grain contrast price

none i know

I really like this film. It is fast and delivers very sharp pictures. It has great contrast and the grain is really good for 400 film even in pictures with a lot of sky in them.

Similar Products Used:

ilford HP 400

Fine grained, sharp, easy to scan. Standard C41 processing by anyone.

Has to be printed on B&W paper - or scanned. Doesn't work well with C41 paper as it was designed to.

I'm going to miss this film. Both T400CN and Portra 400BW have been discontinued and replaced by the new BW400CN. I understand that the new film is very close to Portra 400BW (maybe just re-packaged) which has a different look. The big problem with T400CN was always in printing, but I found a lab that understands this film and printed it on real B&W paper, instead of C41 paper. The prints were great - smooth, sharp, contrasty, very fine grained - a lot of what you look for in a gallery print without all the work. Since I don't do my own printing, I was very happy with these results. Portra 400BW is lower in contrast and a little softer. It is a good film, but just has a different look. Even if I find some of this film left in stock somewhere, I'll never get the results again as this lab switched to a digital mini-lab. Those prints are terrible. I can get excellent results scanning and digitally printing myself though.

Customer Service

Not needed.

Similar Products Used:

Kodak Portra 400BW, many "real" B&W films.

C-41 processing, high latitude of exposure, very fine grain

Gives proper B&W results only if handled by professionals or if printed on B&W paper.

I think the film itself is fine. As many people have pointed out the problems can be with the prints rather than with the processing. I do prefer traditional B&W film, but as this is almost impossible to process where I live, this film comes handy as I can scan the neg or get it printed afterwards on B&W paper with great results. Don't take it to a 1hour lab though, the prints will come out sepia or cyan or whatever.

Similar Products Used:

FP4 Plus, Tmax100, Tmax400

Very fine grain. Sharp.

Black and white prints without work. Repeat the Hail Mary and flagellate yourself to feel worthy instead.

Perhaps the finest grain and sharpest results of any C41 film, and not just the chromogenics. Images can be enlarged more than most ISO 100 films without grain embarrassing the picture; remember the grain is only one colour. I have seen lab comparisons which bear this out. It is sharper than XP2 and less grainy, but is more oriented to colour printing and the colour of automated printing is a little more reliable. Trouble is that on colour print paper it lacks the punch of contrast compared to custom black and white prints. There are good reasons to use colour lens filters on BW films anyway and this is a good choice for experiments. You should know that this film is pitched against Ilford XP2 in being possible to print in the darkroom in BW, whereas the Porta 400BW has more reliable colour if you want to go no further than colour print paper.

Excellent smooth grays, pleasing contrast, invisible grain. Seems less likely to scratch than Ilford's XP2.

None from my point of view.

Kodak's T400 CN is about as good as it gets if you want smooth grays, ultrafine grain, and pleasing contrast. A great film for people. People ask why it isn't offered is slower speeds. I cannot imagine the grain of the 400 ISO emulsion being any finer. Blowing it up to the point grain shows will result in your finding out that you need a tripod or better lens.

Customer Service

Not needed

Similar Products Used:

Ilford XP2

Black and white pictures using C-41 processing.

Cost

This film is better than the what the rating suggests. I shot a roll 6 months after it expired and the results were still great! I developed it at Vistek which is a premium lab. I received many compliments on my pictures with this film. I admit I need to learn more about black and white and filters, but overall the results were fantastic. Get a roll and try for yourself. I just tried the Illford Xp-2 which is the only competition to this film. I'll let you know soon with the results.

Similar Products Used:

Illford XP-2

"Creamy" tonality Ultra-fine grain for a 400 speed film Excellent sharpness High enlargeability Ability to print on either color or conventional B&W papers

Lower contrast on color papers

This film has fantastic tonality, especially skin tones. True, a lot of varied characteristics depending on processing, but bad results are a function of faulty processing vs. the film itself. When using color paper and if done properly by a competent photofinisher, the inherent capabilities of this film will be maximized. These capabilities include outstanding sharpness, enlargeability from 35mm well beyond 11x14 (due to near grainlessness). As with all dye-based films (to include color neg) it does better with overexposure; I normally rate this film at 200 and get outstanding tonal range. If printing on B & W papers, a grade 3 or higher will be required. I don't consider this a drawback of the film itself. Again, you can't blame the film for unknowledgeable processors (the same goes for XP-2).

