Kodak Alaris discontinues BW400CN film

[Ricardo Miranda]

Source:

http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/films/bw400cn/main2.jhtml

 

[snapguy]

never

Never heard of it so I guess I won't miss it.

 

[Jaf-Photo]

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?

 

[EdSawyer]

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. >:-/

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

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.

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

Go Ilford XP2 Super...

(there was a url link here which no longer exists) 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

 

[Jaf-Photo]

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.

Hope not. Portra 800 is fantastic. There's nothing like those colors at that speed.

 

[arealitystudios]

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.

 

[filmamigo]

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.

 

[Jaf-Photo]

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.

 

[arealitystudios]

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

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.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

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.

 

[pentaxuser]

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

 

[pdeeh]

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

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

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

I wasn't aware of Fuji ever offering a chromogenic b/w product. Might have been one of those "not in the US" things.

 

[pdeeh]

Neopan 400CN.
According to many interweb "authorities", made by Ilford for Fuji

 

[pentaxuser]

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

 

[miha]

Kodak made three chromogenic films in the past, this, Portra BW and T400CN T-MAX. All gone now.

 

[Sirius Glass]

A product that was never needed since there are other Kodak black & white films available.

 

[Dinesh]

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

....... wait for it.

 

[pdeeh]

.... hovers mouse over "Ignore thread"

 

[Xmas]

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?

 

[Sal Santamaura]

If I HAD to lay speculation on what would go next, I'd say it would be Portra 800...

Hope not. Portra 800 is fantastic...

Why do you care? You're "quitting film," right?

 

[summicron1]

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.

 

[removed account4]

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 ...