Black and white film for the non-developer (Kodak BW 400CN)

[yossarian]

The chromagenic conundrum

The chromagenic conundrum

I don't care what the manufacturers claim, NONE of these films is ISO 400. And any negs exposed at EI 400 will be too thin to print well on most minilabs.
For some distinctions: XP2 prints better on conventional B&W paper, where it shows higher accutance. It stinks on color paper. In any case, try exposing it at EI 250.
T MAX CN (and variants) has somewhat finer grain than XP2 and all conventional B&W films of the same rated speed (just remember that the "grain" is in fact clouds of vegetable dye). According to my own experience both shooting and lab-printing, CN's actual speed is about 160. I've even taped over the DX contacts and shot CN in point & shoot cameras (which forces a default to ISO 100)
and the negs are beautiful.
Another detail--the first generation CN had a more nearly clear base than other Kodak C41 B&W. The heavier, more orange base of the later films were supposed to make them easier to print on color paper; it didn't always work out that way. The only right way to print these films is with a dedicated channel on the printer--anything else is hit or miss.
yossarian

 

[Indrek]

thanks Richard, i gues I got it 🙂. I think the problem is I`m to much under the digital pressure. Looking at the monitor I have forgotten the paper.
actualli the best "prints" I have ever seen where plastik! prints meltan on heated metal. Thats Mark Vaher`s authot tehnique, they are colour prints but thats not the point. the point is the "paper". I`m gone setup a search now for the grainiest paper I gan find 🙂 And a realli graini film of gourse, thats a bigger problem because my local labs acsept c41 only.

 

[wlewisiii]

Just as an FYI, the shots I posted today to my gallery are on BW400CN at EI200. I feel there is at least a definate improvement in shadow detail.

William

 

[Will]

Just as an FYI, the shots I posted today to my gallery are on BW400CN at EI200. I feel there is at least a definate improvement in shadow detail.

William

Hi Will

You use the BW400 @ 200, you also get it process as 200?

 

[Doug]

No, Will; vary the exposure index all over the map if you like, but processing is the standard C-41, like all color neg film. No adjustments, pulls, pushes. Films that use this process typically have very little underexposure tolerance, but lots of overexposure tolerance. So being generous with your exposure helps avoid those yukky featureless shadows, and highlights are almost impossible to burn out anyway. Also, the extra exposure leads to tighter dye clumps in the processed neg for a smoother less grainy look. I typically give these films, including chromogenic B&W films, about 2/3 stop extra exposure; for example EI 250 for an ISO 400 film. But don't tell the lab; it'd only confuse them unnecessarily! 🙂

 

[Will]

No, Will; vary the exposure index all over the map if you like, but processing is the standard C-41, like all color neg film. No adjustments, pulls, pushes. Films that use this process typically have very little underexposure tolerance, but lots of overexposure tolerance. So being generous with your exposure helps avoid those yukky featureless shadows, and highlights are almost impossible to burn out anyway. Also, the extra exposure leads to tighter dye clumps in the processed neg for a smoother less grainy look. I typically give these films, including chromogenic B&W films, about 2/3 stop extra exposure; for example EI 250 for an ISO 400 film. But don't tell the lab; it'd only confuse them unnecessarily! 🙂

Doug, so, shoots at 250, but process as 400. 😎

Do you allow the lap's shooter to adjust you photo C41 B&W?

I only ever use it at 400 and ask those people not to touch my photos.

 

[Ray Kilby]

I am not particularly technical, but these are my thoughts on C41. B/W film. I also find that if you rate the c41 400 asa b/w neg film at 250/300 asa you get very good results. But I have found that sometimes you simply have to shoot it at 400 asa as you need a bit of speed, and to be fair it does OK. (Not superb, but OK.) I also find that you can rate this film between frames. Sometimes I shoot art 250, then change it to 400, even 600. You always get a result. It's a bit like using a digital camera. The frames differ as the clumps change dramatically, but thats sort of fun. But for me the best reason for using the B/W c41 film is that it scans so well. (Very even density neg, which a digital processs likes.) If you are not traditional paper printer, but do your prints on a computer, then these type of B/W film are very useful indeed.

 

[Kat]

I don't care what the manufacturers claim, NONE of these films is ISO 400.

Is this also true for traditional B&W? What about if the film is rated at 100 ISO--would those be more accurately true?

