alexz
Well-known
I wasn't aware until recently that Kodak has replaced their T400CN by BW400CN film.
I'm interested to ehar user's opinion on the new one comparative to T400CN. Is it different ? Do you consider it better or worse ? Why ?
Thanks, Alex
I'm interested to ehar user's opinion on the new one comparative to T400CN. Is it different ? Do you consider it better or worse ? Why ?
Thanks, Alex
venchka
Veteran
Get in touch with this man. He has used both better than any mere mortal.
geebeephoto
While you're there, take a look at Graham's work. He was using T400CN until about 3-6 months ago when he switched to BW400CN. EDIT TO CLARIFY: He used the older film until his supply ran out. He is now using the newer film.
geebeephoto
While you're there, take a look at Graham's work. He was using T400CN until about 3-6 months ago when he switched to BW400CN. EDIT TO CLARIFY: He used the older film until his supply ran out. He is now using the newer film.
Last edited:
alexz
Well-known
Thanks a lot, just did.
rogue_designer
Reciprocity Failure
I have not noticed any difference between the Portra BW400, it's replacement T400CN, or BW400CN
That doesn't mean a difference isn't there - just that I havn't noticed any. I have rated all of them at 250-320 and gotten consistently good results. Almost good enough to make me wonder why I still bother with regular 400 speed bw film.
That doesn't mean a difference isn't there - just that I havn't noticed any. I have rated all of them at 250-320 and gotten consistently good results. Almost good enough to make me wonder why I still bother with regular 400 speed bw film.
alexz
Well-known
Is Portra BW400 older then T400CN ? I did not know that...
I shot my first B&W roll (B&W C41) with T400CN - wasn't dissapointed, but thought perhaps the newer one will be better somehow then its acestor...
BTW, why people tend to rate T400CN third to half stop slower then it rated by manufacturer ? I wonder perhaps would I rate it also at 320 I would get even better results ? What do I earn with slight overesxpoure with this particular film ?
Have little clue in all that yet...
I shot my first B&W roll (B&W C41) with T400CN - wasn't dissapointed, but thought perhaps the newer one will be better somehow then its acestor...
BTW, why people tend to rate T400CN third to half stop slower then it rated by manufacturer ? I wonder perhaps would I rate it also at 320 I would get even better results ? What do I earn with slight overesxpoure with this particular film ?
Have little clue in all that yet...
VinceC
Veteran
The film has extremely wide exposure latitude -- it will properly expose from ISO 50/100 to ISO 800. Basically, the grain size decreases with lower ISO and increases with higher ISO, becoming noticeable at 800 and unacceptable above it. Shooting around 200 gives more pleasing tones with a smooth grainless feel. I'm no expert in this, but I use the film a lot and enjoy it.
alexz
Well-known
Thanks Vince, let me understand you correctly:
do you mean exposing it at 200 but processing as nominal 400 ? We aren't alkign about pulling, right ? Just a plain overexposure ?
do you mean exposing it at 200 but processing as nominal 400 ? We aren't alkign about pulling, right ? Just a plain overexposure ?
rogue_designer
Reciprocity Failure
pretty much just plain overexposure - it tends to even out the grain and give better overall tones - to my eyes anyway. Certainly the number of shots acceptably exposed are higher when I just act as though it's a 250 (I don't use a meter often when shooting street - so I have a bit more latitude)
In general c41 films can be overexposed with better results than underexposure - so I like to buffer that direction.
In general c41 films can be overexposed with better results than underexposure - so I like to buffer that direction.
venchka
Veteran
alexz said:
Sorry, Vince. I got carried away.
Correct. Plian over/under exposure. The film goes in an automated processing machine along with all the rest of the film. Processing is the same. Only exposure changes. Thanks for confirming that it is ok to shoot at 800. I have wished for an extra stop on occasion.
Benjamin Marks
Veteran
Kodak Professional BW400CN Film is a multi-purpose 400-speed black-and-white chromogenic film designed for processing in color negative chemistry and printing on color negative paper.
T400CN is a chromogenic film designed for processing in color negative chemistry and printing on b&w silver paper. You can also print through it to produce a "color" C-print, but the base on T400CN can produce odd or inconsistent results (sometimes brown, warm-black, sometimes blue) if the color processor is not properly calibrated or if the photographer has not specified the color cast he wants in his pix. I think that BW400CN was introduced to deal with this, although more's the pity as it is one fewer film stock available for printing in the darkroom.
Ben
T400CN is a chromogenic film designed for processing in color negative chemistry and printing on b&w silver paper. You can also print through it to produce a "color" C-print, but the base on T400CN can produce odd or inconsistent results (sometimes brown, warm-black, sometimes blue) if the color processor is not properly calibrated or if the photographer has not specified the color cast he wants in his pix. I think that BW400CN was introduced to deal with this, although more's the pity as it is one fewer film stock available for printing in the darkroom.
Ben
Last edited:
Dougg
Seasoned Member
I believe T400CN was the only of several Kodak C41 B&W films not to have the orange mask typical of C41 color films. An orange mask makes it easier to print the B&W neg with automated machines on color paper such as at the local 1 hour lab. But the mask makes it less convenient in the traditional darkroom, especially with multi-contrast B&W papers.
This has been one of the advantages of Ilford's XP series B&W films; no bothersome mask. (Same for Fuji Neopan 400 CN) It has a faint but noticeable blue/purple tint to the film base. Kodak T400CN has a faint but noticeable pink/orange tint to the film base that is not nearly as strongly colored as the orange mask in Kodak BW400CN or the typical color neg film.