Customer Service

Kodak's has always been great.

Similar Products Used:

T-Max 400 (TMY) Tri-X Ilford XP-2 Super

Lack of grain. Superb sharpness. Ease of use.

Print it yourself or take it to a professional b&w lab.

I am a big fan of the TCN film. I use it primarily in the 120 format for professional portraiture and wedding jobs. It has a great tonality, fantastic grain and may be the sharpest film I've used. I have a 20x24 portrait of a wedding couple on the wall of my office that you can see the individual threads in the texture of the tuxedo, count the eyelashes and the individual white stitches on her white dress. What you can't see is any grain. Another reviewer wrote that he wouldn't use this film to photograph vomit. Maybe he should change his subject matter and he might find a use for this fabulous film!

Similar Products Used:

T-max 100, 400, 3200, FP4, HP5, XP2 Super, Neopan 400

fine grain for a fast film contrasty with rich blacks C-41 process

none for the kind of film it is

My dad got this film about 18 months ago. He decided not to get into b&w, so I ended up with it. It was not kept in the fridge,and almost expired. I did not get my hopes up. But it was far from expired! It yielded very sharp prints with excellent contrast. Blacks were rich black, and whites were bold. Even the night shots were fairly sharp. Films tend to reveal grain more in low light pictures. The lab did a good job on the color. The prints had a tiny bit of brown, and I guess that''s about the best color to have if prints have a color cast. I have used all 3 of the C-41 process (as far as I know, there are 3), and they all gave pleasing results. But why doesn''t anyone offer C-41 b&w in 100 speed?

Similar Products Used:

Kodak B&W+ 400 Ilford XP2 400

Make strong enlargment unlike ANY slow speed B&W film I''ve ever tried. Latitude like no other film on the market (XP2 Super a close second).

Still doesn''t produce quite the textural richness I find any many B&W films such as Tri-X, all of Fuji Neopan films, and Ilford FP4, all of which are open to debate. Needs a quality printer to get the most from the film, but don''t ALL B&W films need that?

I''ve shot almost every B&W emulsion over the years, and never found any to date that can rival T400CN for its latitude and lack of grain (being a dye based film). I have photos to 11x14 that look medium format to even the most discerning eye. The film is contrasty. It needs generous overexposure. I almost always rate this emulsion at 200 -- sometimes 100, depending on contrast variation of the scene. Low contrast subjects are set at 400. And yes, I only use professional printers here in L.A. At 400 rating, I have heard complaints about how difficult (time consuming) it can be to find the right contrast range. If a pro has difficulty, you can bet a computerized mini-lab machine will be of no help. Yet, I have two 4x6 prints on my wall printed from Rite-Aid on T400CN. I personally prefer this chromogenic over Ilford XP2 Super, which I find doesn''t enlarge as cleanly to 8x10 and 11x14 as T400 does. I know printers who disagreement with me, but all I have are my own prints for comparison. The best attribute to this film is its latitude. I often expose ratings from E.I. 200 to 800 on the same roll with fantastic results. Try that with any non-chromogenic and kiss half your prints goodbye. If you''re an amateur, I strongly suggest you consider this film as mini-insurance policy in tricky lighting situations. Since this is not the ONLY B&W film I use, I recently began shooting Fuji 100 Acros based on recent reviews. I love it. It has a beautiful smooth tonal range I love, but cannot match T400CN for its overall grainless look. You always strike a compromise somewhere with these films. When I want no grain, I shoot T400CN, period. Since I prefer the added textual quality grain provides in my dad to day, and even some portrait shootings, I shoot non-chromogenics. Tri-X and Fuji Neopan 400 still tops for me. For architecture and landscape, and portraits, T400CN is a winner. It seems to me anyone who has tried this film to unsatisfactory results, simply isn''t utilitze a professional lab with a qualified printer at the helm, or needs to start rating this film properly at E.I. 200 or slower. You''d be amazed at the enhanced tonal change you''ll receive.

Customer Service

Hardly.

Similar Products Used:

Ilford XP2 Super. Almost all B&W grain emulsions.