Acros II RELEASED!

[Tom Kershaw]

Is this a sign of things to come, one specialist B&W coater & manufacturer for all the brands.
Could this concept spread to C41 & E6?

Only having one manufacturer for each film technology / process seems a bit risky and also possibly reduces competition.

 

[Henning Serger]

Surprised that Harman is not worried about a cannibalizing their own product

They probably don't see a problem with that, and I agree with them:
Delta 100 and Acros 100 are quite different films, each with its own, unique character: Acros with its orthopanchromatic sensitisation, and its unique reciprocity charateristics (unique in the BW world, in colour Provia 100F has the same exceptional strength).
And also with its extremely fine grain, which is in certain developers even a bit finer than that of TMX.
On the other hand Delta 100 with its normal panchromatic sensitisation and its excellent sharpness and resolution, which both surpass Acros. Grain is not as fine as that of Acros.
So both films have a different look. I like and use both, but for different subjects.
Horses for courses.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[Henning Serger]

Is this a sign of things to come, one specialist B&W coater & manufacturer for all the brands.

No, definitely not. Keep cool. From all my recent talks and factory visits I can ensure you that that is not the direction the industry has chosen. It is just a little bit the other way round: In about five years we will probably have more manufacturers (real ones with own emulsion making and coating) in operation and offering photo films than five years ago.

Could this concept spread to C41 & E6?

No, see above.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[Henning Serger]

Concerning the "Made in UK" topic:
That does not necessarily mean that the whole production (from emulsion making to converting) is done there, at Harman technology / Ilford Photo.
There are two other possibilities, too:

1. Emulsion production and coating is done by Fujifilm in Japan, but converting / finishing is done by Harman. Just have a look at some of the Lomography CN films: The film is made by Kodak, and then the master rolls are shipped to China for converting. On the films "Made in China" is printed.
The regulations for the "Made in...." differ from country to country. But it looks like if final assembling and QC is done in a country, and this assembly is responsible for a certain part of the added value, then a "Made in..." of the country of that final production step is correct. And that is the case with film converting.
Why would Fujifilm go that way?
Fujifilm has significant backorders for their colour film (especially CN film) for over a year now. Demand is surpassing supply (production capacity). Looks like converting is the bottleneck. With Acros II converting in addition on the same converting lines the backorder problem for colour film would even increase. So an outsourcing of converting would make sense in such a situation.

2. Emulsion is made by Fujifilm, and coating and converting is done by Harman technology. In this case much more work is needed, because the emulsion has to be adapted to the Ilford coating machine.
And such an adaption process is not trivial. But by that Fujifilm could keep its unique know-how concerning the Acros emulsion. And transport of emulsion is not a problem at all: I have seen emulsion "bricks" at my factory visits: Photo emulsions are not in liquid form after production has finished, they have a kind of "gelee" consistance, solid, but a bit flexible (before coating they are heated and become a liquid). They are packed in black resin packages, which can be easily transported. That emulsions were made at one factory, and coating was done at a different factory abroad, has been (and is) the case in film production several times. It is not unusual.
Why would Fujifilm go that way?
From my Ilford factory visit and my talks to Simon I know that Ilford has the capability to make small(er) coating runs quite efficiently. Maybe Fujifilm's analysis came to the conclusion that expected demand for Acros II and Ilford's coating flexibility and efficiency are a better match currently.

Both are possibilities. Not more, not less.
Currently we don't know which route Fujifilm has choosen and why. But I think both Fujifilm and Harman technology have well analysed for themselves the benefits of this cooperation.
For us photographers much, much more important is how similar Acros II will be to Acros. Whether there will be significant differences or even improvements. I am looking forward to test it .

Best regards,
Henning

 

[GLS]

I hope the 120 version will retain the Fuji-type self-adhesive binding tape, spool and hole in the backing paper leader. The latter two are especially handy when loading cameras that like to slip a bit during initial take up.

 

[lantau]

I hope the 120 version will retain the Fuji-type self-adhesive binding tape, spool and hole in the backing paper leader. The latter two are especially handy when loading cameras that like to slip a bit during initial take up.

My first thought when I heard about it. I wonder if Fuji can supply their backing paper, provided it can run through Harman machines.

I also love Fujis wrappers. Fuji 120 films are like candy. Unfortunately I never had a chance, so far, to meaningfully binge shoot them

 

[B.S.Kumar]

Japanese companies are inter-linked to a far greater degree than is apparent. Seemingly aggressive competitors have close operating and financial ties to each other, and investments in common suppliers. So this kind of co-operation is not unknown to the Japanese.

Also, the Japan-EU trade agreement came into force in January, 2019, which means no customs duties on products either way. The pact would probably continue with the UK in a similar form. It makes sense to outsource a smaller product line to another supplier, if quality is maintained. The Japanese market is shrinking. Earlier the bulk of film would be shipped out of the country. As a global corporation, it doesn't matter where the product is manufactured, as long as overall profits are maintained or increased.

