Does CN stand for crappy negative?

There are certain things that have puzzled me for quite some time. Is better than sex cake really better than sex? Well probably not but someone, somewhere along the line decided that it was an apt name. I suppose that you cannot really quantify the deliciousness of something, only perhaps by surveying hundreds of people you will be able to see different curves to how people feel. Is cake actually preferred? I don't know that any institution would be dumb enough to put money into studying that, however more stupid things have been polled (eg: male iPhone owners are more attractive). But underneath it all there was a point in time where we as a society collectively said yes to this as being more or less fact. The problem is, and the same goes for much on the internet, so much is argued without any real basis for it.

Peterson's - Nate Matos 2011

Sow what is it then that gives C41 process black and white film such a bad rap?

I can only speculate it is stubbornness within the photographic community. I am not one to disobey the order of the SN (Silver Negative) however while there has been much change within photography over the last 10 years or so. Much has stayed the same as a last ditch effort to keep the medium true to its roots. For example, Henri Cartier-Bresson shot a fair amount of street photography. Most of us are well aware of this. He also primarily shot with a Leica camera and was an early adopter and fan of 35mm film. A format at the time which was frowned upon by many other photographers of the era for its high grain and relatively low resolution. Yet here we are 80 years after the advent of street photography, and many people will give you an answer that would mirror HCB's when asked "what is the best camera for street photography?" Leica, it doesn't offer anything more than any other camera (don't let the purists fool you) and yet it is still synonymy's with street photography.

When you look at black and white photography, there can be only one answer. Right? Well I'm not entirely sure. C-41 process films will go the way of the Do-Do far before I can no longer purchase hydroquinone and the other necessary ingredients to make a homemade batch of D76. Yet while these are still readily available I enjoy using them. Developing to me is a hassle, yet the dynamic range, contrast and tonality of a film still can't be beat by any digital camera that costs less than my car. Which leads me to use Kodak BW400CN. For those who may have a personal vendetta against Kodak, Ilford makes XP2 while Fuji has Neopan 400CN. Both (like Kodak's) are high sharpness, medium to high contrast, high resolution black and white 400 speed films that you develop in a standard C-41 process.

time! - Nate Matos 2011

If you are a guy (or girl) like me, who is lazy, easily frustrated and enjoys to complain this feels like the perfect solution. I encourage you to go out and give it a try. The most it will cost you is about $4 for a roll of 36 exposures and should be around $2 for developing. And as you walk out of your local CVS negatives in hand, try and not be so negative about different emulsions.

For more images shot with BW400CN take a look at my overview of the Lomo LC-A here