Ping: Jim Kramer (film topic)

Some time back I said that I would do an extensive comparison of Ilford
XP2 and Kodak BW400CN, both C41 B&W films. That turns out to be a
formidable task, so I'm going to renege, at least for now. I simply
don't have the time to do an adequate job.

But I can say this, after just finishing another roll of the Kodak (my
usual film is XP2): They both scan well in my workflow. I scan (Nikon
4000ED) in RGB, convert to Lab, discard the a and b channels and convert
to gray scale. There are more complex workflows, mostly derived from
converting color negatives, but this one works quite well for me. (More
below.)

I seem to have more misses on exposure with the Kodak than with the
Ilford. In fact, exposure errors with XP2 with my M7 are relatively
rare. This leads me to believe (with insufficient evidence to be
certain) that the exposure latitude of the XP2 is greater.

With limited data (again) I would suggest that tonality seems to be
smoother with the XP2. But this may reflect more the need for a true
A-B comparison, so I'm soft on this conclusion.

Net, net, however, I'm going to stick with XP2.

Returning to the question of RGB-Grayscale conversion, why not start
with color negatives? PS/CS3 has a neat conversion option, and there
are several plugins that claim to enhance tonality control in the
conversion process. I've looked at them, and I'm intrigued.

I would like to pursue this option, but I have precious little
experience with color film. So, I'm looking for suggestions from the
group. My strong preference is for a fast film, say, ISO ~400, with
good latitude and good "grain" structure. Since this is a path to B&W
only, color fidelity is (I think) irrelevant. My final output is a B&W
print.

Thanks for any suggestions.

HFL

 

The obvious thing to try is a roll of Portra 400NC for the best
latitude at ISO 400.
If you're willing to go a little slower, Portra 160NC will give you
less grain and is
what I usually shoot. The new new Ektar 100 should have still less
grain according
to Kodak but probably has less latitude than Portra NC. I haven't
tried it yet.

Portra VC films have more contrast with less latitude than NC. Any of
them are
better than the Kodak consumer films. Since you probably won't care
about
a little color shift you won't even have to compete with your
significant other for
refrigerator space.

 

Sometimes all the time in the world isn't enough.

I'm using the 5000ED - close enough. Interesting work flow I'll need to see
if I like it better. Usually I'll scan straight to grayscale and fiddle
with the contrast and levels until I like what I see then hit it with some
USM to sharpen or add effects. Sometimes I'll scan in color and work with
the red or green channels or mix them up. Some times multiplying part of
the blue lends drama.

I would say that's odd, but I think Tony P. concluded that XP2 had more
latitude as well.

I've gone the other way...

If you are happy with what you get, that's what matters. I still like to
play with something different on occasion.

I still have CS2 and am unlikely to upgrade until 5 or 6.

If you want tonality control you are pretty much forced into an HDR
solution. Scan the film above, at and below a "proper" exposure and use
software to combine the images into a finished image. For some stunning
work have a look at almost anything by Alan Young on the fredmiranda black &
white vision forum
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/board/43
One of his posts gave a link to his website and an exhaustive explanation on
how to emulate the effects.

Nix Silver Effects is the other software plug-in for PS that many people
seem taken with.

Personally I have trouble going from color images to B&W, I don't know if it
is just a mental block or the sense of loss. I am much happier with B&W
film images or even the in-camera digital B&W options.

I suspect any old color negative film would do if you are willing to fiddle
with the post processing until it looks the way you want it to look.

-Jim

 

Thanks, Bob, I'll look into the Portra 400NC and report back, eventually.

HFL

 

Thanks for the input, Jim. I'll see what's available in my local shop,
especially the Portra 400CN recommended by Bob Kirkpatrick.

HFL

 

Without in any way disagreeing with Bob, I suggest you might also like
to try Fujicolor Pro 400H which has slightly lower contrast and
therefore greater latitude than Portra 400NC.

There is also Fujicolor Pro 160S which (not surprisingly) also has
lower contrast and greater latitude than Portra 160NC. But in the
scheme of things, the differences are relatively small.

Coming back to chromogenic black and white film, XP2 Super has at
least a stop more latitude than Kodak BW400CN. Despite that, I
strongly prefer the Kodak emulsion because of its ultra-fine grain and
excellent resolution.

I agree with Bob that Ektar 100 would also be a very good choice, if
you can live with the slower ISO speed. Having said that, most people
expose Portra 160NC and Fujicolor Pro 160S at ISO 100, but I can
understand why you would choose an ISO 400 film as a starting point.

If we all buy enough Ektar 100, perhaps we can persuade Kodak to
produce an ISO 400 version. ;-)

 

Thanks, Bruce, I'll add your recommendations to the accumulating arsenal.
Your comments about BW400CN suggest I should go back and have another
look. As usual, one-size-fits-all can be a costly compromise.
And not to provoke a backlash, but when one looks at all these choices,
it's hard to subscribe to the "film is dead" mantra.

HFL

 

Harry Lockwood wrote,on my timestamp of 30/10/2008 2:02 AM:

Noticed that as well, particularly with anything
like reflexions on metal.

Same here. bwc400n scans with a little
less grain for me, but I can correct that easy.

There are some folks in rangefinderforum showing good
results with Reala developed in b&w developer,
of all things!

 

I accept that film is a niche market. For the mass market of the
developed world, digital is king, but there will always be a strong
niche market among discerning photographers.

Black and white film sales are rising. Sales of film (of all kinds)
to professional photographers are rising. Film is very much alive.