Kumar

 

[runswithsizzers]

Surprised that Harman is not worried about a cannibalizing their own product

Can't wait til we see the first samples (from experienced reviewers)

If Fuji prices Acros II like they have their other films, Ilford needs not worry too much about competition from Fuji.

 

[B&Wpositive]

Concerning the "Made in UK" topic:
That does not necessarily mean that the whole production (from emulsion making to converting) is done there, at Harman technology / Ilford Photo.
There are two other possibilities, too:

1. Emulsion production and coating is done by Fujifilm in Japan, but converting / finishing is done by Harman. Just have a look at some of the Lomography CN films: The film is made by Kodak, and then the master rolls are shipped to China for converting. On the films "Made in China" is printed.
The regulations for the "Made in...." differ from country to country. But it looks like if final assembling and QC is done in a country, and this assembly is responsible for a certain part of the added value, then a "Made in..." of the country of that final production step is correct. And that is the case with film converting.
Why would Fujifilm go that way?

Henning,

What exactly is entailed in "converting" with respect to film manufacture? Also, when you mention the "made in China" Lomography Color neg films that are made at Kodak and "Converted" in China, is the ISO 100 120 film one of those? I know it says "Made in China". But the 35mm 100, 400, and 800 all say "made in USA" so I assume on those that Kodak does it all.

And finally, do you know anything about whether it would be likely for Fuji to sell Acros II in the US eventually, and what might go into the decision on their end?

 

[B.S.Kumar]

There are complicated rules for defining country of origin, with varying percentages of "value addition" that depends on the countries that are trading with each other. Generally, without preferential treatments being considered, at least 50% of the value addition done in a particular country would determine the country of origin and hence, the "Made in" label. A brief overview is here: https://www.customs.go.jp/roo/english/origin/outline_of_roo.pdf

Fuji has already announced that Acros will be available in "other markets, including the USA" starting spring 2020.

Kumar

 

[flavio81]

1. Emulsion production and coating is done by Fujifilm in Japan, but converting / finishing is done by Harman. Just have a look at some of the Lomography CN films: The film is made by Kodak, and then the master rolls are shipped to China for converting. On the films "Made in China" is printed.

Bingo. This seems the most likely situation.

Fujifilm has significant backorders for their colour film (especially CN film) for over a year now.

WOW, this is something to celebrate for, to be honest!! A happy problem!!

 

[DREW WILEY]

All quite interesting and encouraging. I'm not in a hurry because I still have a decent reserve of the previous ACROS in both 120 and 4x5. The only minor gripe is the inability of this film to be developed to a much higher than normal gamma, contrast-wise. And then when an exceptionally strong magenta or blue filter is required for to significantly boost contrast using VC paper, the highlights do show a bit more granularity than ideal. So the purported improvements seem ideal to me. Sheet film is a whole different problem. I won't buy sheets unless they're on dimensionally-stable polyester. But even acetate base would have to be thicker than roll film to be functional, and require a different stock without the added antihalation density of 120 roll film, which is daylight loaded. Since super-fine grain is not as important in large format work, I'm not terribly worried about sheet film not being offered again for awhile, if ever. There are plenty of other options. But I do miss ACROS 4X5 Quickload sleeves for long-haul backpacking applications. And the orthopan sensitivity was particularly nice for mountain use.

 

[Arcadia4]

Harman and Fuji already have a longstanding co-operation on Fujifilm Neopan 400CN so Harman would be the obvious partner for Acros production given they must already meet fuji quality specs for converting and packing in fuji branding. On the 120 a give away is single rolls as Ilford only pack film in singles whereas Fuji currently only offer 120 pro packs.

As an aside Neopan 400CN is currently only sold in the UK, one would have thought Fuji might offer it more widely (mainly as it wouldn't be worth packing it for a UK only quantity).

 

[foc]

Is Neopan 400CN simply Ilford Xp2 super relabeled?

I know Fuji have said that it is different to XP2 but IMO it is the same. ( I have shot a lot of both)

My belief is that it is just a marketing pitch to try and separate the two same products (Ilford XP2 & Fuji 400CN).
And to further add to the matter, why was the Fuji 400CN product only available in certain markets?

Just think about the logistics of manufacturing a different emulsion and then getting the company that has a very similar product, to coat and pack your emulsion. Does it make economic sense?

This type of rebranding the same manufactured product happens in the food industry all the time, so why should the photo film manufacturing industry be any different?

 

[fdonadio]

I really don’t see the point in chromogenic black and white films anymore. This used to be a great differential when color processing was ubiquitous (and had even 1-hour turnaround) and black and white processing was a niche and, so, expensive.

Now you can get a great black and white emulsion like Acros or even Tri-X and process it at home, cheaper than sending it out for processing, which may need postage and take days to get the negatives back. Yes, C-41 can be processed at home, but it’s harder.

