In this audio blog I discuss my testing results for Kodak P3200 at an EI of 6400 for hand-held pinhole and zone plate photography as well as the new direction Part 3 in this series will explore. Click on the Audio Logo to listen…
LINK: TMY-2 @ 1600 article here on FR.
Figital Revolution 
Please remember to be more specific in your podcasts. I did not hear you mention the film format size you were using when you discussed zone plate, film and developer choices. This can make a substantial difference, as medium format grain is more tolerable since it is enlarged less.
Also, you should mention the reduced tolerance in exposure that scanning has compared to traditional darkroom work. In the darkroom you can overexpose a LOT and get good or at least usable images, but scanners don’t offer the same generous tolerances, and thin negatives tend to scan best. Very important to mention this to those starting a ‘figital’ workflow.
Elliot… I did mention that I am using a Leica M7 and Leica M film: cameras that are only 35mm… also Kodak P3200 is only available in 35mm. I also disagree with the statement that darkroom completed negative to print process has a more generous tolerance as this is just incorrect… it depends on the scanner you are using, the skill level of the scanner operator and the color space/ tone cure you are scanning into. There is far more control for expansion and compression of tone using a non linear tone curve in good scanning software than any graded or VC paper could ever offer. There are many negatives that I have scanned and printed where the scanner, in my case and Imacon, can scan and keep clean highlight and shadow detail in a manner that would be impossible or near impossible in the darkroom without the use of a mask or a lot of bleach. Where you are correct is in the fact that 35mm does indeed have more grain than 120 or LF film… always the case in both the traditional and a “figital” workflow.
Stephen