Is it a shame Fuji discontinued Superia200 ? What is the reason ?

trendland · Oct 23, 2017

1 year production ....within.... some hours. - sorry.

C200 is a cheap film. It might be cheap on both sides : Cheap to produce and cheap in sale.
But how much expansive must it be to produce Superia200 ?
Don,t forget the 4th layer. ....It is 25% more expensive ?
I can't say if couplers and All the chems you need to produce films are much more expensive in comparison to last decades. But it depends allways to the
volume you need. AND chems never becomes cheaper during the years.
The same is with energy a.s.o.
The question is the comparison of costs between these two films.
Is Superia200 much more expensive in production?
I would say it depends strongly to the volume.
If it is (the volume) simular - cost might be in the near of each other.
Notice : Tadays pricing is more in regard of marketing - the real costs are mostly not the theme.
The pricing is fixed from an answer to a question like :
What are you willig to pay to a new Apple
I phone with xxxx...features.
So forget statements like : The production of a product is soo high - therefore the high price.
You can see this also with different pricing to different markets with the same product.
Wich film it is not in this manner - it is a real crisis. And I realy would not state so.
But I only state production costs of t his 2 films are in a very near.
This is almost the proof to say:
Superia200 is just sold out - C200 is still there to a couple of .....xxx...month.
And Fuji has no todays production to boths films.
If Fuji stated : We are still producing this film or these emulsions they are no lyers.
They just mean "assembling" with saying
"production "

with regards

trendland · Oct 23, 2017

Otherwise Fuji would be realy not smart.
They can sale Superia200 to higher pricing in comparison to C200.
The profit with Superia200 can't be less.
So it depends on the volume - right ?
Is C200 selling much more than Superia?
Yes it could possible be - because of smalest price you see with C200.
But here with C200 you have a group of amateurs wich have been in focus as possible clients from market reserarch in
the past.
My theory is : These amateurs don't use
film in any form today.
And those people who shot film today decide from characteristics of film.
C200 is realy not bad - I like it also,
but Superia200 is definitivly with some
(may be little) better quality.

The decision Fuji made in the past was mostly done in direction to let the more expensive film in programm (they first cut all E6 amateuric films - then they sold exclusivly E6 proffessional films)

Then they had a "monopol" to sell E6 and doubled pricing....

Why Fuji now decided to tell us C200 is still
in programm but Superia200 we can't produce any longer?

Because we will hear soon : Sorry for discontinue next C200.

..unbeleavable these Fuji guys ....

with regards

Lachlan Young · Oct 23, 2017

trendland said:
Of cause - my theory why Fuji discontinued film after film is real strange.
But also remember Kodak was in a terrible situation with a minus of 97,5% less demand to their whole film program.
The situation at Fuji Film was obviously the same but they were not bankrupt. And Kodak stopped film production with E6 and discontinued many other films.
If you remember the parallel of sequence from discontinued films?
It was without any logic with Kodak films. It was just the first selling out films wich was first discontinued.
Remember Agfa's bankruptcy their produced masterrolls of Agfa bw films feed the remaining marked to a full decade.
And if I would have to decide to produce films like Fuji with big coating machines in color.........????????..?????
In such a manner - these coating lines have to run non stop with a minimum of
some weeks just to come in a profit zone with masterrols (due to calculation of costs and sales profit) .....??
I would not let them run to 11,5 hours and stop the line because of the ammound to the full years selling is just reached. (due to -98% ).
With total inefficient costs and possible + 350% more costs.
Perhaps Fujis management spend some million bucks to new coating machines
wich are much smaler AND wich will not reach the full 1 year production wir hin some hours. But I don't believe so.
To me it seams (as I personally would have done) they made a last "big "
production run from coating with most films they discontinued later - this makes real sence.
As we know from Agfa a big amound of normal volume produced masterrols could reach to years in a suddenly very smal market.
But I realy did not know if this is indeed so. I wasn't at Fuji production and have seen the decommissioned coating lines.
But to me it is the reason to stop some films (just because they were sold out)
So it is with Superia200...

with regards

When Agfa shut down the Leverkusen plant, they used up the remaining chemical stocks on site and coated several million square feet of product as I understand - far in excess of what a normal coating run might be & that's where all the NOS APX 100/400/Scala came from. By the time Adox Silvermax hit the market, the NOS Scala was getting pretty foggy & remaining stocks seem to have been dumped/ sent for silver recovery fairly shortly thereafter.

