What's the finest grained film of all time?

[slashmaster]

Was wondering what the finest grained film of all time is? I would imagine it would be a very low ASA black and white negative.

[Tscan]

Reversal is usually finer grain than negative but good question. Right now the Vision3 50D Negative is hands down the finest grain film, however there are variables that affect grain. I've had a hard time differentiating between 200T in daylight vs 50D at times. Kodachrome 40 and Ektachrome 100D reversals are both very close in grain to 50D neg, but i'd give a slight advantage to the 50D which is more modern. I've never had the pleasure of shooting Kodachrome 25 but heard it's about the same as K40? Then there are older 10ASA films from way back but i doubt they are finer grain than a modern low ASA negative.

[carllooper]

Print film is very fine grain. About 6 ASA or thereabouts. They don't publish ASA for print films because unless you use such in a camera (which you could) there's no need for the ASA rating.

Films made for printing optical sound are very fine grained. You can shoot images with such but results will be very contrasty, but not a bad effect (in fact quite compelling)

Films made for holography are probably the finest grain films of all time, and require correspondingly long exposure times to exploit.

There's some special filmstock (in 16 and 35) that was manufactured about 10 years ago, and still available, that is claimed to be completely grainless and exceedingly high resolution. It was marketed as "Gigabit Film" and the guy sitting on the remaining reserves offers such at a competitive price. Requires special processing but not anything that a DIY lab couldn't handle.

C

[inlieubeaulieu]

back when I used to do B&W darkroom photography I used to use Tech Pan film. Technical Pan film was originally developed for astronomical purposes (high contrast ASA 16 or 25), and when processed with technidol (its own specialized developer) it was the tightest grained film that I ever had the pleasure of working with. When making 8x10 enlargements from 35mm, the grain was not visible with a grain-focuser. The images almost appeared to be digital.

in the opposite direction, sorry for the digression, I used to use ASA 3200 film which yielded beautifully grainy images when I pushed it to 12,800ASA (and I could capture television strobe within long-ish exposures)... I often wish this film stock was available in Super 8 or 16mm as it would be great for night-photography (there was even a Fuji ASA 1600 color film stock which would be interesting too)

[Mmechanic]

Gigabitfilm, as founder Ludwig denominates, is a family of very fine-grained black-and-white stocks in conjunction with proprietary developing formulae.

The very first ciné trials were made by Mr. Ludwig himself. I processed the 35mm original. The next shoot was organised by me with a cameraman who owns an ARRIFLEX 35 BL II. Then I began with the first trials in 16mm, using a Paillard-Bolex H-16 S. That camera has since been modified around the gate because I have found the flung-on claw to tend to slip over the thin-base film. I also wanted to improve steadiness which is essential for Gigabitfilm.

Another experiment I conducted was with Kodak 2468, a microfilm duplicating film. This stock is virtually grain-free but you pay the price of orthochromacy and the low ISO exposure index of 4. Perforated Kodak 2468 is a marvel. It comes on standard thickness base.

One must be determined to shoot on high-resolution stock. Even the tiniest mistake shows. If you don’t focus precisely, the picture is unsharp. Nothing to hide behind. The biggest obstacle to Gigabitfilm and other such films is the difficulty to take the image to the screen. Only the best projectors just do, they need to have effective cooling, usual lenses simply don’t convey what’s on the film. Very good (and expensive) lenses, very uniform illumination of the projector aperture, and of course a perfect print are paramount. In the case of reversal originals the print problem doesn’t exist. So, Gigabitfilm remains the best duplicating film for labs. Producers haven’t discovered high-res photographic cinema, yet. Many people are fond of some graininess. To see no grain can be disturbing.

In case of interest, send me a PM.

[marc]

Kodachrome ASA10 was really something!

