Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,942   Posts: 1,585,731   Online: 1090
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 27
  1. #11
    Travis Nunn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Henrico, Virginia USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,604
    Images
    32
    I got a few "not for resale" rolls of 400CN from a Kodak rep a few years ago. I didn't know any better so I tried to make some prints on normal b/w paper. I couldn't get enough contrast in the prints, even with a #5 filter.

    In all fairness, I've never tried to get prints done on RA4 paper so I can't comment on how they look.
    ____________________________________________
    Searching my way to perplexion

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Greece
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,322
    Quote Originally Posted by Travis Nunn View Post
    In all fairness, I've never tried to get prints done on RA4 paper so I can't comment on how they look.
    I've tried it twice and the result isn't bad. It was quite neutral, just some very faint color cast, if any. Of course, a lot depends on the operator of the minilab. On the other hand, making your own prints is so much better. Being able to control contrast/brightness is crucial. You can't expect someone else to be in your mind...

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Oxford, England
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    505
    Images
    35
    It's worth trying the Fuji Neopan 400CN -- their chromogenic. It's supposed to use 'Ilford' technology.

    I do know that it's always seemed to me to give slightly different results to XP2.

  4. #14
    AgX
    AgX is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    9,105
    Fuji Neopan 400CN

    This film is listed on the Fujifilm UK site, not on the German site, which is not surprising as offers differ regionally. Weird is though that it is not featured at the Fujifilm Global site. Actually no B&W film at all to be found there...

  5. #15

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Evanston, IL, USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    646
    Images
    17
    Quote Originally Posted by Anon Ymous View Post
    I've tried it twice and the result isn't bad. It was quite neutral, just some very faint color cast, if any. Of course, a lot depends on the operator of the minilab. On the other hand, making your own prints is so much better. Being able to control contrast/brightness is crucial. You can't expect someone else to be in your mind...
    Color papers are only made in a narrow range of contrasts. I've never used any of the Black and White chromogenic films, but I'd imagine printing it would mostly involve running a half dozen test strips to adjust the filter pack to the exact point where you eliminate that color cast. If you have access to a color darkroom, then I'm guessing that you have a place to print on silver paper.

  6. #16
    IloveTLRs's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Switzerland
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,003
    Images
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by AgX View Post
    By the way, what does actually that `CN´ in 400CN mean?
    "CN-16" is a color negative processing method ... I think (Fujifilm boxes say that on the side.)

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Floriduh
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,278
    Images
    2
    Thanks guys. I'm going to try a roll of CN thru Dale labs when I get back and see how prints come out.
    W.A. Crider

  8. #18

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Woonsocket, RI USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,725
    FWIW, my personal experience with Kodak's BW400CN is that, although it does require longer exposures and higher contrast than regular B&W films, it's not really hard to print. Given that other people have other comments, I suspect some radically different things are going on -- maybe it's a matter of personal standards, or differences from one paper to another (I've mostly printed on Agfa MCP310RC), or differences from one enlarger to another (I've got a Philips PCS130 condenser enlarger with PCS150 color unit).

    I also once tried a side-by-side comparison of printing this film on RA-4 paper vs. B&W paper (the Agfa, IIRC). The RA-4 print produced slightly more subtle gradations of tone and was generally a bit more pleasing, but it was difficult to get a neutral tone, and I didn't quite succeed. I got close enough that the print didn't jump out at me as being badly off unless it was put side-by-side with a conventional B&W print. I don't shoot a lot of this film, but when I do I print it on B&W paper because I find this easier than doing it on RA-4 paper. I suppose if I got a really extraordinary photo on this film I might put the effort into trying an RA-4 print from it, given the results of my side-by-side test.

    Personally, I prefer the Ilford XP2 Super, but that has more to do with the look of the finished prints than with the ease of making prints. This is subjective and hard to describe; I just prefer the look of the XP2 Super.

  9. #19
    Alex Hawley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Kansas, USA
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    2,895
    Images
    63
    Quote Originally Posted by srs5694 View Post
    FWIW, my personal experience with Kodak's BW400CN is that, although it does require longer exposures and higher contrast than regular B&W films, it's not really hard to print.
    Same as my experience. It prints differently compared to a standard B&W neg in terms of contrast and exposure but so what? I've always printed 400CN negs on both standard multi grade and grade B&W papers. I didn't think the experience was strange at all.
    Semper Fi & God Bless America
    My Photography Blog

  10. #20
    AgX
    AgX is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    9,105
    Quote Originally Posted by IloveTLRs View Post
    "CN-16" is a color negative processing method ... I think (Fujifilm boxes say that on the side.)
    Actually that Kodak film is called `BW 400 CN´ and that Fuji one `Neopan 400 CN´. So there is a hint at B&W...

    But a designation `Kodak 400 CN´ would have been a bad one for that film.

    Yes, that `CN´ most probably is intended to mean `process as a CN-film´.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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