Don't forget that the single most expensive part of a roll of film is not the strip of coated product, but rather the packaging (the 135 canister for example).

And regarding the 3rd party packaging of cheap Fuji neg film etc, it makes sense for Fuji to offload excess stock that they can't sell - if the batch has already broken even, it's pure profit for Fuji & clears dead stock from their warehousing before it goes off & is only fit for silver recovery. And the market for £1/roll neg film is not fussy about quality above the most basic level.

trendland · Oct 23, 2017

Lachlan Young said:
When Agfa shut down the Leverkusen plant, they used up the remaining chemical stocks on site and coated several million square feet of product as I understand - far in excess of what a normal coating run might be & that's where all the NOS APX 100/400/Scala came from. By the time Adox Silvermax hit the market, the NOS Scala was getting pretty foggy & remaining stocks seem to have been dumped/ sent for silver recovery fairly shortly thereafter.

Don't forget that the single most expensive part of a roll of film is not the strip of coated product, but rather the packaging (the 135 canister for example).

And regarding the 3rd party packaging of cheap Fuji neg film etc, it makes sense for Fuji to offload excess stock that they can't sell - if the batch has already broken even, it's pure profit for Fuji & clears dead stock from their warehousing before it goes off & is only fit for silver recovery. And the market for £1/roll neg film is not fussy about quality above the most basic level.

Thanks for that addinional info. To me it seams so Agfa stopped production from one hour to the next with pressing the buttom.
But you are right it was mentioned also from others - they first processed all chemicals AND All stuff from store - and
several weeks later someone pressed the
buttom.

To me the packaging or the canisters to each film is not the most expensive part
of production - I could imagine this is only some cent/film and can be handled also with small volumes (not with smalest of cause)
Well - I am no expert of production from film as I stated.
But to me the most expensive factor in production is the adjustment of a production run from coating lines with big machines. (in color c41,E6).
Costs of calibrations to all chems and other raw materials to one emulsion.
This means you have several test runs in big machines with several times trash films just to recalibration of all parameters from production to optimize.
This is to me one main reason of crisis.
Because of the bad volume ratio from
adjustements and waste - to volume of perfect film.
In the past a single coating line at Kodak Park wich was responcible to produce Kodak Gold 400 possible ran the whole year without stop.
A calibration from change the line to Gold 200 caused losses of efficiency in production.
And I am sure a production manager from Kodak was able to say how much this caused costs per hour (the recalibration process).
This costs are to devite from total ammount of produced films.
No problem with 219.000.000 Kodak Gold 400 within 9month nonstop. production.
Sure it was only some 1/00 cent a film.
Sure the line was calibrated within production from just one of high volume films several times.Just to control.

But it seams to me impossible to run such machines to produce just 75.000 films (in 135-36 equivalent).
AND costs are also incalculable high with
215.000 films - that should be nothing in volume with normal production lines and production possible reached this volume within some hours.

Some days before these costs per film might be
1,01375 cent per film - today this might cost $ 1,23 per film and that is the problem with very low demand to special emulsions - these costs are rising up and up to $2,xxxx AND higher.

So I doubt strongly manufacturers did not find other ways.

with regards

Lachlan Young · Oct 24, 2017

trendland said:
Thanks for that addinional info. To me it seams so Agfa stopped production from one hour to the next with pressing the buttom.
But you are right it was mentioned also from others - they first processed all chemicals AND All stuff from store - and
several weeks later someone pressed the
buttom.

To me the packaging or the canisters to each film is not the most expensive part
of production - I could imagine this is only some cent/film and can be handled also with small volumes (not with smalest of cause)
Well - I am no expert of production from film as I stated.
But to me the most expensive factor in production is the adjustment of a production run from coating lines with big machines. (in color c41,E6).
Costs of calibrations to all chems and other raw materials to one emulsion.
This means you have several test runs in big machines with several times trash films just to recalibration of all parameters from production to optimize.
This is to me one main reason of crisis.
Because of the bad volume ratio from
adjustements and waste - to volume of perfect film.
In the past a single coating line at Kodak Park wich was responcible to produce Kodak Gold 400 possible ran the whole year without stop.
A calibration from change the line to Gold 200 caused losses of efficiency in production.
And I am sure a production manager from Kodak was able to say how much this caused costs per hour (the recalibration process).
This costs are to devite from total ammount of produced films.
No problem with 219.000.000 Kodak Gold 400 within 9month nonstop. production.
Sure it was only some 1/00 cent a film.
Sure the line was calibrated within production from just one of high volume films several times.Just to control.

