Comparison of two Kodak black & white film emulsions

by Seshu Badrinath

I chose to examine an old standard among photojournalists, Kodak's Tri-X Pan and compare it to a new entry in the black and white film market, Kodak's T400CN. The latter is an emulsion that can be processed using the ubiquitous C-41 process available in most drug stores today.

Basic Methodology:

I used a Mamiya 6x6 (C330) for this assignment. The subject was asked to stand in an open shade environment and a hand-held meter read f/8.0 @ 1/60. I standardized both rolls by sticking to this one exposure. Both film emulsions were exposed as 200 ISO, instead of leaving it at Kodak's recommended 400ISO. Two rolls of the 120 size were exposed (one each). Kodak's T400CN film was sent to Atlanta to be processed at a lab. I processed the Tri-X at our wonderful lab on the 2nd floor. Both negatives were scanned using the Nikon LS4500 scanner, cleaned and toned at home on an Apple Macintosh 6500 PowerPC.

The Results:

The Tri-X was clearly a more difficult emulsion to work with, only because I either over processed the negative, or the relative temperature of the water I used was much higher than examined (68 degrees Fahrenheit), which increased the highlights and expanded the tonal range. In comparison, the T400CN film looked remarkable. I have used the 35mm version of this film and have always enjoyed scanning it in. The grain is tight and is on par with a film that is rated at 100 ISO.

There are advantages and disadvantages, however. The Tri-X is simply more stable. Barring mishaps in the lab, I am sure the film would and should print beautifully. There are no other disadvantes, unless you consider getting one's hands wet in the lab!

Kodak's T400CN is comparatively easy to work with. The lab I sent my film to, in all probability, calibrates their machines, producing optimal negatives time and time again. This is an assumption on my part, but nonetheless a somewhat educated one. Due to its very nature, the T400CN emulsion has a warm cast to it. One can easily remove that in PhotoShop, or leave it in to preserve a sepia-toned look. The major disadvantage of this film is that because it is dye-based it isn't particularly archival.

The Conclusions:

Tri-X's historical nature is to be more forgiving, though this time, I seemed to have had to wrestle with the negative. The T400CN for it's advantages of ease of processing, a greater tonal range and tight grain scores high in my book for producing lush black and white prints. Generally, both emulsions handled grain gain uniformally. I would highly recommend the T400CN - especially to those who are interested in shooting black & white film and getting their film processed in an hour while they go about doing other things. Since it scans well, it is doubly lucrative for photojournalists who have long depended on Kodak Tri-X.

© 2000 Seshu Badrinath @ Pipal Productions / School of Visual Communication, Ohio University.