bad idea. Sometimes when you're using your camera you can't avoid storing the equipment (including film) in less than ideal conditions, but limit it as much as you can.

I have to disagree with you another view....Consumer films are designed to be stored and the best way to store them is in the fridge or even in the freezer...Pro films are designed to be shot almost straight away because pros turn over films much quicker than amateurs..Pro films will keep well in the fridge or freezer...
Consumer films should be ok if they are kept in the camera for a few months even a year as long as the ambient temperature/humidity is fairly constant,,pro films won't..
I have shot films like TriX and Fujichrome that has been out of date by 2 years,,stored in the freezer and the results were great..

Colour print films will have finer grain if they are overexposed a tad,,say by no more than 2/3s of a stop....This is deadly for B/W films..

Tony,,your photolab will not push process your film unless you specifically ask them to and then there is a surcharge for the service...What I think you did without seeing your results is underexpose your roll of Kodak Gold..The lab compensated for the underexposure equalising the exposure of the prints..Check out the shadows on the negs under a loup,,is there any shadow detail??If not,,your negs are underexposed...Did you notice the grain in the midtones??If so,,what the lab has done is compensated and moved the shadows into the midtone region..

Jurgen
Australia

Like I said, nothing wrong with storing consumer films in the fridge. The only films that I've seen that list storage temperatures on their data sheets that indicate refrigeration is necessary are pro films.

I agree about overexposing color neg by 2/3 stop - I usually set my camera to expose ISO400 at ISO250 for just that reason.

I agree about overexposing color neg by 2/3 stop - I usually set my camera to expose ISO400 at ISO250 for just that reason.

That may be true for some cameras but not the XD11. Kodachrome slide film needs about 2/3 stop over, but colour negative film is right on using this camera.

Ronnoco

That may be true for some cameras but not the XD11. Kodachrome slide film needs about 2/3 stop over, but colour negative film is right on using this camera.

Ronnoco

It has nothing do do with the camera. This habit comes from "shooting for the shadows" with print film. It allows you to get more information out. Negative film can take a lot more underexposure than overexposure.

It has nothing do do with the camera. This habit comes from "shooting for the shadows" with print film. It allows you to get more information out. Negative film can take a lot more underexposure than overexposure.

Sorry, but in this case, it does. I have run more film: print and slide, through XD11 cameras than anyone here and that is my experience.

Ronnoco

Galen Rowell used to have a few of a couple different Nikon bodies. He mentioned that even with some of the higher-end cameras the metering could be one stop different from camera to camera... I think it's safe to say that in general the +2/3 stop rule is a good general practice with color neg, shot plenty of it and that was my experience. Kodachrome 64 was different, I usually shot that at -1/3, exposing it at ISO80.

Sorry, but in this case, it does. I have run more film: print and slide, through XD11 cameras than anyone here and that is my experience.

Ronnoco


Print film has such a large lattitude that any metering problems other than outrageous will never show up. We are talking about the details, not "good-enough" negatives.

Galen Rowell used to have a few of a couple different Nikon bodies. He mentioned that even with some of the higher-end cameras the metering could be one stop different from camera to camera... I think it's safe to say that in general the +2/3 stop rule is a good general practice with color neg, shot plenty of it and that was my experience. Kodachrome 64 was different, I usually shot that at -1/3, exposing it at ISO80.

Not with the XD11!

Ronnoco

Print film has such a large lattitude that any metering problems other than outrageous will never show up. We are talking about the details, not "good-enough" negatives.

Sure, but why over-expose, when it is not necessary?

Ronnoco