But it seams to me impossible to run such machines to produce just 75.000 films (in 135-36 equivalent).
AND costs are also incalculable high with
215.000 films - that should be nothing in volume with normal production lines and production possible reached this volume within some hours.

Some days before these costs per film might be
1,01375 cent per film - today this might cost $ 1,23 per film and that is the problem with very low demand to special emulsions - these costs are rising up and up to $2,xxxx AND higher.

So I doubt strongly manufacturers did not find other ways.

with regards

There are comments from Simon Galley when he represented Ilford/ Harman on here to the effect that the canisters & certain packaging etc were the most expensive components per film.

I also recall that the minimum coating length on the M14 machine at Mobberley is about 1600-2000m + startup & stoppage. The Kodak film coater might need a longer minimum length as it is considerably more complex with two multilayer coating heads to Ilford's single multilayer head. No one really knows about Fuji's machine(s) though they are unlikely to be drastically different in design. Also, by way of comparison, the Ilford machine can coat up to 60", the Kodak one 48" (I think), though I recall that the widest rolls of Ilford films available are 50".

I also recall that the Ilford machine can changeover within an hour or so between different products and about a day between paper & film - the Kodak machine is likely to be not far off - and they have the advantage of not having to deal with paper dust etc due to only coating film in B38. And anyway, by the time that a coating run reaches full scale, it should be able to run without needing major recalibration every time, if all the parameters are met, the machine is running regularly & coating more than one product. Furthermore, there may also be internal reasons for coating smaller batches more regularly or larger batches on a longer interval.

More fundamentally than digging into the weeds of multilayer coating, Fuji should be asking itself why Delta 3200 and Portra 800 in 135 are both currently bigger sellers on B&H's website than NPH in either 135 or 120...

trendland · Oct 25, 2017

Lachlan Young said:
There are comments from Simon Galley when he represented Ilford/ Harman on here to the effect that the canisters & certain packaging etc were the most expensive components per film.

I also recall that the minimum coating length on the M14 machine at Mobberley is about 1600-2000m + startup & stoppage. The Kodak film coater might need a longer minimum length as it is considerably more complex with two multilayer coating heads to Ilford's single multilayer head. No one really knows about Fuji's machine(s) though they are unlikely to be drastically different in design. Also, by way of comparison, the Ilford machine can coat up to 60", the Kodak one 48" (I think), though I recall that the widest rolls of Ilford films available are 50".

I also recall that the Ilford machine can changeover within an hour or so between different products and about a day between paper & film - the Kodak machine is likely to be not far off - and they have the advantage of not having to deal with paper dust etc due to only coating film in B38. And anyway, by the time that a coating run reaches full scale, it should be able to run without needing major recalibration every time, if all the parameters are met, the machine is running regularly & coating more than one product. Furthermore, there may also be internal reasons for coating smaller batches more regularly or larger batches on a longer interval.

More fundamentally than digging into the weeds of multilayer coating, Fuji should be asking itself why Delta 3200 and Portra 800 in 135 are both currently bigger sellers on B&H's website than NPH in either 135 or 120...

Well - I would never say anything against
Ilford. With 2 exeptions :

1.) Theo restructured their business 3 times with the lost of many many jobs.
2.) The same time they increased prices
with spezial focus in bulk rolls higher and
higher.

But may be there was no other way...

But lock at their portfolio : All films Ilford ever made are still avaible.
And Ilford SFX is one of this emulsions
ONE can't believe.
A real small demand film.

To Kodaks coating procedures I can't say
if maintenance and calibrations are not neccessary but possible - so they have to run 24/7 The change to an other emmulsion seams to be the key factor from costs.Just of speculation issues.
Therefore adjustments, calebrations, test runs, controls in labs, further test runs, wasted films for test runnings.
The quality controls from Agfa should have been very strong at Leverkusen.
But it seams to be much more expensive at Kodak to get all parameters on highest standard with E6 and of cause also c41.
Remember the need of emmulsion numbers to professionals.
Thats The key to me with smal production volume in color.
Ilford may handle this with bw relatively easy.

with regards

PS : From this points I can't realize how
Ferrania will carry out E6....
But lets see what future will bring.

