Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,660   Posts: 1,481,537   Online: 1081
      
Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. #1
    BradS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    S.F. Bay Area, California
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    3,921

    J&C Classic 400 VS Kodak 400TX

    Seduced away from Tri-X by very favorable pricing and the fantastic reputation J&C has earned with its many loyal customers, I bought a small stash of J&C Classic 400 35mm film. So far, I like the film a lot but I find it is definitely different from the modern Tri-X. I'm treating it exactly as I do 400TX. That is:

    rate the film at at EI-250.
    Develop in HC-110 dil. D, 20 deg. C, 6 minutes, agitate 10sec / minute.

    After just three rolls of Classic 400, I have the following observations:

    • The spectral repsonse of Classic 400 appears to be quite different from that of Tri-X.
    • Tri-X gives finer grain
    • Classic 400 appears to have slightly less latitude
    • Although not quite as robust as that of Tri-X, Classic 400 emulsion is plenty robust. About on par with similar offerings from Ilford.



    ALl in all, it seems like a winner. Like I said above, I'm still not getting it quite right but, it does look promising. Anybody else have hints or observations on this film?

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    N. Texas
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    361
    Piggybacking, a question for all - when Forte improved the film, were the old quality-control issues ironed out (curl, blotches, etc.)?

  3. #3
    John Bragg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Penwithick, Cornwall, U.K.
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    331
    Images
    9
    Hi Brad, Interesting to read your thoughts on this "other " film and how you are getting on with your testing. It took me a good while to get used to NEW Tri-x, but once having established its effective speed and a development regime to suit it, I think it takes some beating ! I use it exclusively now, and am invariably disappointed when seduced away by other emulsions. Anything else just isn't the same. As Frank Hurley said, "Near enough, is not good enough !"

  4. #4
    Lachlan Young's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Blairgowrie, Scotland; York, England
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    576
    Images
    3
    Hi there, I believe the different spectral response of the Classic Pan 400 (as it is called in Britain) is down to the fact that it has an 'extended spectral sensitivity to the near infrared' according to UK importers Retro Photographic. Retro have a review of this film & more info on this page http://www.retrophotographic.com/classicfilms.htm
    Hope this helps,
    Lachlan

  5. #5
    BradS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    S.F. Bay Area, California
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    3,921
    Quote Originally Posted by Lachlan Young
    Hi there, I believe the different spectral response of the Classic Pan 400 (as it is called in Britain) is down to the fact that it has an 'extended spectral sensitivity to the near infrared' according to UK importers Retro Photographic. Retro have a review of this film & more info on this page http://www.retrophotographic.com/classicfilms.htm
    Hope this helps,
    Lachlan
    Ah, yes. I beleive it is properly "Classic Pan 400" here too. The technical data on the J&C website also clearly show extended red sensitivity.

    I guess that the summary is that the two films can be preocessed about the same but they look completely diffeerent. I haven't shot any of the old Tri-X in a while. I am interested to go back and look at some of my old negs to see if the old tri-x is closer in appearance to Classic Pan 400.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Shropshire, UK
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    87
    There was a write-up in UK mag Black & White Photography a few months ago. An interior shot of a church showed a noticeable 'halo' effect around incandescant lighting, and the reviewer commented on its red sensitivity.

    Simon.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Shooter
    Holga
    Posts
    121
    Just picked up a handful of rolls of JandC's 400 myself. Someone mentioned it being similar to old Trix-X, and so I'm looking forward to assessing that statement.

    And the lower price is a nice touch too.

  8. #8
    BradS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    S.F. Bay Area, California
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    3,921
    Quote Originally Posted by outofoptions
    Does this extended red sensitivity reduce the need for filters? Supposedly since films are more blue sensitive than red, a yellow filter is used to bring back the 'normal' appearance. Correct?
    Not sure. I have noticed that if the film is underexposed a little bit (EI-640) and dev'd normally, it produces very nice skies - almost as strong an effect as if an orange filter were used.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Willamette Valley, Oregon
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    3,684
    Quote Originally Posted by outofoptions
    Supposedly since films are more blue sensitive
    than red, a yellow filter is used to bring back the
    'normal' appearance. Correct?
    That is correct. Normal B&W films are balanced for
    tungsten. Apparently it's not possible to so sensitize
    an emulsion to green and red so as to equal it's inherent
    blue sensitivity. To balance where there is a high blue
    content to the light, subtract that excess of blue
    with a yellow or orange filter. Dan



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin