Kodak Alaris discontinues BW400CN film

Discussion in 'Product Availability' started by Ricardo Miranda, Aug 19, 2014.

  1. Ricardo Miranda

    Ricardo Miranda Member

    Messages:
    2,083
    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2012
    Location:
    London, UK
    Shooter:
    35mm
  2. snapguy

    snapguy Member

    Messages:
    1,297
    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2014
    Location:
    California d
    Shooter:
    35mm
    never

    Never heard of it so I guess I won't miss it.
     
  3. Jaf-Photo

    Jaf-Photo Member

    Messages:
    493
    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2014
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Now it starts.

    This is the sort of film that logically should be the last man standing. It's easier to develop as many shops don't do B&W processing anymore and it's easy to scan.

    Which Kodak film is next, do you think?
     
  4. EdSawyer

    EdSawyer Member

    Messages:
    1,098
    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2008
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    this was a bit of a bastard child of a film, IMNSHO. I never used it. It was the worst of both worlds - not as good as "real" B&W, but the expense and hassle of C41 processing. still, not cool that Kodak is discontinuing *ANY* film at this point. They don't have enough as it is to be able to be doing that sort of thing. >:-/
     
  5. TheFlyingCamera

    TheFlyingCamera Membership Council Council

    Messages:
    9,444
    Joined:
    May 24, 2005
    Location:
    Washington DC
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Actually, this kind of makes sense - since virtually nobody is printing anything any more anyway, this odd bird which always was a bit of a niche market doesn't have a big market share. It really is best for printing on RA-4 paper. It works, well enough, when printed on fiber paper, but the folks who are going to keep black-and-white film alive are the ones who are going to home process and do their own enlarging, not the target market for this film. That, and the advent of instagram filters and the like make me surprised this film lasted as long as it did. Unless Kodak goes completely tits up quickly, I see them ending up with a similar palette of films to Ilford - Tri-X for a traditional grain emulsion, TMax 100 and 400 for T-grain emulsions, plus the Portras and Ektar 100. If I HAD to lay speculation on what would go next, I'd say it would be Portra 800 - it's expensive, and relatively low volume compared to the others. But I'm not speculating.
     
  6. Ken Nadvornick

    Ken Nadvornick Subscriber

    Messages:
    5,041
    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2005
    Location:
    Monroe, WA, USA
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Go Ilford XP2 Super...

    Here's one I did on the Ilford film. Beautiful smoothness.

    The same state fair begins again here in two days. Seeing the Kodak death of their product makes me want to try more of the Ilford product, but this time in 120. This is when Harman's promise to do all they possibly can not to discontinue anything at all really comes into focus.

    Thanks Harman...

    Ken
     
  7. Jaf-Photo

    Jaf-Photo Member

    Messages:
    493
    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2014
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Hope not. Portra 800 is fantastic. There's nothing like those colors at that speed.
     
  8. arealitystudios

    arealitystudios Member

    Messages:
    226
    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2008
    Location:
    Portland, Or
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Though I don't like to see any film leave the market, I will fully admit I never once purchased this. I always found it strange looking and since I develop B&W film myself there just wasn't much point in me buying a film I couldn't process at home.

    I personally don't know of anyone who used it regularly.

    So it is not shocking at all to see this go quite frankly.
     
  9. filmamigo

    filmamigo Member

    Messages:
    262
    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2007
    Location:
    Toronto, Ont
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    A sad day :-(

    This was my favourite film. Smooth, grain free, lovely tonality that was very kind to skin in portraits. But when it was discontinued in 120, I knew that 35mm would go away sooner rather than later.

    I'm not a fan of the Ilford XP2 stuff. I guess I will be processing more traditional B&W at home.
     
  10. Jaf-Photo

    Jaf-Photo Member

    Messages:
    493
    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2014
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Yeah, I've never used it, either.

    But it makes sense to the lomo crowd that doesn't develop their own B&W, and use scanners.

    I'm sure they could have been a market, if only KA would PROMOTE their films.
     
  11. arealitystudios

    arealitystudios Member

    Messages:
    226
    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2008
    Location:
    Portland, Or
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I have to agree with that one. I know sooooo many people who want to get into film and don't know where to go or how to start nor do they know what is available and what the difference is between products that are out there.
     
