The Surface of Water, Grain, and the Search for the Perfect Scan.

By Nik Stanbridge

I seem to have been taking photographs of the muddy puddles and flooded fields where I walk the dog for ever. She’s over 12 so I’ve seen a lot of seasons, a lot of rain, and a lot of mud and water. The landscape (under my feet) is always different even if the walk is largely the same. It all started in the digital realm (when Mollie the Springer was a puppy) and then morphed as I switched back to film six or seven years ago and then sort of stopped when I decided it had ran its course. I decided to shut the series down once I’d published a photobook, Earth. I was bored with it and had moved on to other projects. In fact I forced myself to stop taking any more photos because I wanted to devote mental energy and resources to other projects.

In those 12 years of the dog’s life (so far), I’ve had a number of jobs but have lived in the same place and taken the same (ish) walk pretty much every day. The walk has been quite a constant. Around that constant though, so much in me and my life has changed and evolved. Two changes over that period… retirement, and switching back to film, have been bigger than the others. And within the latter, GAS (of course). GAS always seems to reinvigorate projects! I bet you find that too.

But then I came back to the project with fresh eyes and fell in love with the subject all over again. And the new photographs were fresh too. They were simpler, more subtle, less complex and more meditative. Almost abstract. Or maybe I was looking at the subject with a more abstract eye. I had more time this time round. I was retired. I was out walking the dog at different times and at a different pace. I was more reflective too.

I became ever more fascinated with puddles and what lay just beneath their surface. And started noticing how ethereal and otherworldly the bottom of puddles looked, especially on film. Or rather as photographs. It reminded me of a Garry Winogrand quote. When asked why he took photographs he replied “I photograph to find out what something will look like photographed“. I do that.

When I saw the photographs of these puddles and their contents, I also loved how the photographs looked. I loved how the subject matter perfectly matched the medium – grainy film. The graininess made the images. The images needed the grain.

I choose to have grain. I use Rodinal to help feed my love of grain. Grain with Rodinal, pretty much irrespective of the film stock, is delicious, tight, defined and sumptuous. The subjects I choose to photograph tend to benefit from grain, like the puddles, I love expanses of shades of grey. Moriyama has been an influence with his cars, hats, wire fences, skies, clouds and so on. And his out of focus subjects. They all benefit from the grain.

And part of the success of these images, a small but important part, is about the sharpness of the neg scans. There’s no point having grainy images (or using beautiful lenses) if the scans are mushy. I’m a big fan of home neg digitisation and am obsessed with sharpness. Edge to edge sharpness specifically. I’m now on my third neg holding contraption, third digitisation camera, and fourth or fifth lens (not counting all the shoe box sized dedicated scanners I’ve tried). Not each change of kit/upgrade, however, has been driven by sharpness per se, but I’m now, with my latest acquisition very happy indeed with the effortless edge to edge sharpness. I won’t bore you with all the details because it’s actually all about the end result. But for those that want to know, my new favourite neg holder contraption is the JJC version of the Nikon ES-2 (it’s a direct copy/knock-off). Coupled to a staggeringly sharp macro lens like the Nikkor 60/2.8D, the results are breathtaking, as you can see here. And crucially, results as good as these are easy to achieve with no annoying alignment process needed (of any kind, at any point). Effortless.

These scans (this level of scanning in general) let the grain shine through, exactly as it should, and show off the photographs to their truly best advantage. I love that you can look around the image – all of it. Being able to zoom in and float around exploring minute details. Imagine you’re in a gallery looking at the image in a frame on the wall. You absorb the image as a whole. You can also approach as close as you like. So you do. You look at details. You look at things you hadn’t noticed. Contemplation. Reflection.

We all spend significant time and effort (technological and mental) in creating our images and I believe this needs to encompass creating the digitised image (unless of course, you’re darkroom only). I’m no longer a darkroom person but I am a huge believer in producing printed versions of my images and I’ve written about this before. A high quality digital rendition of my photographs is the hidden but key link in all of my printed work – from photobooks, to photopolymer etchings (photogravure), to articles like this one… it’s why I’ve spent so much time perfecting and upgrading my neg scanning capability – I don’t want it to be a weak link in my photography. That said, I also need this part of my process to be as simple, quick and straightforward as possible – it is, after all, a mundane part of my photography. To summarise, everything I do with my photographs requires scans of the highest possible quality, achieved in the simplest and most economical way. And, to be clear, I’m not claiming these are the best scans possible or are perfect, but they do suit my needs more than my previous efforts (by a long way).

All images Leica M3, Summicron 50/2 DR. Ilford HP5 in Rodinal 1:50. Digitised with a Nikon D810, Micro Nikkor 60/2.8D, the JJC ES-2 and Negative Lab Pro.

I’m on Insta and I have a website too.

Share this post:

Find more similar content on 35mmc

Use the tags below to search for more posts on related topics:

Contribute to 35mmc for an ad-free experience.

There are two ways to contribute to 35mmc and experience it without the adverts:

Paid Subscription – £2.99 per month and you’ll never see an advert again! (Free 3-day trial).

Subscribe here.

Content contributor – become a part of the world’s biggest film and alternative photography community blog. All our Contributors have an ad-free experience for life.

Sign up here.

About The Author

By Nik Stanbridge
I've always been drawn to the ordinary, the decaying and the mundane. For me, it’s always been about capturing what’s right there in front of us that we all walk past without really noticing. I look for what’s hidden in plain sight that's either transient, disappearing or so obvious we’ve all stopped seeing it. Much of my work is about rendering the commonplace abstract - from muddy tyre tracks to architectural details, to utility workers’ paint on the road. I'm sensitive to ordinariness, transience, evolution and decay and attempt to convey it in these calm and strong images that have solidity and an engagement with the world.
View Profile

Comments

Geoff Chaplin on The Surface of Water, Grain, and the Search for the Perfect Scan.

Comment posted: 26/05/2024

A wonderful series Nik and excellent compositions. I completely agree about digital scanning having moved to it only recently. While the grain here adds to the compositions I wonder how different both images and compositions would be with an ultra-fine grain film like RPX25 or the slow Adox films. Inspirational series, thanks for posting!
Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Nik Stanbridge replied:

Comment posted: 26/05/2024

Thanks Geoff. As with most such processes that have many moving parts, I’m sure my ‘perfect right now’ setup will evolve (at more expense). I agree re. wondering what the images would look like fine grained. I’m a bit up against it though in winter when the puddles are prevalent. Slow film would be challenging. Might be time to experiment with a tripod.

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Graham Line replied:

Comment posted: 26/05/2024

And here I'm wondering how such photos would look with HC-110 and FP4 with the 40/2 M-Rokkor, which shows there are many ways to approach a subject. Beautiful and thought-provoking photos. Thank you for posting them.

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Nik Stanbridge replied:

Comment posted: 26/05/2024

Thanks Graham. That sounds like a(nother) dream combo! So many options.

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Philip Bovey on The Surface of Water, Grain, and the Search for the Perfect Scan.

Comment posted: 26/05/2024

This is a great piece.
Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Nik Stanbridge replied:

Comment posted: 26/05/2024

Thanks Phillip - kind of you to say so!

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Ibraar Hussain on The Surface of Water, Grain, and the Search for the Perfect Scan.

Comment posted: 26/05/2024

I usually use darkroom prints as a benchmark to determine how grain should look in a scanned image
I find digital camera scans to be quite a bit harsher

Lovely photography and writing
Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Nik Stanbridge replied:

Comment posted: 26/05/2024

I agree that darkroom grain is a thing to behold and I have many vintage prints from my 1980s darkroom days. Alas, I have little appetite for the darkroom these days having ‘switched’ to photogravure printing (an intaglio process) which I’ve written about here on 35MMC.

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Daniel Emerson replied:

Comment posted: 26/05/2024

Hi Ibraar, I would like a few more words to help me make meaning of your comment above. Regards Daniel

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Ibraar Hussain replied:

Comment posted: 26/05/2024

Darkroom prints soften the grain - even in prints from very fast film. Digital high res scanning sharpens it so much that I find it to be too sharp defined ugly and noise like. But I understand Nik enhances it for artistic effect. And for him it works. I prefer my old Epson 4990 as it isn’t a Sharp scanner and scans are softer - which I find pleasing and more so when scanning grainy fast images. Just my own opinions and not a criticism or anything of Nike’s lovely work

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Daniel Emerson on The Surface of Water, Grain, and the Search for the Perfect Scan.

Comment posted: 26/05/2024

Hi Nik,
Enjoyed the quirky, whimsical read. A different approach both subject wise and in the pursuit of projecting life from grey surfaces through your your management of grain. Talking of grain, if you had both time and inclination,I would be interested in seeing a.a highly enlarged section over an abrupt change in density to show grain patterns, so to to understand what you are achieving. This seems to be in the opposite direction to the work of Geoff Chaplain
Regards
Daniel
Dan Emerson.
Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Geoff Chaplin replied:

Comment posted: 26/05/2024

You're right Dan, I generally don't like intrusive grain preferring a more subtle fp4 level of grain on 8x10 prints. Having said that obvious grain sometimes works well with an image as with the plain areas in Nik's images.

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Nik Stanbridge replied:

Comment posted: 26/05/2024

Quirky and whimsical could be a phrase in my bio ;) And I’ll see what I can do re. the enlargement.

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Ibraar Hussain replied:

Comment posted: 26/05/2024

I preferred your scans from your Epson to the digital camera by the way Geoff. Smoother - sure they lacked the resolution and definition but were more pleasing to the eye

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Daniel Emerson replied:

Comment posted: 26/05/2024

Thanks Nik, Dan

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Daniel Emerson replied:

Comment posted: 26/05/2024

Yes Geoff, I sort of consider obtrusive grain as the enemy, But it plays out well in low light moody shots and there are really nice portraits around where grain is a feature. Thus, I am interested both Ibraar' s and Nik's approaches.

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Geoff Chaplin replied:

Comment posted: 26/05/2024

Fair enough - if we all did the same thing life would be boring.

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Andrea Taurisano on The Surface of Water, Grain, and the Search for the Perfect Scan.

Comment posted: 26/05/2024

Yet another fantastic discovery made here on 35mmc. I didn't know your work, Nik, and now I saved it among my very favorites. We seem to love the same aesthetics on our black & white stuff, and coincidentally have even ended up using the same gear (including the scanning part), fim and developer! But even more than the aesthetics of your images I'm inspired by your ability to find good subjects in just about anything around where you live. THAT is something worth practicing. I'll be following you waiting for more awsome images.
Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Nik Stanbridge replied:

Comment posted: 26/05/2024

Very kind of you Andrea. I’ll be looking out for your work now.

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Gary Smith on The Surface of Water, Grain, and the Search for the Perfect Scan.

Comment posted: 26/05/2024

First of all: brilliant images illustrating your article! I started my photo journey 50+ years ago and developed (and printed) a lot of Tri-X shots in my darkroom. I've only recently dipped my toe back into film and it gets sent out for processing/scanning. Once I get the scans back I often feel the need to run a denoise process on them. Recently I've been paying for enlargements of my film shots. We'll see where I end up.

Great article Nik!
Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Nik Stanbridge replied:

Comment posted: 26/05/2024

My darkroom journey, like yours, was several decades ago and hinged around Tri-X. I’m pretty much priced out of Kodak film stock these days hence the HP5.

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Jeffery Luhn on The Surface of Water, Grain, and the Search for the Perfect Scan.

Comment posted: 26/05/2024

Nik,
Loved the writing and pix. Tackling a subject that only dogs and young boys enjoy, is unusual!!! I try very hard to avoid grain with large film formats and HC110, but when there are broad areas of mid-tones punctuated by sparse details, grain adds needed texture. Isn't Rodinal great for that! I have a point source enlarger to further accentuate grain. Split filter printing makes it even more pronounced. Great article!
Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Nik Stanbridge replied:

Comment posted: 26/05/2024

I’m starting to enjoy the writing as much as the photography these days; in no small part thanks to comments like yours, so, thank you. And Rodinal?, I couldn’t imagine life without it now!

