Kodak Professional B&W CN Film

I'm a pretty die hard traditional B&W film user. I like the traditional B&W

film look on B&W paper and the archival quality of these films. I bought a

roll of the current Kodak B&W CN film which as we all know is a 400 speed C-41

film. I had a friend shoot some pictures of me with my cameras for a joke "too

many cameras" idea. We will be doing another one of this series outdoors next

time. Anyways I had the roll developed at the lab I work at (we are C-41 35mm

only) and was pleasantly suprised at the results. The only reason I bought the

roll was so I could get it developed quickly instead of waiting a week, and

scanned and printed by myself as I wanted. This film gives a very smooth

creamy look and is not as contrasty as traditional films. Someone said it has

a look similar to Verichrome Pan film. Anyways it made shooting portraits

easier since I often have to deal with too much contrast in the portraits I've

shot. I looked on Kodak's website about this film and it seems its designed

for both consumers and pros alike. What blew me away was its PGI rating- less

then 25! Now the holy grail of color films in my book is Kodaks Ektar 25 which

had a PGI rating of 25, and that film had fine grain! I couldn't believe this

B&W film was even better then that. To compare I looked at the traditional B&W

films and they used the RMS rating, so I couldn't easily compare the

differences. Does this film beat out even 25 ISO B&W films like Efke 25 for

grain size? I'll still use traditional films for my B&W work, but I might when

needed start using these CN films more often for ease of use and if I need

really fine grain. Has anyone tried printing this film onto B&W paper? Also

what would you guys say the look of this film is compared to traditional B&W

films? Here below is a sample pic of the shoot we did with this film in my

cameras series shoot.<div></div>

100 t-max developed in D-76 has finer grain than traditional 25 ISO films!

 

I was never that impressed with Ektar 25. Sure, the grain was quite fine, but sharpness was lacking overall. Digging out some of my old Ektar 25 negs, and comparing them to the best of todays 100 ISO emulsions, shows that there's very little difference in the grain, and that the sharpness is better with modern 100ISO films. Technology moves on.

 

It's a shame that Konica are no longer in the film-making business, because their 100ISO colour negative film had extremely fine grain and superb sharpness.

I am going to try the Kodak BW400CN film. I have been using Ilford XP2 super (also a 400 speed C41 film), but my enlargements have distracting grain. Has anyone here compared the XP2 super to BW400CN??? Ilford says in its literature that it's an "equivalent" film to the Kodak. My Ilford prints look smooth at 5x5 (off my MF cameras) and 4x6 (off my 35mm), but not when I blow up. 8x10s are quite grainy. Could it be a lab problem?? The attachment is from MF camera, scanned at 300dpi.<div></div>

Kodak designed the chromogenic B&W film with portraiture in mind, and initially branded it as a Portra BW film. My experiences with it have been positive and if it were not for my obsession with TriX, I would use it more often. Dittoes on the TMAX100 resolution comments. Kodak recommends it as a substitute for TechPan, which is a reach in some applications, but the resolution is excellent.

Paul, there is something wrong if you are getting that kind of grain from medium format XP2!

 

Go to www.flickr.com and search for "xp2." You can look at almost 5000 XP2 examples.

I am still new photography, so bear with me. Since I tried exposing 400UC at 320, I ran a roll of the BW through my Canon AE-1P at the same 320, and I was pleased with the results. But I have also used it at 400 in my Zeiss Ikon Contessa with amazing results as well. I am full aware of the latitude afforded by these films. I had picked up a bunch at a Target on clearance for 2.50 a 3 pack. So I am set for awhile, as well as I will be using it quite a bit. Where I have it developed at, they use Fuji Crystal Archive, and I like the results.

I much prefer the look and grain of Tri-X but, hey, you don't have NEARLY enough

cameras!

Paul

 

The XP-2, should have very fine grain. I really like the stuff. My personal favorite is Fuji's Neopan 400CN (chromogenic, C-41), which is made by Ilford, for Fuji. But, the Ilford is very good and fine grained. Fuji scan attached.

 

Russ<div></div>

Fuji Neopan 400CN, rated @ 320. Kiron 70-150 lens.

 

Russ<div></div>