>>3910425>Grain is a large factor in both tonality (how many distinct tones can be represented)Yes.
>and is a factor in DRNo.
>you want to claim that 110 film has the same tonality and DR as 8x10.Of course it does.
One will be grainy as fuck and the other virtually grainless for the same print size.
But the zones that are clipped in one (be it highlights or shadows), they'll be clipped in the other too.
If emulsion size affected DR, everybody would be printing on larger sheets of paper (paper is just like film after all), to get more DR. The larger you go, the more DR. (And this would work since film has higher DR than paper anyway, so there's DR to spare).
And then by extension, a paper's contrast would change based on the sheet you picked.
This is obviously not the case.
>But if you have the same emulsion, thereby making other factors equal, then yes the larger format will show higher DR.Post an example.
I have never seen it in practice, and I have never seen it in theory, as the curves given by manufacturers are identical across formats.
The only slight difference, of no practical importance, is when film is coated on different bases across different formats, for structural rigidity. This can marginally affect base density (but not fog), and in fact in the opposite direction than you're implying (larger formats have thicker base and hence more density and "less" DR), but again this is of no practical importance whatsoever.
What *could* be of practical importance though, is that sometimes the different base (across formats) needs a different dev time. Some might forget that, and give the same dev as the film in smaller formats, resulting in different development and thus different contrast.
Maybe you saw something like that and got confused, I don't know.
But post the examples.
>you can dig deeper into the shadows...more total DR...on larger formats.How?
Once density isn't there, it won't magically appear - regardless of grain size for equal prints.
