Konica C-41 B&W door prizes

fraley

fraley

Beware of Claws
Local time
2:35 PM
Joined
Sep 6, 2004
Messages
516
I just posted some pics from my first roll of Konica C-41 B&W film... please take a look at the gallery if you can. The first three people to PM me with their names & postal addresses will be sent two complementary rolls each to try for themselves... and hopefully to post the results!
 
I've become very fond of the new Kodak BW400CN, but this looks like a great film too. I really like the pigeons.

William
 
wlewisiii said:
I've become very fond of the new Kodak BW400CN, but this looks like a great film too. I really like the pigeons.

William
Click to expand...

Yes, i finished the XP2 in the canonet (yes, the pass-around canonet) today, and when i went to the lab/shop, they were out of xp2!! so i got the BW400CN instead. Let's try it.
I loaded a GSN with it.

William, do you shoot it at nominal speed or use the widely accepted C-41 underrating trick?
 
Thanks for the comments, everyone. Designer, I'd like to see anything you post from your first roll.

I have three takers on the door prize offer, well four but who's counting? ;)
 
Fraley,
Nice shots, now I'll have to find some to try out.
.........
Russ shoots XP2 at 320 or less, but I like the results at it's 400asa rating. The underrating looks to "light" for my tastes.
 
Pherdinand - I tend to shoot at the rated ISO, but I've been cosidering doing one at 200 and one at 800 for my next two rolls just to see how it reacts. I'll be sure to post something in my gallery if I do that.

William
 
Check my site for a quick test of XP2 Super shot at different EI on the same roll. BW400CN results should come soon.
 
Another vote for rating both Kodak B&W 400 CN and XP2 at 200. Maybe I should try and find some Konica C41 B&W to try. Their Impresa 50 WAS a nice colour print film. You could check http://www.ilford.com/html/us_english/bw.html for their PDF on XP2 and look at the Exposure Rating section. It may explain why rating B&W C41 fim at 200 is fairly common.

Bob
 
Thanks for the referneces on the BW400CN.
The weather today was completely scr3w3d up, ice and rain falling, then sunshine, then big snowflakes, all within 2 hours. Sometimes very high contrast, sometimes as flat as the Kalahari.
I've shot the XP2 at iso 200 for a bit of higher contrast, hopefully it will help.
 
Last edited:
Well, I wasn't very clear on why I shoot XP2 at 400asa. I shoot it with a Y2 filter and often don't compensate either. So with the Olympus SP, which meters outside the lens, I do shoot at 200asa so I won't be shooting the equivelent of 800. The recent gallery shots in the cemetary were shot this way.
 
straight up and with my limited experience, I've come to prefer the Ilford over the Kodak, but I'm not too fond of the c-41 b&w in general. I haven't shot the 400 at ei 200, so maybe that's why. I'll have to give it a try. I'm looking forward to your pictures. What I'm not fond of is what happens in the high midtones. Micheal's image of the fences and ivy, for me, shows what is typical of the film. The fence on the right (redwood?) looks great, while the light greys in the ivy and on the painted fence seem a little muted or muddy. BTW, Micheal the image is a great tone and texture study, and Marc the Ilford comparison on your site is well done.
 
Michael, this morning I checked your gallery. My favorite in that album: the pidgeons. Nice composition! I didn't think for a second you shot it with a 50mm lens. Nice!
 
Ray, i had teh same question regarding the fences, however to my eyes it seems that it's a digital noise issue of the scanner.
 
Pherdinand, it could be. I've noticed the same effect on shots I've made too, particularly with the Kodak version. BTW, the Konica could very well be Kodak just re-canned (?). I was pleasantly surprised when I tried the Ilford after using the Kodak and found the Ilford film base to be similar to traditional b&w films, as opposed to Kodak's which looks like color negatives. Just an aesthetic thing.
 
Last edited:
Does the Konica film then also have the orange mask like the Kodak? A clear base is better for multi-contrast papers in the darkroom, and I'll theorize that the mask's density should reduce the dynamic range of the negative image, boosting contrast a bit. I really like XP2, and all b&w pics in my gallery are with that film.
 
I just dropped the door prizes in the mail, hope to see some postings in the gallery ;)

Thanks for the comments. I found very different results taking one roll to the drugstore and another roll to a more expensive processor. The drugstore scans had a blue tint that I removed by setting the jpeg to grayscale. The second roll looks okay as is, I'll post some soon. Maybe still a little too low contrast for my taste, a little muddy as mentioned above. I've gotten to prefer fuji neopan 400 and a light yellow filter.

I did shoot some Kodak B&W C-41 (the readily available kind) that was higher contrast. I'm not sure if it was due to the loaner lens - a new summicron 50 - or the film... there is no method to my madness! :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom