First roll of Kodak BW400CN

[jwnash1]

I just shot my first roll of Kodak BW400CN. I had Costco develop it and scan it to a CD without prints. The resulting images had a distinct reddish hue to them, which given the reddishness of the negatives in understandable. In order to get acceptable black and white images, I had to post process the image in Picture Window Pro using the same work flow I use to convert a digital image to Black and White. To compare, I scanned a negative on my HP S20. If I scan it as a color negative, it comes out pretty much like the CD scans. If I scan it as a B&W negative, it comes out very flat and low contrast, greyish but not snappy, dull and lifeless and takes equal if not more post processing. Is this normal or did Costco screw up the development. If this is normal, I must say it is a whole lot cheaper and and easier to shoot, develop, and scan TriX myself.
John

 

[batterytypehah!]

This film always has an orange base, just like other C-41 films. Is that what you're seeing?

Don't expect good scans (or prints, for that matter) from any supermarket/drugstore. They simply don't care to change their settings, so it gets treated as color.

I find scanning BW400CN at home very easy, though. Not familiar with your scanner but mine (Epson 4490) does an excellent job on B/W.

Could the low contrast be from underexposure? Like most color print films, it's better to overexpose. A number of RFF members rate it at 250 or 320.