[LRflex] Re: Kodak BW400CN
- From: Bille Xavier F. <hot_billexf@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2011 13:35:25 +0200
Hello Jeff, It was somtething I used some 6 or 10 years back. It was not as
rough as the TriX, but much contrasty than the Ilford film. The Ilford was very
fragile once developped, easy to scratch but not the Kodak. I have not seen
that kind of film in the shops for about 4 years. That film BW400CN was very
easy to scan through a Nikon Coolscan. IT's a pleasant film which gives proper
results even on paper designed for color, although the result look a bit washed
out. You bring back good memories. It happens that I just found that I have 4
units with a use date of 2005..... I'll give a those a go. Lomography results
for sure!
---------------------------------
Xavier F. BILLE
Maisons-Alfort - France.
> Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2011 01:18:53 -0400
> From: jgluckphoto66@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [LRflex] Kodak BW400CN
>
> What has anyone's experience been with Kodak Pro BW400CN chromogenic
> C-41 film been? I shot a ton of Tri-X back in the day--late 60s, early
> 70s--but I'm looking now for an "easy" solution.
>
> Jeff Gluck.
>
> >
> >
>
> ------
> Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
> http://www.lrflex.furnfeather.net/
> Archives are at:
> //www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
http://www.lrflex.furnfeather.net/
Archives are at:
//www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
Other related posts:
