Let's share candids!

[bmattock]

Tryon Palace, New Bern, North Carolina

Tryon Palace, New Bern, North Carolina

Portrait of my wife - I'm trying out that new Kodak C-41 B&W film, not sure what I did wrong here - can't seem to get it right. Suggestions?

 

[Doug]

Show us the pic, Bill! 🙂 And which of the Kodak C41 B&W films are you trying here?

 

[bmattock]

Show us the pic, Bill! 🙂 And which of the Kodak C41 B&W films are you trying here?

Ok, this is weird - I thought I had posted the picture. When I try to upload it, I just get a line across the bottom of the screen. Oh well...

Well anywhere, here it is hosted from my webserver...

The film in question is called Kodak Black & White, 400, C-41 process. I actually didn't think that Kodak had any other C-41 process B&W film...

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks

 

[Doug]

Well, as to the picture, the subject's expression is unfriendly. Other than that, maybe you mean the tonal qualities? The lighting is extremely flat and frontal, no modeling, so there's no roundness or dimensionality to the subject. Should I see something else that the film can be blamed for? 🙂

I believe Kodak is offering three C41 B&W films. There's T400CN that has no orange mask (so I've been told), there's Portra 400BW, and finally Kodak Black & White 400 Plus which may be what you have. I think the latter two both have the orange mask and are intended for machine printing on color paper.

I've used Agfa Vario-XL, discontinued long ago, and Ilford XP1 and XP2 Super, none of which have an orange mask, so are easier in the home darkroom on B&W paper. I bought a few rolls of Kodak T400CN to try, but haven't yet so I don't know what it's like. I'm very fond of the Ilford XP film.

 

[bmattock]

Well, as to the picture, the subject's expression is unfriendly. Other than that, maybe you mean the tonal qualities? The lighting is extremely flat and frontal, no modeling, so there's no roundness or dimensionality to the subject. Should I see something else that the film can be blamed for? 🙂

If you read what I wrote, I didn't blame the film for anything. And my wife's expression is not 'unfriendly'. Thanks.

 

[SolaresLarrave]

Bill... I fail to see the link. Could you post it please?

I've used all three chromogenic films by Kodak, but I still like Ilford's better. However, they're not bad if you're in a bind. My dream is to learn the B&W film chemistry well enough to do my own developing, scan the negs I want to print and combine thus wet and dry darkroom skills.

Have a nice day!

 

[SolaresLarrave]

I posted this one elsewhere in this forum... would it count as a "candid"? It was done with a 50/2 Summicron (prefocused) and my first Leica body, on Reala film.

 

[Doug]

If you read what I wrote, I didn't blame the film for anything. And my wife's expression is not 'unfriendly'.

I'm sorry, Bill, if my words came across as offensive. I guess that leaves the lighting issue as what you considered the problem?
Best wishes...

 

[lars]

Bill, I think it would be useful if you told us what YOU don't like about the picture so we can offer more specific suggestions.

...lars

 

[Doug]

Hi Francisco... Developing C41 films is not particularly difficult in the home darkroom. When Ilford's film was XP1, they offered a handy home development kit for it.

And I've used the Unicolor C41 kits for Kodak and Fuji color neg films, with equally good results.

And your pic looks candid to me! 🙂

The main issues, in my experience, are the 100 degF temperature to be maintained, and the short developing time (3 3/4 min as I recall) which makes consistency more difficult.

It seems feasible to use a lower temp and a longer time for the chromogenic films... I expect it might cause a color shift for a color film as the film's color layers could respond differently to the changes, but that shouldn't be a factor for the chromogenic B&W.