best black and white c41 film?

[Brad Maestas]

Before I returned to developing my own B&W at home, I shot both offerings for a couple of years. BW400CN is certainly fine-grained but of course that's not all there is to a good film. For many reasons I prefer XP2. In my area, XP2 only commands a very small premium over BW400CN so my choice was not swayed by price.

Out of the perhaps 150+ total rolls I took of both films, I only ordered prints a handful of times so 400CN's amber tint is of no real benefit to me. Furthermore, I plan on making prints in the future so that sealed the deal for me and XP2. It just happens that I also prefer its tonality to 400CN as well.

That said, now that I'm using trad B&W films again I am happy about both the tonality and the savings I am getting using them. I still have some XP2 and 400CN so I suppose I'll get around to shooting them again at some point.

 

[craygc]

Although these days I just dont like a C41 for B&W anywhere near as much as a traditional B&W emulsion, my preference in C41 are any of the ISO 160 colour print films.

 

[hlockwood]

Although these days I just dont like a C41 for B&W anywhere near as much as a traditional B&W emulsion, my preference in C41 are any of the ISO 160 colour print films.

Wow! What gorgeous tonality. Care to share how you converted from color to grayscale?

Harry

 

[venchka]

Not very many choices

Not very many choices

Just wondered what people thought was the best black and white film that can be processed at the local store? Can't develop at my flat at the moment so was going to buy a cheap bundle of film online... Thank you!

You only have 2 choices. Flip a coin. Or, use both.

 

[craygc]

Wow! What gorgeous tonality. Care to share how you converted from color to grayscale?

Harry

Thanx Harry, I have no problem in talking about what I do but unfortunately it isnt a workflow by numbers

For all 35mm scanning I use a Nikon 4000ED and a 9000ED for the medium format. I use Vuescan where everything is turned off except for the lightest ICE setting.

The hard to describe part is how I work the image. I'll try and you can ask as many questions as you need 🙂 Something Ive always done that seems to go against what most other do, is work directly on the original as a single layer; and to do this I use a Wacom tablet extensively.

First is looking at multiple colour filtration options for B&W conversion and saving the ones I like in certain areas as snapshots in PS. I then pick the version that has the best look overall. After this, using the History Brush and the tablet, I paint back in the tonality from the other versions only in the place and in the amounts I like - all freehand.

Then I'll pick on particular areas of the image to work at a time - so basically little to no global tonal adjustments. So what this means is (for example) choose a kids face (or background, etc) then make curve adjustments to achieve what you want - only for that area without any concern for how it affects other parts of the image. Then (in Photoshop) mark that state as a "history" state and return to the previous state; select the "history brush" tool and, depending on experience, with a brush opacity of 20% - 30% slowly hand paint (tablet pen and a soft-edge brush) in the areas you want to the level you want. I
always do this by freehand at a suitable magnification and never use masks. Other tricks with this approach is to increase white in the levels and via the history state process paint it in to improve contrast and/or tonality.

I can understand why nobody ever writes this as a workflow because you just cant do it as a set of numbered instructions, its time consuming and what you do will vary from image to image. My Mum has always made a living from painting and when I started seriously post-process images, I looked a lot towards many of the techniques she would using in her paintings to achieve an effect.

Then for sharpening I use an edge mask that is from a set of actions that used to exist on a site called www.pinkheadedbug.com years ago that have not been there for some time.

Basically, I use the same process for traditional B&W as well and I think its that part you are seeing more so than the conversion. If anything that doesnt make sense or more questions please feel free to ask...

 

[hlockwood]

Thanx Harry, I have no problem in talking about what I do but unfortunately it isnt a workflow by numbers

For all 35mm scanning I use a Nikon 4000ED and a 9000ED for the medium format. I use Vuescan where everything is turned off except for the lightest ICE setting.

The hard to describe part is how I work the image. I'll try and you can ask as many questions as you need 🙂 Something Ive always done that seems to go against what most other do, is work directly on the original as a single layer; and to do this I use a Wacom tablet extensively.

First is looking at multiple colour filtration options for B&W conversion and saving the ones I like in certain areas as snapshots in PS. I then pick the version that has the best look overall. After this, using the History Brush and the tablet, I paint back in the tonality from the other versions only in the place and in the amounts I like - all freehand.

Then I'll pick on particular areas of the image to work at a time - so basically little to no global tonal adjustments. So what this means is (for example) choose a kids face (or background, etc) then make curve adjustments to achieve what you want - only for that area without any concern for how it affects other parts of the image. Then (in Photoshop) mark that state as a "history" state and return to the previous state; select the "history brush" tool and, depending on experience, with a brush opacity of 20% - 30% slowly hand paint (tablet pen and a soft-edge brush) in the areas you want to the level you want. I
always do this by freehand at a suitable magnification and never use masks. Other tricks with this approach is to increase white in the levels and via the history state process paint it in to improve contrast and/or tonality.

I can understand why nobody ever writes this as a workflow because you just cant do it as a set of numbered instructions, its time consuming and what you do will vary from image to image. My Mum has always made a living from painting and when I started seriously post-process images, I looked a lot towards many of the techniques she would using in her paintings to achieve an effect.

Then for sharpening I use an edge mask that is from a set of actions that used to exist on a site called www.pinkheadedbug.com years ago that have not been there for some time.

Basically, I use the same process for traditional B&W as well and I think its that part you are seeing more so than the conversion. If anything that doesnt make sense or more questions please feel free to ask...

Thanks, Craig. I'm going to have to look more carefully into this because I'm not satisfied with my workflow - especially after seeing your beautiful images.

Right now I'm shooting only XP2, scanned on the 4000ED with NikonScan. I simply convert the tif file to Lab, toss the a and b channels, then convert to grayscale. Maybe too quick and dirty. I'll run a roll of color and see if I can get a better image, taking into account at least some of the steps you outline.

Thanks again,

Harry

 

[PatrickT]

Does anyone use the Fuji Neopan 400cn? I LOVE regular Neopan 400 and am wondering if these two would be at all similar. I realize it's not available in the US...

 

[Roger Hicks]

Does anyone use the Fuji Neopan 400cn? I LOVE regular Neopan 400 and am wondering if these two would be at all similar. I realize it's not available in the US...

No, but XP2 Super is. Who makes Neopan 400CN for Fuji?

Is Ilford going to make a better film for Fuji than they make for themselves? And conversely, is Fuji going to accept an inferior film to the best Ilford can make?

Cheers,

R.

 

[NickTrop]

I like both XP2 Super and Kodak CN. XP2 if you're going to do traditional prints, that's what it's designed for. Kodak CN if you're going to have it processed at the local drug store or camera shop on color paper. I think CN has a rich, grainless look I've grown to quite like. It doesn't look like traditional silver black and white, but it has its own distinctive look that I find appealing. Gets dissed by traditionalists but I think it's an underrated film. XP2 Super looks closer to a traditional black and white film...

Both are just fine. Buy a couple rolls of each, see which one you like better.