B&W question.

[Myst]

does thoses b&w film which uses colour processing give the same result as thoses that needs the special processing?

 

[student]

does thoses b&w film which uses colour processing give the same result as thoses that needs the special processing?

In a nutshell, NO!

The traditional ones are silver based. The ones (called chromogenic films) are based on different technology.

What one prefers is another matter.

 

[Reflection]

You're probably talking about Kodak's TCN. I don't think the contrast is that great. Nothing beats true B&W film. You may save a couple of dollars for the processing, but that's about it.
Nevertheless, whether i like it or not doesn't matter. To satisfy your curiousity, why not buy a roll and try it out. Your preference may differ.

 

[tommon]

I stand to differ, the modern high street colour labs did not too bad a job with a TCN disposable camera which an Australian mate brought over for his holiday use. Good contrast, etc. Almost could not tell that it was TCN unless you see the negs. Of the full latitude of exposure will only be seen when we start a A4 or 8R and larger. Generally modern colour development machines have come a long way and develops my friend's TCN with great accuracy to the the tones and contrast that seems even better than my colour prints.

 

[ortega]

I stand to differ, the modern high street colour labs did not too bad a job with a TCN disposable camera which an Australian mate brought over for his holiday use. Good contrast, etc. Almost could not tell that it was TCN unless you see the negs. Of the full latitude of exposure will only be seen when we start a A4 or 8R and larger. Generally modern colour development machines have come a long way and develops my friend's TCN with great accuracy to the the tones and contrast that seems even better than my colour prints.

basically it depends on the operator, but it is a hit or miss situation.
Not reliable results.

I still prefer traditional B&W films. Beautiful prints.

 

[student]

I had no problems at all with my TCN and XP2. Negatives nicely processed. Don't use them anymore.

On the whole, I prefer traditional B&W. Chromogenic B&W is smoother, but to me, somehow lacking in "punch".

I think certain images such as those "airy/misty/dreamy" like effects may be better with chromogenic.

 

[Pro Image]

I stand to differ, the modern high street colour labs did not too bad a job with a TCN disposable camera which an Australian mate brought over for his holiday use. Good contrast, etc. Almost could not tell that it was TCN unless you see the negs. Of the full latitude of exposure will only be seen when we start a A4 or 8R and larger. Generally modern colour development machines have come a long way and develops my friend's TCN with great accuracy to the the tones and contrast that seems even better than my colour prints.

TCN will never replace or produce results from traditional b/w. student and Ortega have mentioned that b/w is still the best there is. if u r unable to tell that it's printed on a TCN film.....ahh then u r missing a whole lot in a B/W. I have tried myself on a roll of TCN film many many years ago. Use it. Develope it. Did not like it.

Kodak T-Max 100/400 and Tri-X are still the best. Try it and you will see the differance when u put a print of TCN with a T-Max 400 prints side by side.

 

[showtime]

traditional bw films give excellent results when good techniques employed. for instance, dodge and burning, developing time, rate, chemicals used, exposure while printing, etc. without these techniques, i dont think traditional bw films might very well produce crummy results...