  12. TheFlyingCamera

    TheFlyingCamera Membership Council Council

    Messages:
    9,444
    Joined:
    May 24, 2005
    Location:
    Washington DC
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I shot a bunch of it in 35mm a long time ago. It is grainless, certainly, but it is actually not terribly sharp - I would have been far better off shooting traditional black-and-white film in its stead.
     
  13. pentaxuser

    pentaxuser Subscriber

    Messages:
    8,202
    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Location:
    Daventry, No
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Despite the one and only APUGer I can recall saying that he prefers this to XP2+, isn't the general view that XP2+ is the better film and one which prints better on B&W paper. It might be that sales volumes of BWCN400 v XP2+ reflects this so its a sensible rationalisation of the product range.

    I only tried it once and had it processed and developed by Jessops, as was. I wasn't impressed with it compared to XP2+. Even on colour paper it somehow didn't look right. There still seemed to be a colour cast.

    It was also competing against the Fuji equivalent as well. Maybe just too many chromogenic films for the market to sustain.

    pentaxuser
     
  14. Sponsored Ad
  15. pdeeh

    pdeeh Member

    Messages:
    3,427
    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2012
    Location:
    UK
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Damn, I just sold my last roll for 99p on eBay.

    If I'd known this I could have marked it as Rare Vintage No Longer Available and got a tenner for it :blink:
     
  16. TheFlyingCamera

    TheFlyingCamera Membership Council Council

    Messages:
    9,444
    Joined:
    May 24, 2005
    Location:
    Washington DC
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I wasn't aware of Fuji ever offering a chromogenic b/w product. Might have been one of those "not in the US" things.
     
  17. pdeeh

    pdeeh Member

    Messages:
    3,427
    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2012
    Location:
    UK
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Neopan 400CN.
    According to many interweb "authorities", made by Ilford for Fuji
     
  18. pentaxuser

    pentaxuser Subscriber

    Messages:
    8,202
    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Location:
    Daventry, No
    Shooter:
    35mm
    My impression was that Fuji may have dropped its 400 trad B&W 120 film and had commissioned a chromogenic 400 to take its place, made by Ilford as pdeeh has said.

    Given that its main competitor is a very strong XP2+ and that everyone here mourns the loss of the Fuji trad B&W 400 film it seems a strange decision if APUG reflects the market's sentiments.

    pentaxuser
     
  19. miha

    miha Member

    Messages:
    1,217
    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2007
    Location:
    Slovenia
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Kodak made three chromogenic films in the past, this, Portra BW and T400CN T-MAX. All gone now.
     
  20. Sirius Glass

    Sirius Glass Subscriber

    Messages:
    20,581
    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2007
    Location:
    Southern California
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    A product that was never needed since there are other Kodak black & white films available.
     
  21. Dinesh

    Dinesh Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,699
    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2005
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    ....... wait for it.
     
  22. pdeeh

    pdeeh Member

    Messages:
    3,427
    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2012
    Location:
    UK
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    .... hovers mouse over "Ignore thread"
     
  23. Xmas

    Xmas Member

    Messages:
    6,452
    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2006
    Location:
    UK
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    Well I use it and Xp2+ but Im not gonna cry.

    It is/was a bit more difficult to wet print on VC paper, than Xp2+ or retained silver films.

    It is/was not difficult to home process C41 but getting CD4 is more difficult here.

    Tmax100 or Trix next?
     
  24. Sal Santamaura

    Sal Santamaura Member

    Messages:
    1,506
    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2005
    Location:
    San Clemente, California
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Why do you care? You're "quitting film," right?
     
  25. summicron1

    summicron1 Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,946
    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2010
    Location:
    Ogden, Utah
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    i have used it. it's very nice, but different than XP2 in how you print it. I've pretty much settled on more standard b/w just for ease of processing.

    Which is a shame --XP2 and this kodak are simply amazing in 120.
     
  26. jnanian

    jnanian Advertiser Advertiser

    Messages:
    19,988
    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2003
    Location:
    local
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    ive used this film as well as xp2super and liked them both. the kodak stuff
    was easier for fuji/ dwaynes to print because it had the incorporated orange mask
    but xp2 is much easier foe me to print because it has no mask and is made for my b/w darkroom
    i can see why it is discontinued ... a lot of hobbyists who would have used this probably use
    their phone, or tablet no processing needed and the pix prob come out better for distributing
    to their friends and family in the interweb or viewing as a slideshow on their tv ...