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Gary on The Surface of Water, Grain, and the Search for the Perfect Scan.

Comment posted: 26/05/2024

The scanning kit you mention may be what I have been waiting for. Nikon may have stopped making theirs. I'm glad to hear it won't be necessary to buy a D850 and that I can use the Z-mount macro lens. I ordered the JJC kit and my fingers are crossed for a glitch-free transaction with this Chinese company. Thanks for the tip. What software do you use to convert negatives to positives? I use Lightroom usually.
Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Nik Stanbridge replied:

Comment posted: 26/05/2024

For the neg/pos conversion I use Negative Lab Pro which is a Lightroom plugin. Not cheap but it’s very very good. Overkill for b/w though.

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Tony Warren on The Surface of Water, Grain, and the Search for the Perfect Scan.

Comment posted: 27/05/2024

Lovely images Nik and engrossing article. I too revere Rodinal, not used anything else for many years once I found it. And 1:50 seems to be the Goldilocks dilution for most things, even sub-miniature. I don't know how you post process but if you want clearly defined grain, "Clarity" in Affinity Photo provides it in spades.
Thanks again for the great read.
Tony.
Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Nik Stanbridge replied:

Comment posted: 27/05/2024

Thanks Tony. Rodinal has everything going for it. Acutance, sharpness, grain, shelf life… I do post on LR sand try to keep adjustments to a minimum but Clarity is available and sometimes used

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

David Tan on The Surface of Water, Grain, and the Search for the Perfect Scan.

Comment posted: 27/05/2024

Inspiring in many ways, sir. Beautiful and thought-provoking work from start to finish.
Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Graham Orbell on The Surface of Water, Grain, and the Search for the Perfect Scan.

Comment posted: 27/05/2024

I like your photos Nik. I like the graininess. Don’t take any notice of those who don’t like grain. There is no right or wrong in photography. There are too many experts in photography who make up rules to be followed. Your photos are your statements and your art. Ask Mollie your Springer she’ll agree. Tell the experts if you can be bothered, to look at pointillism. Look at the art of Georges Seurat and many others who paint with millions of dots rather than brush strokes. I doubt anyone tells them they should only use smooth brush strokes
I agree with you about using the JJC equipment for scanning. I’ve done some tests with it and it’s the way to go. But I’ve delayed setting it up because I needed to rebuild my e-bike and that took longer than I expected getting bits from China. But now that’s finished and seeing it’s winter and raining all over New Zealand I plan to get back to digitising with my JJC again. Being retired seems busier than working. Or maybe I take longer. Your grain is great. By the way talking of grain do you remember Cowboy Kate & Other Stories by Sam Haskins 1964? You might have been too young to read it.
Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Nik Stanbridge replied:

Comment posted: 27/05/2024

I was three when Cowboy Kate was published but came across Sam’s work a few years ago and even wrote here about one of the photos from CK, the final image in fact (https://www.35mmc.com/29/12/2021/the-influence-of-other-artists-on-my-work-by-nik-stanbridge/). And in writing that article I worked with Sam’s son, Ludwig. Small world!

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Graham Orbell replied:

Comment posted: 27/05/2024

Nik, that’s impressive, you worked with Sam’s son! Did you get a feeling for grain from Sam’s work? I was 26 and married, working both in photography and filming for TV. A photographer friend showed me Cowboy Kate. Then in my spare time I experimented with grain, enlarging small portions of 120 Tri X processed in D76. Made 4X5 positives then higher contrast 4X5 negatives to print from. It worked well but only one example has survived. It’s of a seagull, not a beautiful woman. I was not disciplined enough to document them. Besides I had to work for a living. Keep up your good work

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Nik Stanbridge replied:

Comment posted: 27/05/2024

I became bolder in my use of grain after my exposure to Sam’s work. The big revelation for me in relation to Sam’s work though was seeing his prints. He was, I believe, conservative in his printing volumes so seeing vintage prints live and in the flesh is relatively rare. I do hope Graham that you will share your seagull!

