Very grainy ISO 400 film!

[shaoken]

I'm not sure about B&W films..
I just sent an Ilford HP5 film to process, no pushing is done..

The thing is I get very grainy photos which looks like ISO 1600.. (the 1st shot)
BUT some don't appear so grainy.. (the 2nd shot)

Details
Shots taken indoors, flash fired from my compact Olympus Mju:- II camera.
It's a 35mm F2.8 lens.

Here are some samples:





Can anyone who is experienced in B&W films tell me why?

[cosycatus]

looks like a bad lens...

[Johnny Seo]

Which shop u send to process the film? It over xpose in some area of photo that gave a flare shooting against the sunlight. Why photo blue,are uyou using CPU to do the printing

[surrephoto]

Hi shaoken, i myself have experienced the disappointing quality of certain ilford films.

Ilford Pan 400 and HP5 are films with a traditional grain-type. If you want grainless 400, you will need to buy the Delta 400.

Do note that however all Deltas are very unforgiving to exposure errors. This is also why some street shooters use Pan/HP5 due to the latency. It is simply a tradeoff.

[Yoricko]

Some photos are more grainy than the others because you under-expose on that particular frame.

The photo lab will usually do an auto-levels to get the picture right when they scan.

[greg]

if you're already pushing your film, why used flash? Flash and bw is a no no combo and it usually flattens out the tones.

for shooting people, push with a fast prime lens and a pair of sturdy hands and burn the blacks with a condenser. You'd be amazed by the rich blacks and rightful tones where they should be..

Greg

[shaoken]

Originally Posted by Johnny Seo Which shop u send to process the film? It over xpose in some area of photo that gave a flare shooting against the sunlight. Why photo blue,are uyou using CPU to do the printing

I sent to Triple D for process.
I did not print, scanned at Triple D.

Originally Posted by surrephoto Hi shaoken, i myself have experienced the disappointing quality of certain ilford films. Ilford Pan 400 and HP5 are films with a traditional grain-type. If you want grainless 400, you will need to buy the Delta 400. Do note that however all Deltas are very unforgiving to exposure errors. This is also why some street shooters use Pan/HP5 due to the latency. It is simply a tradeoff.

Hmm.. I like grains but I did not expect it to be so grainy to this extend..

Originally Posted by Yoricko Some photos are more grainy than the others because you under-expose on that particular frame. The photo lab will usually do an auto-levels to get the picture right when they scan.

Originally Posted by greg if you're already pushing your film, why used flash? Flash and bw is a no no combo and it usually flattens out the tones. for shooting people, push with a fast prime lens and a pair of sturdy hands and burn the blacks with a condenser. You'd be amazed by the rich blacks and rightful tones where they should be.. Greg

I shot it almost all under the same lighting with flash fired.
As it's a compact auto film camera I'm using, I can't adjust the settings.

*I don't shoot film except for Lomography.

******************

Anyway, thanks guys.
Just want to find out why there are so many grains on the photos.

Maybe will think twice when using a coarse grain film next time..

Thanks!

[LKSC]

What you are seeing is partly due to the Callier effect. Traditional black white emulsions do not scan well because of this. HP5 has more visible grain compared to slower or T-grain films like the Delta range , but its appearance becomes exaggerated when scanned.

[mdzmr]

To me I guess its a processing issue.It could be type of developer use and also the developing timing.

The best way for B&W film is to self-process.

[Rangefinder_fan]

I dont think its due to 'the disappointing quality of certain ilford films' HP5 just has a different grain structure, so it is up to the photog to decide what type of effect he wants in the end result. If the film is built like that, blaming it for not being 'grainless' is a bit like blaming a cat for not being able to bark.
As for the TS pix, I agree with another poster that its a scanning issue because the original was underexposed. If auto levels are applied, you will get a lot more grain.

rf

Originally Posted by surrephoto Hi shaoken, i myself have experienced the disappointing quality of certain ilford films. Ilford Pan 400 and HP5 are films with a traditional grain-type. If you want grainless 400, you will need to buy the Delta 400. Do note that however all Deltas are very unforgiving to exposure errors. This is also why some street shooters use Pan/HP5 due to the latency. It is simply a tradeoff.

[Rangefinder_fan]

How so?

Originally Posted by cosycatus looks like a bad lens...

[Yoricko]

Originally Posted by shaoken details shots taken indoors, flash fired from my compact olympus mju:- ii camera. It's a 35mm f2.8 lens. here are some samples:

Originally Posted by shaoken i sent to triple d for process. I did not print, scanned at triple d. I shot it almost all under the same lighting with flash fired. As it's a compact auto film camera i'm using, i can't adjust the settings. *i don't shoot film except for lomography.

same lighting? Look at the photos.

[shaoken]

Originally Posted by Yoricko same lighting? Look at the photos.

Sorry, it's should be about the same lighting..
Both under flourescent light.

[Yoricko]

Your first photograph shows a scene that is totally indoors, whereas in the second photograph, daylight had a chance to reflect off the tiles/floor/walls and provide better lighting.

[shaoken]

Originally Posted by Yoricko Your first photograph shows a scene that is totally indoors, whereas in the second photograph, daylight had a chance to reflect off the tiles/floor/walls and provide better lighting.

You may be right!

The tiles and the glass can act as a "light reflector".
Therefore, those which are really indoors are underexposed, thus, get grainier when color corrected while scanning.

[Lomographer]

it is definitely not a processing problem or fault

but it may be the film

mayb try the t-max 400?

the ilford is known to be grainy.

i think it may be callier effect.

[Lomographer]

Originally Posted by Yoricko Some photos are more grainy than the others because you under-expose on that particular frame. The photo lab will usually do an auto-levels to get the picture right when they scan.

yup, they usually can fix it for you when developing

[sloth]

Originally Posted by surrephoto Hi shaoken, i myself have experienced the disappointing quality of certain ilford films. Ilford Pan 400 and HP5 are films with a traditional grain-type. If you want grainless 400, you will need to buy the Delta 400. Do note that however all Deltas are very unforgiving to exposure errors. This is also why some street shooters use Pan/HP5 due to the latency. It is simply a tradeoff.

Blown Delta by 2 whole stops and still came out decent.

Unforgiving? Hmm, digital can be worse at times

[surrephoto]

Originally Posted by sloth Blown Delta by 2 whole stops and still came out decent. Unforgiving? Hmm, digital can be worse at times

It also depends on the type of location where you blew your delta roll at.

If the location has contrasty light, there will probably still be enough contrast remaining to make it look decent.

[Lomographer]

Originally Posted by surrephoto It also depends on the type of location where you blew your delta roll at. If the location has contrasty light, there will probably still be enough contrast remaining to make it look decent.

where was the places you shot at when you pushed your delta by 2 stops?