The only practical advantage I can see in chromogenic black and white films is scanning. Since they only have pigment clouds (no silver image) on the processed negative, one can use the ICE features of the scanner/software to remove dust and scratches.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

I haven't used much XP2 Super but the scanning advantage is there and I imagine the film would do well in strong contrast conditions like mountain ranges etc.

 

[summicron1]

Surprised that Harman is not worried about a cannibalizing their own product

Can't wait til we see the first samples (from experienced reviewers)

Quite the opposite -- more film is good for everyone. In marketing, the best place to set up a new business is right next to the same thing -- you build economies of scale and attract more folks with more choices.

 

[DREW WILEY]

If both Harman and Fuji weren't making money doing this, neither would be involved. Lots of manufacturers serve as subcontractors to corporations which would otherwise be considered their competitors. Some do certain tasks better than others, or simply have the infrastructure to keep doing it. I've even seen competing corporations suing another over patent rights to one particular line of products, while, at the same time, forming joint ventures to bring out new product lines.

 

[destroya]

im hoping its just that fuji needs harman to do a small run to get the film out there while they ramp up their own production line to make more, hence a better economy of scale.

 

[Henning Serger]

Henning,
What exactly is entailed in "converting" with respect to film manufacture?

There are several terms used for it: In German it is "Konfektionieren". In English the terms converting and finishing are used mostly.
In film production you have the first two main steps:
Making the film emulsion and then coating it onto the film base. After that you have a big master roll (Kodak's term/ name for it), parent roll (Ilford's term used for it) or Jumbo roll (term used by Agfa, ADOX, Ferrania and some others).
All production steps after coating belong to the converting production steps: Cutting the master / parent / Jumbo roll into pancakes. Cutting the pancakes into films of the final film lengths, perforating of 35mm film, exposing film name and the frame numbers onto the film, spooling it into 35mm cassettes or with rollfilm assembling the film to the backing paper, putting the films into foils, canisters and boxes.

Also, when you mention the "made in China" Lomography Color neg films that are made at Kodak and "Converted" in China, is the ISO 100 120 film one of those?

Yes, e.g.

I know it says "Made in China". But the 35mm 100, 400, and 800 all say "made in USA" so I assume on those that Kodak does it all.

Yes, these standard colour film emulsions are all made by Kodak. The Lomochrome films are made by a different manufacturer.

And finally, do you know anything about whether it would be likely for Fuji to sell Acros II in the US eventually, and what might go into the decision on their end?

Acros II will be most likely sold worldwide next year. It makes much sense to introduce it step-by-step and not at once in the major markets. Because hundreds of thousands of films have to be converted. That takes time. And Ilford has of course no interest at all that Acros II converting leads to converting bottle necks of the Ilford films. Their priority must be that all Ilford films have priority in production.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[B&Wpositive]

Acros II will be most likely sold worldwide next year. It makes much sense to introduce it step-by-step and not at once in the major markets. Because hundreds of thousands of films have to be converted. That takes time. And Ilford has of course no interest at all that Acros II converting leads to converting bottle necks of the Ilford films. Their priority must be that all Ilford films have priority in production.

Do you know if it's only the "converting" or rather all steps that are being done at Ilford for Neopan Acros II ? And any idea why Fuji subcontracted to Ilford? Could this be a temporary thing and eventually Fuji may do it themselves? Or is it likely they've given up making black and white themselves in-house? Are there still any other current Fuji black and white films being made anywhere currently?

And as far as the Lomography color negative film, let me double check with you: Even the 120 films (emulsion coating steps) are done at Kodak, but then shipped to China for cutting and assembling with backing paper, spooling, etc.? If so, how much does the portion done in China (by what was formerly Lucky???) affect the film quality? I remember hearing on here about reports of marks or halos in the negatives, due to some issue with the paper, if I remember correctly.

 

[Henning Serger]

Do you know if it's only the "converting" or rather all steps that are being done at Ilford for Neopan Acros II ? And any idea why Fuji subcontracted to Ilford?

Please see one of my postings above (No 54), in which I have already discussed all that.

Could this be a temporary thing and eventually Fuji may do it themselves?

Maybe. Future will tell.....

Are there still any other current Fuji black and white films being made anywhere currently?

X-Ray films. Fujifilm is one of the biggest global players in that field. And AFAIK archival films.

And as far as the Lomography color negative film, let me double check with you: Even the 120 films (emulsion coating steps) are done at Kodak, but then shipped to China for cutting and assembling with backing paper, spooling, etc.?

Yes.

If so, how much does the portion done in China (by what was formerly Lucky???) affect the film quality? I remember hearing on here about reports of marks or halos in the negatives, due to some issue with the paper, if I remember correctly.

I doubt that the converting in China is done by Lucky. The converting quality is not on the same level as Kodak. I know lots of photographers who have had QC issues, too.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[NedL]

Just got an email from Freestyle that they have it in stock.
$11.99 limited stock. I'm going to order a few rolls of 120 to try... still have a pretty good stash of acros I in my refrigerator.