brachal
Refrigerated User
The availability of Kodak BW 400CN (C41 process B+W) in 120 came up in another thread a couple of days ago. I got confirmation from Kodak that this film has been discontinued. I think it's a real shame. Hopefully the 35mm will stick around for a while. 
Krzys
Well-known
It did have a unique look..but trad B&W is for me.
Santtu Määttänen
Visual Poet
Real shame since I've been shooting this film quit a lot lately (since I've learned to enjoy lab developing and not messing with chemicals). I hope the Ilford XP2 Super doesn't drop off since then I would have to go almost fully to digital to do my black and whites..
chris00nj
Young Luddite
The discontinuation makes sense, because there is no convenience of 120 C-41. It is only convenient in 35mm due to the number of one hour photo labs.
How many places process 120? Any local labs that will process 120, will do both traditional B&W and C-41 B&W. If you take it to Walmart or Ritz Camera, they will ship it out for development which will take the same time as if they shipped out E-6 or B&W.
How many places process 120? Any local labs that will process 120, will do both traditional B&W and C-41 B&W. If you take it to Walmart or Ritz Camera, they will ship it out for development which will take the same time as if they shipped out E-6 or B&W.
Santtu Määttänen
Visual Poet
My local place runs on Agfa machines which process 120 along with 135 but they don't do sheet film or real black and white developing. Also they don't have profiles to do prints from 120 (except for 6x7) even if it does run throe their machines. I bet this is simlar is other places running on Agfa machines too (there are plenty around even if they're not made anymore).
Besides real black and white developing in a lab is bit hit and miss in my experience (even in pro places) so to get good results I would have to do them my self.
batterytypehah!
Lord of the Dings
Ugh. Sorry to have been the bearer of bad news, then (in the other thread).
This really stinx as I just found a couple more Brownies this weekend and finally want to take one out to shoot. I for one prefer to drop stuff off at Walmart, who knows how long it will last but at ~$1 for C-41 120 I'm not keen on souping my own.
This really stinx as I just found a couple more Brownies this weekend and finally want to take one out to shoot. I for one prefer to drop stuff off at Walmart, who knows how long it will last but at ~$1 for C-41 120 I'm not keen on souping my own.
bwidjaja
Warung Photo
@batterytypehah, how do you get $1 for C-41 120 at Walmart? Last time I dropped it they charged me $2.38 and it took 2 weeks. This is in Irving, TX.
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
My local shop sends everything out to a big lab in the south of the country. All shops in my 65,000+ town do. There's no benefit to be had from BW400CN where I live, or in the greater part of NL.
chris00nj
Young Luddite
In my town of 2.4 million people, there is one lab that processes 120 film. All other places send the film off to some other part of the country.
Santtu Määttänen
Visual Poet
And I live in town of under 30K people and we have lab that process film including 120
And there's labs in plenty of other cities too. And I know that I can get 120 processed in most of major cities in Europe and in some smaller ones too (Prague, Warsov, Paris and Barcelona come to mind at once and I know for a fact that there's plenty of others too). So I wouldn't call it rare, just that most places don't do it (like those kiosks that send stuff out or major grocery stores that do the same)
batterytypehah!
Lord of the Dings
I have not tried it myself yet but that price has been reported here on the forum (dev only, no prints). Look for posts by venchka, he's in TX as well.
It does take two weeks, at least E-6 does for me.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I can't say I'm surprised that Kodak would axe this film. Black and white c41 is a convenience film in 35mm for those that don't want to deal with pro labs and enjoy the convenience of chain store one hour processing. MF is a more considered photography choice generally and the photogs going with the bigger negatives generally want more control over the final results ... which they usually wont get with machine processing.
batterytypehah!
Lord of the Dings
Since the question has come up, here's one of those "120 pricing at Walmart" threads: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=77850
84 cents/roll in Houston at that time.
This one's over half a year old, may not be the last word and of course these things have a way of changing overnight.
84 cents/roll in Houston at that time.
This one's over half a year old, may not be the last word and of course these things have a way of changing overnight.
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
Not a terrible loss.
If this means more resource for Kodak to keep producing silver-only B&W films in 120 format, then more power to them.
If this means more resource for Kodak to keep producing silver-only B&W films in 120 format, then more power to them.
batterytypehah!
Lord of the Dings
But that's of course not what it means...
For Kodak to stop confectioning BW400CN in 120 means one thing only: fewer people are shooting 120. They make the emulsion, they have the choice into which formats to cut it, they decide to axe 120. Read: Not even worth our trouble to package and distribute this product.
How that can be good news is beyond me, whether you shoot 120 or 135, silver or chromogenic. It's bad news for all of us in the long run when choices dry up. Whether it's your own preferred choice that goes first is irrelevant.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
brachal
Refrigerated User
I think it's sad, but this is the way things are going to go. I wasn't upset when kodachrome went away; I never used it. I don't use BW 400CN in 120; I'm strictly a 35mm guy. But my wife shoots this in 120, and she's pissed. She's shot plenty of different black and white films over the years, but she recently started using 400CN because she loved the images. It's a really good film. The processing matters less than the results. And now that choice is gone. In my mind, this is a case of "things are darkest just before they go completely pitch black." It's not going to get better; it's just going to keep getting worse.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I don't understand why this film so popular ... I shot oodles of the stuff in 35mm until I got bored with the lack of flexibility and moved on to conventional black and white emulsions where I had a choice of speed and general look regarding grain etc.
It also scans poorly IMO ... the scanner gets confused by the orange mask and tends to produce low contrast scans.
It also scans poorly IMO ... the scanner gets confused by the orange mask and tends to produce low contrast scans.
JRG
Well-known
I thought that C-41 BW was popular among [designed for?] professional wedding photographers, especially in the 120 size. In which case, Kodak's decision may be more a matter of professional photographers, many using MF, having switched to digital than 'those that don't want to deal with pro labs and enjoy the convenience of chain store one hour processing'.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I remember reading some Kodak blurb about Portra NC being a recommended film for wedding shooters due to it's ability with skin tones... I wasn't aware that BW400CN was regarded in the same light though?
I also have an inherent distrust of C41 machines ... the local lab had one that sctratched a lot of my films ... colour and black and white! The one time I went back and mentioned it they told me it was obviously my camera marking the film during rewind and advance!