So this issue of the orange mask may affect your purchase choice. Both films can be printed well at the local lab but a lack of orange mask makes for a bit more work and smarts required of the operator. In the darkroom the mask interferes with use of variable contrast filters.
I have had C41 films push-processed one stop's worth, and in my experience this is a formula for blocking up brighter areas. OTOH, typically C41-process films are "bullet-proof" when it comes to highlights; there's almost always some detail that can be squeezed out of them! These films are very tolerant of overexposure (but maybe not so tolerant of overdevelopment) but certainly not very tolerant of underexposure. The shadow areas lose detail and texture and gain grain (and ugly greenish tint in color films). A bit of overexposure gives margin for error while smoothing grain, increasing color saturation, and adding richness to the shadows. I usually set my meter for 2/3 stop under box speed.
This has been one of the advantages of Ilford's XP series B&W films; no bothersome mask. (Same for Fuji Neopan 400 CN) It has a faint but noticeable blue/purple tint to the film base. Kodak T400CN has a faint but noticeable pink/orange tint to the film base that is not nearly as strongly colored as the orange mask in Kodak BW400CN or the typical color neg film.
So this issue of the orange mask may affect your purchase choice. Both films can be printed well at the local lab but a lack of orange mask makes for a bit more work and smarts required of the operator. In the darkroom the mask interferes with use of variable contrast filters.
I have had C41 films push-processed one stop's worth, and in my experience this is a formula for blocking up brighter areas. OTOH, typically C41-process films are "bullet-proof" when it comes to highlights; there's almost always some detail that can be squeezed out of them! These films are very tolerant of overexposure (but maybe not so tolerant of overdevelopment) but certainly not very tolerant of underexposure. The shadow areas lose detail and texture and gain grain (and ugly greenish tint in color films). A bit of overexposure gives margin for error while smoothing grain, increasing color saturation, and adding richness to the shadows. I usually set my meter for 2/3 stop under box speed.
rogue_designer
Reciprocity Failure
Huh - good to know about the orange mask difference - I didn't really use the T400CN much as I had a large stock of frozen Portra BW400. Thanks for the clarification.
Kodak's site says this is a direct replacement for the Portra BW, and will also replace the T400CN, but makes no mention of what, if any, other changes there are between them.
Kodak's site says this is a direct replacement for the Portra BW, and will also replace the T400CN, but makes no mention of what, if any, other changes there are between them.
d30gaijin
Noctilusting
My experience is consistent with Doug's post. I much prefer the T400CN and bought up what I could locally before it was gone. It makes a much better B&W print on B&W paper. The orange tinted base of BW400CN is intended to make a better B&W print on color paper in drugstore color machines but I don't find that to be entirely true. It still requires additional knowledge by the machine operator and too many of them don't have that knowledge, hence the prints still come out with odd tints.
I haven't tried printing BW400CN on B&W peper so can't speak on how that comes out, but I have a feeling it won't be what was originally wanted. But then again, I've been wrong plenty of times before.
Don
I haven't tried printing BW400CN on B&W peper so can't speak on how that comes out, but I have a feeling it won't be what was originally wanted. But then again, I've been wrong plenty of times before.
Don
alexz
Well-known
Well, direct printing doesn't bother me a lot - I always scan and print from a processed file. I guess the mask (orange or whatever) doesn't affect scanning though (my regular color C41 and E6 films get scanned just fine).
Thanks a lot, Alex
Thanks a lot, Alex
Dougg
Seasoned Member
I think you're right, Alex; the mask doesn't interfere with getting a fine scan, though the presence of the mask must somewhat reduce the dynamic range of the film.
rogue_designer
Reciprocity Failure
Dougg said:
Since the same mask value is added to both highlight and shadow densities - it should be a zero sum - no change in dynamic range. The only difficulty would be if the addition of the orange mask pushed the density too deep for the scanner to penetrate in highlights.
VinceC
Veteran
>>Sorry, Vince. I got carried away.<<
No problem.
Yes, I was talking about over-exposing without changing the processing, as others have said. I tend to not use a meter when I'm shooting, and this film has so much latitude that I've never lost a shot due to poor exposure (though I have gotten pretty grainy on some low-light shots).
I scan all my negatives, so the color tint isn't a problem.
No problem.
Yes, I was talking about over-exposing without changing the processing, as others have said. I tend to not use a meter when I'm shooting, and this film has so much latitude that I've never lost a shot due to poor exposure (though I have gotten pretty grainy on some low-light shots).
I scan all my negatives, so the color tint isn't a problem.
R
Richard Black
Guest
I've used all of Kodak's C-41 and I can't say that there is a difference that is readily discernible; however, I prefer the T400CN to the others. I don't think it has as pronounce color cast, but that is just a guess. It is just a slight bit differnt.
VinceC
Veteran
The negatives do scan with a hint of green, which becomes more noticeable if I do any burning, so I have to remove the color in photoshop.
MCTuomey
Veteran
before jeff ascough (the wonderful wedding photog) went digital, he used BW400CN in M cameras and had it processed and printed locally (England) for his clients. iirc, i read that he rated the film at 320. his files look as grain-free as any 400 speed film could be, imho. coupled with the convenience factor when time is short and their good scanning behavior, it's hard not to like the C-41 B&W films, i think.