[slashmaster]

Reversal is usually finer grain than negative but good question. Right now the Vision3 50D Negative is hands down the finest grain film, however there are variables that affect grain. I've had a hard time differentiating between 200T in daylight vs 50D at times. Kodachrome 40 and Ektachrome 100D reversals are both very close in grain to 50D neg, but i'd give a slight advantage to the 50D which is more modern. I've never had the pleasure of shooting Kodachrome 25 but heard it's about the same as K40? Then there are older 10ASA films from way back but i doubt they are finer grain than a modern low ASA negative.

Thanks Tscan but are you sure reversal is finer grained? Because I thought the highest definition would be the lowest asa black and white negative you can find.

[slashmaster]

Print film is very fine grain. About 6 ASA or thereabouts. They don't publish ASA for print films because unless you use such in a camera (which you could) there's no need for the ASA rating.

Films made for printing optical sound are very fine grained. You can shoot images with such but results will be very contrasty, but not a bad effect (in fact quite compelling)

Films made for holography are probably the finest grain films of all time, and require correspondingly long exposure times to exploit.

There's some special filmstock (in 16 and 35) that was manufactured about 10 years ago, and still available, that is claimed to be completely grainless and exceedingly high resolution. It was marketed as "Gigabit Film" and the guy sitting on the remaining reserves offers such at a competitive price. Requires special processing but not anything that a DIY lab couldn't handle.

C

Thanks Carl!

I wonder how well a 6 asa print film would work in a camera?

[slashmaster]

Gigabitfilm, as founder Ludwig denominates, is a family of very fine-grained black-and-white stocks in conjunction with proprietary developing formulae.

The very first ciné trials were made by Mr. Ludwig himself. I processed the 35mm original. The next shoot was organised by me with a cameraman who owns an ARRIFLEX 35 BL II. Then I began with the first trials in 16mm, using a Paillard-Bolex H-16 S. That camera has since been modified around the gate because I have found the flung-on claw to tend to slip over the thin-base film. I also wanted to improve steadiness which is essential for Gigabitfilm.

Another experiment I conducted was with Kodak 2468, a microfilm duplicating film. This stock is virtually grain-free but you pay the price of orthochromacy and the low ISO exposure index of 4. Perforated Kodak 2468 is a marvel. It comes on standard thickness base.

One must be determined to shoot on high-resolution stock. Even the tiniest mistake shows. If you don’t focus precisely, the picture is unsharp. Nothing to hide behind. The biggest obstacle to Gigabitfilm and other such films is the difficulty to take the image to the screen. Only the best projectors just do, they need to have effective cooling, usual lenses simply don’t convey what’s on the film. Very good (and expensive) lenses, very uniform illumination of the projector aperture, and of course a perfect print are paramount. In the case of reversal originals the print problem doesn’t exist. So, Gigabitfilm remains the best duplicating film for labs. Producers haven’t discovered high-res photographic cinema, yet. Many people are fond of some graininess. To see no grain can be disturbing.

In case of interest, send me a PM.

I'm very interested! I will PM you. Wonder what kind of resolution gigabit film would be equivalent to?

[slashmaster]

Kodachrome ASA10 was really something!

When did they make it?

[doug]

Kodachrome ASA10 was really something!

When did they make it?

I presume this was the Kodachrome I film that they used from the late 1930s to the 1950s. It was sharp and low grain by the standards of the day, but Kodachrome II was sharper at 25asa I think. This came in about the early 1960s. I think a lot of the quality we associate with the 1960s and 1970s colour films comes down to the processing, which probably varied from lab to lab. I have some late 70s Kodachrome slide film shot and processed in India that had very bad colour. On the other hand some Agfa 16mm reversal I took in Venice in mid 1960s, and processed in UK, I projected fairly recently. Not only is the colour fine but it looks virtually grainless I'm not sure what the asa was.

[Will2]

For some reason I remember Kodak's Vision 2 100T 5212 being the finest grained camera film they produced...or maybe it was "the sharpest."

[Tscan]

For some reason I remember Kodak's Vision 2 100T 5212 being the finest grained camera film they produced...or maybe it was "the sharpest

It was the sharpest. I used the 100T and 50D at the same location once and the 100T was a little grainier but sharper.