 

[Poptart]

It's like videotape vs. film. Video just can't match the emotional range of film. You need that silver--the more the better. And you don't need a darkroom to develop B&W film anyway, so what's the problem?

 

[Socke]

so I'm thinking about using Kodak BW 400CN instead and would appreciate your opinions of this film.

This folder contains the medium sized scans from BW400CN right from the lab Matanzas in B/W

I wanted XP2 but couldn't get it and the Tri-X I ordered came one day after I left for Cuba 🙂

 

[Will]

I am not particularly technical, but these are my thoughts on C41. B/W film. I also find that if you rate the c41 400 asa b/w neg film at 250/300 asa you get very good results. But I have found that sometimes you simply have to shoot it at 400 asa as you need a bit of speed, and to be fair it does OK. (Not superb, but OK.) I also find that you can rate this film between frames. Sometimes I shoot art 250, then change it to 400, even 600. You always get a result. It's a bit like using a digital camera. The frames differ as the clumps change dramatically, but thats sort of fun. But for me the best reason for using the B/W c41 film is that it scans so well. (Very even density neg, which a digital processs likes.) If you are not traditional paper printer, but do your prints on a computer, then these type of B/W film are very useful indeed.

No, Will; vary the exposure index all over the map if you like, but processing is the standard C-41, like all color neg film. No adjustments, pulls, pushes. Films that use this process typically have very little underexposure tolerance, but lots of overexposure tolerance. So being generous with your exposure helps avoid those yukky featureless shadows, and highlights are almost impossible to burn out anyway. Also, the extra exposure leads to tighter dye clumps in the processed neg for a smoother less grainy look. I typically give these films, including chromogenic B&W films, about 2/3 stop extra exposure; for example EI 250 for an ISO 400 film. But don't tell the lab; it'd only confuse them unnecessarily! 🙂

Thanks for the advice guys, since no push/pull, will give it a try this week.

What I worry most, is that those people try to adjust my photos, or recommand me for that.. this is not what I want.

...Works well also at 200., scans easier with cheap scanners than silver based film does...

Is this too much?

 

[phototone]

To clear up a bit of confusion in the previous posts. The C-41 process, which all of these chromogenic films use, and all color negative film uses, is a fixed process. The film is processed in a machine with fixed time and temperature. All C-41 films get processed for the same exact time, regardless of what film or ISO they are. If you rate a C-41 film at an ISO other than the manufacturers rating, you are either underexposing or overexposing. This is not necessarily a bad thing, though, as for more shadow detail you overexpose. Being dye-based images, the highlight density will never block-up as it can with silver based images. So in effect, when you over-expose chromagenic b/w films you are lowering contrast, bring up the shadows closer to the highlights. There is a maximum highlight value corrresponding to the maximum amount of dye that can be released in the film. All the dye (as dye-couplers) is incorporated into the film when it is manufactured. Even it you were to process C-41 film manually (as I have done in my own lab), where you extend the developer time, you do not actually gain much in maximum highlight density.

 

[Doug]

Found a B&W Lab with an outlet in the small time I station in...

Said in the context of BW400CN, this brings up one concern about labs. The chromogenic B&W films form an odd little niche right between traditional B&W films and color neg films. They are not so common as these other films, so on occasion will lead to confusion at the lab.

The counter clerk may see the film cannister says "Black & White" and put it into the line for traditional B&W processing, which will pretty much ruin the film. When presenting my chromogenic film at the lab I point to the place on the cannister where it says "Process C-41", whereupon the clerk can just put the film in line for C41 color processing. Thinking is such a strain... 😀

But once the negs have been developed, they should be treated --ideally-- as any other B&W neg as far as printing and scanning are concerned. Most labs I think don't divert the film out of the normal C-41 sequence, just printing onto color paper, but it's quite difficult to avoid an overall tint in the prints. BW400CN's orange mask is helpful with color paper. But I would prefer they print onto traditional B&W paper...

Might be good to shop around for a lab that is familiar and comfortable with this, and does the best print. I also like a lab where the processing machinery is in a controlled/filtered atmosphere, not just out in the open behind the counter. And you don't want them dragging your uncut roll of film across the floor from the developer machine to the printing machine!

Hopefully your small-town lab willl do a good job for you, but it helps to be alert to the potential problems! 🙂

 

[peter_n]

Is this also true for traditional B&W? What about if the film is rated at 100 ISO--would those be more accurately true?

In my case yes, except for !00ASA! I rate NP1600 at 1250 and process at 1600, NP400 at 320 and process at 400, but I rate and process Acros at 100. 🙂

 

[Nikon Bob]

Will

Rating Kodak C41 B&W at 200 is not too much. The car photos in my gallery were shot rating Kodak C41 B&W at 100 as I was using a yellow filter at the time. It seems to work. If you check Ilfords home site and read the PDF on XP2 super I think you will find they claim it can be rated at iso 50 to 800 and developed as usual at a mini lab with no special instructions for push/pull processing.

Bob

 

[Will]

Will

Rating Kodak C41 B&W at 200 is not too much. The car photos in my gallery were shot rating Kodak C41 B&W at 100 as I was using a yellow filter at the time. It seems to work. If you check Ilfords home site and read the PDF on XP2 super I think you will find they claim it can be rated at iso 50 to 800 and developed as usual at a mini lab with no special instructions for push/pull processing.

Bob

Bob,

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=17038&cat=500&page=1

Love this one.

Been looking hard at the 120s I done with BW400 (Shot @ 400), they do lacks the details in the dark area (simple flat-black...)

EI100 with a Yellow Filter, this I am gonna try. Used a yellow filter & EI400 before, verythings cameout ugly 🙁

Said in the context of BW400CN, this brings up one concern about labs. The chromogenic B&W films form an odd little niche right between traditional B&W films and color neg films. They are not so common as these other films, so on occasion will lead to confusion at the lab.

The counter clerk may see the film cannister says "Black & White" and put it into the line for traditional B&W processing, which will pretty much ruin the film. When presenting my chromogenic film at the lab I point to the place on the cannister where it says "Process C-41", whereupon the clerk can just put the film in line for C41 color processing. Thinking is such a strain... 😀

But once the negs have been developed, they should be treated --ideally-- as any other B&W neg as far as printing and scanning are concerned. Most labs I think don't divert the film out of the normal C-41 sequence, just printing onto color paper, but it's quite difficult to avoid an overall tint in the prints. BW400CN's orange mask is helpful with color paper. But I would prefer they print onto traditional B&W paper...

Might be good to shop around for a lab that is familiar and comfortable with this, and does the best print. I also like a lab where the processing machinery is in a controlled/filtered atmosphere, not just out in the open behind the counter. And you don't want them dragging your uncut roll of film across the floor from the developer machine to the printing machine!

Hopefully your small-town lab willl do a good job for you, but it helps to be alert to the potential problems! 🙂

Doug, the lap I use now is a local chain store, with better C41 B&W then those I tried in Hong Kong, really no orange/blueish tints, I guess I am lucky.

Think I can get the film C41-developed, and printed on B&W paper. When you ask a Lab to print on B&W paper, do you specify anything (for both C41 B&W or D76)? I have no experiences with that yet (only got as far as C41 B&W).

 

[Doug]

Think I can get the film C41-developed, and printed on B&W paper. When you ask a Lab to print on B&W paper, do you specify anything (for both C41 B&W or D76)? I have no experiences with that yet (only got as far as C41 B&W).

Hi-- D76 is a developer for traditional B&W films, not for Process C-41 films. Nor for B&W paper, so it has no part in this. 🙂 I just ask that the prints be made on B&W paper. My local lab prints with B&W paper up to 5x7 size, not any larger, and I only just recently discovered this option was available.

 

[Will]

Hi-- D76 is a developer for traditional B&W films, not for Process C-41 films. Nor for B&W paper, so it has no part in this. 🙂 I just ask that the prints be made on B&W paper. My local lab prints with B&W paper up to 5x7 size, not any larger, and I only just recently discovered this option was available.

Been through my B&W photos again. The photos from 135 were printed on Fuji Frontier and the 120 were printed on either Fuji Frontier or Kodak Royal.

😱 😱 😱

I perfer the Kodak Royal ones as they have depths in the darker area (on those photos), are they all colour papers?

Being an annoying customer, I call up again. They do C41 B&W and also D-76 B&W with manual printing. Knowage on the C41 areuseful, in Hong Kong D-76 processing is expensive and hard to find...