> I just processed a roll of Fuji 800 which has both underexposed frames and > overexposed frames. It should give me some idea of the difference in grain.
Well, this roll of Fuji 800 doesn't seem to demonstrate the same awful grain I've seen in the past! :-7 Yes, there's quite a lot of grain, but perhaps because the photos are reasonably appropriately exposed, the results are much more useable. The photos I had trouble with before were from a Fuji 800 disposible camera taken underwater - so they were mostly very underexposed. With this film, the underexposed shots are star trails, so by the time you readjust the contrast and brightness they don't look too bad! > I was momentarily excited when I picked up the roll today because I thought > I had captured a meteor. Then I realised it was lens flare. :( I almost got excited again when scanned one frame - a line had appeared which was not on the print. It turned out to be a scratch. Oh well! Here's a jpeg showing small parts of two frames from the film at 1:1 from the 2700ppi scan. One shows the belt of Orion, and the other shows part of someone's face. The latter was taken with flash and the camera set to +1EV. I haven't adjusted the contrast properly in either image, so they're flatter than they should be and the grain is more obvious. In the 6x4" prints of the overexposed frames, the grain isn't particularly noticeable. The images are sharp and punchy - it's amazing for an 800 speed film. Clearly the grain would become much more obvious in larger prints. I can see why a lot of photographers who don't need big prints love this film. If anyone is interested I put together another jpeg which shows a similar sized snippet from a Provia 100F slide next to the overexposed snippet of Fuji 800. Rob PS Trying to figure out the colour balance for the night shots is difficult - there's trees at the edges lit by the green light of fluorescent street lights, and the sky is reflecting sodium (? - orange anyhow) street lights...
<<attachment: Fuji800grain.jpg>>