Nh3
Well-known
... Buy the cheapest C41 color film from your local drugstore, shoot and get it developed. It will look atrocious with off colors and other issues but scan it and then convert it to b&w with your favorite post processing software. You'd get the 'the look of b&w film' and yet with the fine grain of color film which after converting to b&w comes out distinctly.
And since this is an experiment, compare a scan of your b&w film to a color one later converted to b&w.
I have attached a picture below which i took last winter with a Yashica GT - the film was a no-name $2 ISO 200 from local drugstore. The actual color version is useless.
Its not a great picture but it makes my point, you can download it and zoom to see the grain.
/Damn typo on the title - i meant obsolete!
And since this is an experiment, compare a scan of your b&w film to a color one later converted to b&w.
I have attached a picture below which i took last winter with a Yashica GT - the film was a no-name $2 ISO 200 from local drugstore. The actual color version is useless.
Its not a great picture but it makes my point, you can download it and zoom to see the grain.
/Damn typo on the title - i meant obsolete!
Attachments
Gumby
Veteran
I suppose this works, if lack of grain is a mjjor objective. Some people still like grain and that's why the traditional B&W emulsions like Tri-X still exist.
TimM
Member
I can develop B&W at home but can't color - so no thanks 
Developing is - at least for me - one of the things why i shoot film! Always a personal touch.
Developing is - at least for me - one of the things why i shoot film! Always a personal touch.
photogdave
Shops local
You are wise beyond words...
nanthor
Well-known
Not a good picture for an example, not enough range, is there a white cat in the foreground?
nanthor
Well-known
I take that back, there's plenty of range, I meant midtones. Bob.
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
It isn't the same. Color neg films have lower acutance and the tonality looks muddier. You can do some photoshop work to remedy the tonality somewhat, but it still isn't up to the standard of BW film. Why would you do this anyway unless you also wanted color photos at the same time? If that's the case you'd not buy the cheapest color film, you'd get good pro film. Doing that will give you nice color and acceptable but not the best BW.
Avotius
Some guy
Im not convinced, the tones are not very good looking in that shot. I have done a lot of digital black and white conversion work from color film, black and white is still a better way to get a high quality end result. And besides if you are going to try and show this point you should use a "great" picture that shows off all the points you are trying to make, im not sure that shot is it.
40oz
...
sorry, I'm with everyone else. C-41 films are not the same as B&W.
I'll keep scanning B&W, thank you very much.
I'll keep scanning B&W, thank you very much.
J J Kapsberger
Well-known
Although the C41 BW films do seem to scan very well at home. From what I've seen.
Dave Wilkinson
Veteran
My favourite b+w for scanning is XP2 (or other chromogenic)....especially if I don't want grain.
Dave.
Dave.
Nh3
Well-known
This is an experiment and I'm not saying its an absolute fact. Find out for yourself.
To me photography is about experimenting.
To me photography is about experimenting.
Nh3
Well-known
That's right, not only that but all C41 developed films scan way better. Is C41 negatives 'thinner'?
Avotius
Some guy
I have had excellent results with c41 black and white films, especially xp2, not so much the kodak....xp2 is excellent though:
Nh3
Well-known
Yes, the color negatives will look like crap but then transform them to B&W and you'll be surprised.
MartinP
Veteran
Am I the only person who likes printing on silver-paper in the dark ?!
photogdave
Shops local
spkennedy3000
www.simonkennedy.net
No way is this true - you are describing the same process as used for digital BW conversions. You can get some nice results but not the same and not, in my opinion, as nice as real BW film.
Also film scans cannot be pushed around the same way that putty-digital can - so the conversions are limited in scope in a way that digital ones are not. If you try to for example darken a blue sky too much it can become a horrible mess with a film scan.
For me one of the major reasons to shoot film is that it already "looks right" and does not need endless tweaking in Photoshop. Otherwise why bother with film in the firs place if not for its inherent film look, which varies from film to film.
Also film scans cannot be pushed around the same way that putty-digital can - so the conversions are limited in scope in a way that digital ones are not. If you try to for example darken a blue sky too much it can become a horrible mess with a film scan.
For me one of the major reasons to shoot film is that it already "looks right" and does not need endless tweaking in Photoshop. Otherwise why bother with film in the firs place if not for its inherent film look, which varies from film to film.
Avotius
Some guy
Am I the only person who likes printing on silver-paper in the dark ?!
here here here! Second bedroom of the apartment is a darkroom
Nh3
Well-known
Ok boss, I will do what you say. Is there anything else I should be aware of?
...
Look people, this is just a post if you don't agree with it thats fine, otherwise please don't start a flame war and relive your passive aggressive tendencies.
cheers,