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Graham Orbell replied:

Comment posted: 27/05/2024

Nik, I’ll happily try to post my seagull on my Instagram page that I haven’t used for a while. Graham.Orbell

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Graham Orbell replied:

Comment posted: 27/05/2024

Nik, I’ve just now posted my seagull photo on Instagram graham.orbell. Not sure how else to send it to you

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Nik Stanbridge replied:

Comment posted: 27/05/2024

Thants quite something! Thanks for sharing it.

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

David Hume on The Surface of Water, Grain, and the Search for the Perfect Scan.

Comment posted: 27/05/2024

Love this Nik - All of it! Bravo.
Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Roger on The Surface of Water, Grain, and the Search for the Perfect Scan.

Comment posted: 27/05/2024

Fascinating to see the way you have created interesting images out of what many of us would have passed by without a glance. I agree with an earlier response that it would be interesting to know what they would look like if grain free, though I can understand why you made your choice over this. Useful to know about the JJC adapter too. I have been using either an Epson flatbed or an ancient Olympus bellows and film/slide copier but with the latter I am confined to old OM macro lenses, and though they are very good, it would be very tempting to find out whether the results would be any different with a more modern macro lens. It is tempting to get one, if only for the light source.
Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Nik Stanbridge replied:

Comment posted: 27/05/2024

One of the key benefits of the JJC is ease of use and the designed-in parallelism of the film and camera sensor. Highly recommended (speaking as a digitisation veteran)!

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Nik Stanbridge replied:

Comment posted: 27/05/2024

Thanks for jumping in Graham With my lens stopped down to f8, I’m getting exposure of 1/4s or so. That said, I’ve experimented with the JJC light source at different levels of brightness (with corresponding changes in shutter speed) to see if IQ was impacted. It made no difference. The important thing for me is repeatability hence my recommendation to use an LED light source. As Graham says, calibrated use of widow light works very well, but do think about those times when it’s sunny, or raining, or night… the JJC light is a small expense but adds valuable consistency. I second everything else Graham says. Use whatever in-camera capabilities you have to minimise vibration (shutter delays, mirror up, etc). AF is something I’ve struggled with but making sure it works in my process is crucial to me now. If you pick a lens the JJC supports you won’t look back. It will all fall into place.

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Roger replied:

Comment posted: 27/05/2024

Thanks for the advice. What sort of exposure results, for an average, properly exposed negative (or perhaps I should say your typical negative)? The reason I asked is your comment about the importance of a consistent light source. That made me experiment with my computer monitor (displaying a blank white page) or an iPad displaying the same, but that resulted in long exposures, of 8 seconds and upwards, especially if I stop down and use iso 100 for maximum quality, and though in principle my setup should be rigid and keep things parallel, there is a very tiny bit of play, probably in the Sony-OM adapter, and I wonder whether that might cause a problem. Of course, if I use a remote or delayed release, movement should not be a problem but perhaps it does and it slows the process of copying down.

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Graham Orbell replied:

Comment posted: 27/05/2024

Roger I hope Nik doesn’t mind me replying to you. Experimenting with the JJC I tried handholding it and pointing it at a window for light. ( did a custom white balance first.) I was repeating what some of the advertising images showed. The results were fine. Movement wasn’t an issue because it’s one piece. I m not recommending doing it that way. Best to have it mounted and use a two second delay. I am using a Canon 5D 4 with a Sigma 105 f2.8 OS macro ( stabilisation off ) A modern macro matched to your camera is much easier to work with. Viewing wide open and automatic stop down. Exposure data etc is recorded. Even auto focus works, which can be fine tuned on enlarged live view. My Sigma macro has a central focussing element and goes 1:1. The front element doesn’t move or rotate. I use the clip on JJC light which is excellent.

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Alexander Seidler on The Surface of Water, Grain, and the Search for the Perfect Scan.

Comment posted: 28/05/2024

Beautiful, Nik !
ps. did you try the Sigma Art 70/2,8 macro lens ?
Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Nik Stanbridge replied:

Comment posted: 28/05/2024

When my digitisation was based around a Sony A7r the lens I used was the Sigma ART 70/2.8 and I loved it. Very very sharp scans. That part of my journey died though when the Sony died. It became less and less reliable and I replaced it with the D810. And sold the Sigma.

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *