...Kodak C-41 BW film?
I mean as far as contrast filters. Generally when I shoot B&W film I use a Yellow K2 filter to provide a little contrast. I haven't used filters when I have used the C-41 B&W. Can you use B&W filters as usual with these films?
I mean as far as contrast filters. Generally when I shoot B&W film I use a Yellow K2 filter to provide a little contrast. I haven't used filters when I have used the C-41 B&W. Can you use B&W filters as usual with these films?
jdos2
Well-known
I've tried XP2 and other C-41 stuff in medium format. Filters work as you'd expect. They are fun, if you can find someone to do your development for $2/roll!
Well, if it is just for myself I usually just use York for development, very inexpensive, and then scan the negatives.
Thanks for the quick answer. I worried that the color cast would show on the negatives and effect the image.
Thanks for the quick answer. I worried that the color cast would show on the negatives and effect the image.
jdos2
Well-known
I use the local pro shop for very similar service.
No color cast that I've ever detected- it's a single layer, not an integral tri-pack, so there's no chance of color shift. I've used a Wratten 25 and had nice dark skies, like I hoped for.
Of course, C-41 B&W tends to have a cast all its own- I've seen dark brown all the way through purple, but scanning yields very nice results, and the fact that it's a dye image, not silver-grain based seems to make 'em smoother, even if it's not necessarily true that they are.
No color cast that I've ever detected- it's a single layer, not an integral tri-pack, so there's no chance of color shift. I've used a Wratten 25 and had nice dark skies, like I hoped for.
Of course, C-41 B&W tends to have a cast all its own- I've seen dark brown all the way through purple, but scanning yields very nice results, and the fact that it's a dye image, not silver-grain based seems to make 'em smoother, even if it's not necessarily true that they are.
bmattock
Veteran
jdos2 said:
JD,
I agree, the consumer-grade Kodak B&W seems to be very nice, and yes, you can use filters on it just as you would 'normal' B&W film.
I also agree that the Kodak C-41 B&W seems to have a color cast - not unlike normal color C-41 negs. However, that may actually work to your advantage, as it seems to me that most dedicated negative scanners are set up to scan color C-41 optimally. I've scanned XP-2 Super, which has a clear-ish base like Tri-X, and although it may print better, it doesn't scan as well (at least for me).
I drop my C-41 film (color and B&W) off at the local grocery store, which has a 1-hour photo kiosk. I tell them to develop, cut, and sleeve the negs only, no printing. $2 USD per roll, they don't seem to charge extra for 36 instead of 24, and they don't scratch up my negs - they scan nice and clean.
I scan with Vuescan, set to color negative. Then I convert to B&W in Photoshop Elements. I tried scanning as B&W, but it didn't turn out as well.
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
Kodak offers three different C-41 process B&W films... all ISO 400. Portra BW is the professional-grade chromogenic, and Kodak 400 BW is the low-end film. Both of these have the orange mask typical of color C-41 films, and are intended to print well on automated lab machines.
Kodak T400CN is the enthusiast's film, intended for traditional B&W paper, not the color papers usual in the lab machines. Like Ilford XP2 Super, T400CN has no orange mask. If printed on variable contrast B&W paper, the orange mask would make it very difficult to control the contrast, as this is done with yellow or magenta filters in the enlarger.
Not having done any scanning myself yet, I'd think the masked films would scan using essentially the same settings as for color negs. And once the scanner controls are set for unmasked B&W negs, those films should scan as well.
I've never used a masked B&W chromogenic, having started with Ilford XP1 some 20 years ago, also using the similar (discontinued) Agfa Vario-XL. I just picked up a roll of Kodak T400CN to try. I like chromogenics!
Kodak T400CN is the enthusiast's film, intended for traditional B&W paper, not the color papers usual in the lab machines. Like Ilford XP2 Super, T400CN has no orange mask. If printed on variable contrast B&W paper, the orange mask would make it very difficult to control the contrast, as this is done with yellow or magenta filters in the enlarger.
Not having done any scanning myself yet, I'd think the masked films would scan using essentially the same settings as for color negs. And once the scanner controls are set for unmasked B&W negs, those films should scan as well.
I've never used a masked B&W chromogenic, having started with Ilford XP1 some 20 years ago, also using the similar (discontinued) Agfa Vario-XL. I just picked up a roll of Kodak T400CN to try. I like chromogenics!
Oh, and to address Rover's filter question, it's been answered well, and I'll just observe that Ilford's XP film seems to have a bit less blue-sensitivity than the usual silver-based film. At least, skies seem a bit darker, maybe as if a skylight filter was used or maybe even a pale yellow.
Also note my shadow picture entries in this month's theme gallery were all shot on Ilford XP2 with an orange filter fitted to the lens.
Also note my shadow picture entries in this month's theme gallery were all shot on Ilford XP2 with an orange filter fitted to the lens.
Thanks again guys. For B&W I really like Tri-X, and am trying HP5+, but I have a few rolls of the 400BW which also appeals to me. It does have a smooth quality and really knocks the cost of developing B&W down.
I still haven't developed my first batch of film yet. I have been practicing with my reel and probably will shortly. It will be 120 HP5+ with HC-110.
I still haven't developed my first batch of film yet. I have been practicing with my reel and probably will shortly. It will be 120 HP5+ with HC-110.