Fuji and larger than 4x5 insant film..a thought process

I was thinking about Fuji and instant films, and I remembered that Fuji marketed (may still) a printer for minilabs that uses instant "peel-apart" technology to make enlargements from customer negatives up to 12" wide. It is a laser-exposure machine and takes rolls of film and receiver sheets and the processing and peeling apart, etc., is all done inside the machine. Therefore when recharging the machine you have a waste roll of used negatives to throw away. I believe this was called Fuji Pictorio (fuzzy memory, not absolutely sure). The results from this machine are just fine.

Now, if they already coat and produce materials in this large size (in color) for their own machines, it would seem to me that it is only a minor issue (for a big company) to alter the cutting and packaging of these materials to an 8x10 size suitable for use with the Polaroid 8x10 film holder and processor for camera use.

An interesting thought indeed.

I wrote to Fuji-san about a year ago and told them that if they could make 8x10 peel-aparts that deliver the quality of fp100b/c then I and many others would be very interested.

But frankly, this would be just about the nichiest of the niche products. On the one hand you have the clientele who want to use instant cameras and get cute little instant miniprints of their boyfriends or girlfriends doing crazy things in Tokyo, who may now be leaning towards an inexpensive digital and bluetoothing their shot to a nearby polaroid printer; on the other hand you have very serious 8x10 shooters who will say the fp films don't have quite the tonal complexity they can get via standard 8x10 films. I don't see how 8x10 instants will gain traction in either community.

I sure do wish it were possible though!

One can only hope.

Yes Polaroid material doesn't have the same 'tonal complexity' as film, but then that's why I use 8x10 Polaroid material, for its unique look and feel.

Think of the world with only oil paint, and no watercolor.

I agree, Walt, I do like the tonality of the fp100b ... actually I was shocked how much I liked it, and dismayed that I couldn't get my own prints from b&w film to have quite the same snap. The "problem" with the fujiroids is that you have the latitude of slide film, in an age when people wank over HDR. I don't see it as a problem because I adore the contrast and sharpness. But... what part of the market am I....

I think in my letter to Fuji-san I said something like, "I would be willing to live out my days shooting nothing but fp100b/c in 8x10 format." I'm sure they got a good laugh out of that.

Well, to explain further (or again), the peel apart products use pods. These pods require a special machine for manufacture, and must operate under an inert atmosphere. In addition, the pods have a finite lifetime and cannot be frozen.

So, Fuji makes a product for a machine, and it uses an activator. Nice, but no cigar. The activator is a solution, not a goo for a pod. This is like saying you have a bicycle and are going to attach a motor and have an automobile. Thats a reach!

No, there is R&D and construction of packaging equipment to be done to go from one to another. This will require several millons of dollars. Can the market support it? If so, you will see the product, but if not, you will not see the product.

Even if it is to be done, don't expect a product for several years at the least due to lag (or lead) times needed in R&D, construction, debugging, testing and then finally production and distribution.

BTW, if the equipment existed in mothballs, it would probably still take a year to ramp up to useful product.

PE

There is no doubt that R&D and engineering would have to be done for any product expansion by Fuji... However, since Fuji is firmly in the instant-film business, and also (by their own words) firmly committed to film, it would seem that it would be a logical expansion of their market, and has a built-in customer factor, since the only possible competition is closing shop on all instant materials (Polaroid).

The "film" component of any size Fuji FP100c color product I would think would be the same...just cut to different sizes. The receiver sheet (final print) would be the same, just cut and finished to different sizes. It is the assembly, pod manufacture, and other various bits that would have to be designed and engineered....so it is not like asking for a product to be designed and built from scratch...some of the critical components are already there.

Also, since the film holder for the camera, and film processors already exist (from Calumet and Polaroid), there is in existance equipment without fuel waiting.

PHOTOTONE said:

There is no doubt that R&D and engineering would have to be done for any product expansion by Fuji... However, since Fuji is firmly in the instant-film business, and also (by their own words) firmly committed to film, it would seem that it would be a logical expansion of their market, and has a built-in customer factor, since the only possible competition is closing shop on all instant materials (Polaroid).

The "film" component of any size Fuji FP100c color product I would think would be the same...just cut to different sizes. The receiver sheet (final print) would be the same, just cut and finished to different sizes. It is the assembly, pod manufacture, and other various bits that would have to be designed and engineered....so it is not like asking for a product to be designed and built from scratch...some of the critical components are already there.

Also, since the film holder for the camera, and film processors already exist (from Calumet and Polaroid), there is in existance equipment without fuel waiting.

Click to expand...

You are right in everything. However, the cost of doing this must be less than the return. This means that if the company invests $2M over a year, it must then get a return of well over $2M to recoup expenses and make a profit.

So, as my guesstimate of cost is ballparkish and probably quite low, I ask if you think there is say about $4M / year in sales out there for this product?

I don't know. Only Polaroid really knows and they are closing even though they have all of the equipment on-hand. They have no R&D costs and no building costs or startup costs to consider and they feel that even as a relative 'freebie', there is insufficient market.

Now, being right does not mean you are 'right'. You see what I mean?

PE

Photo Engineer said:

You are right in everything. However, the cost of doing this must be less than the return.
Now, being right does not mean you are 'right'. You see what I mean?

PE

Click to expand...

I see your point...however Polaroid operates out of some of the most expensive and valuable real estate in the USA..property that can be sold for enormous profit for redevelopment..this factor is totally outside the equation.

Fuji already has production facilities they are going to keep operating, more products to market can more fully utilize the facilities.

Of course this is just a thought process on my part.

I do believe that if you take the Polaroid real estate value out of the equation, the profit from film manufacture might be somewhat different. And one must consider that the Petters group (owners of Polaroid name) do not have historic roots in the photography industry. Petters is an investment group interested in maximizing their investment in the Name not particular products. One wonders how many years after the cessation of instant film and camera manufacturing will the Polaroid name still have any "good will" value.
For that matter, how many years of "good will" in name recognition would Kodak have for non-photographic products, if they discontinued all photo related activities? Would People buy Kodak lightbulbs? Kodak deoderant soap in 2050?

It is telling that in the photography world, when we take an instant proof of a shot to show to a client, we say we are taking a "Polaroid" of a shot. "Here, let me take a Polaroid and show you what I am getting." Now of course we are taking "Fujiroids".

As long as we don't have hemirhoids doing it!

You are right of course, but we must also consider the fact that Ilford's property is approaching the value of the land IIRC. What does that mean? It isn't true of Kodak property, but might be of Fuji property in Ashigara as it is right next to several big electronics plants.

No, I think that Fuji will take a pass on this, but then again, who knows.

PE