carlostaiwan · Oct 25, 2017

To those interested in trying the Superia 200, or if you still can access some rolls. I wrote a review about it, I hope you guys like it.
https://carlosgrphoto.com/2017/10/23/fujicolor-superia-200-review/

trendland · Oct 25, 2017

filmconquistador said:
To those interested in trying the Superia 200, or if you still can access some rolls. I wrote a review about it, I hope you guys like it.
https://carlosgrphoto.com/2017/10/23/fujicolor-superia-200-review/

Carlos you've made a fine job with your
side.It looks just great - I wish I would have the time to such substancial comparisons of different emissions.
Sure I have lots of (color emulsions ) -
but perhaps I will do in future.
Let me short ask : From where have you got you color chart with painted colors?

with regards

PS : Wasn't C200 first? I saw this film many years ago in drugstores and supermarkets. 2 film pack $ 1,99 - never
gues this could possible be : " LAST MAN STANDING " in future - with lower speed.

trendland · Nov 6, 2017

GarageBoy said:
I don't trust a thing fuji says regarding film, and I've accepted the fact that anything left in the line up can be gone tomorrow

Well the better method could be to believe Fuji everything they stated 100%
but to expect the 100% oposite they will do.
If they say now : We will produce C200 as alone c41/ISO 200 amateuric emulsion.
You have to know they will not produce this film - they perhaps stopped the production meanwile.
AND OF CAUSE THEY WILL (AND ARE WILLING) TO DISCONTINUE C200 ALSO !
So Fujis comunication isn't real bad.
One only have to translate it correctly.
So we can still trust
all anouncements of Fuji they will give us from now on.
As the (translated) 100% opposite.

with regards

pentaxuser · Nov 6, 2017

trendland said:
Well the better method could be to believe Fuji everything they stated 100%
but to expect the 100% oposite they will do.
If they say now : We will produce C200 as alone c41/ISO 200 amateuric emulsion.
You have to know they will not produce this film - they perhaps stopped the production meanwile.
AND OF CAUSE THEY WILL (AND ARE WILLING) TO DISCONTINUE C200 ALSO !
So Fujis comunication isn't real bad.
One only have to translate it correctly.
So we can still trust
all anouncements of Fuji they will give us from now on.
As the (translated) 100% opposite.

with regards

It seems a strange way to try and sell films. Any thoughts as to why they allegedly act this way?

pentaxuser

trendland · Nov 6, 2017

pentaxuser said:
It seems a strange way to try and sell films. Any thoughts as to why they allegedly act this way?

pentaxuser

Sure it has to do with sharholder value.
AND this is in regard of the whole profit of big companys.
As the case here with Fuji is.Let us just
guess it (the profit) is less than 0,35%
of the total concern profit.
So all share holders would fell into a deep sleep while Fuji is presenting the results last 2 quarters from the film sparte.
They also would fell into the same deep sleep if Fuji presents a minus from 0,35
of the full concern results.
But Fuji managers would also sleep better without this film sparte but they can't find any investors - perhaps they could give it away for less ?
But this they never would trust - I guess.
But sharehoulders and managers are thinking foreward to the day mission is acomplished and Fuji is not involved in film business in any way.

with regards

pentaxuser · Nov 6, 2017

Thanks, so the Fuji directors want us to get so mad about them saying one thing and meaning the opposite that we stop buying all its film and relieve them of the decision to stop making it which is what they want all along. They can then say that we, the consumers, stopped production because we stopped buying Fuji film and it wasn't their fault? They are manoeuvring us, the consumers, to be the party that kills Fuji film production?

Have I got this correct? It is just that in the past Fuji seem to be able to make a decision to stop some film production without any negative intervention by we consumers. Fuji rather than hiding behind negative consumer action which it has orchestrated as in your example to relieve it of appearing nasty, has been accused of taking arbitrary decisions to cut film in the face of clear consumer support. Either Fuji is cowardly as in you statement or it is nasty as in the opinion of others I have seen. It cannot be both at the same time,can it ?

Do you know when Fuji decided on this "talk in riddles to make them mad enough to stop buying film"

pentaxuser

trendland · Nov 7, 2017

Just have a look to Ferrania.I have more than some doubts their plan with E6 will go right.
Today they first need the money to produce some bw films in a second "bigger" production run.
The possible profit from this is an urgent need to advance with further steps.
If this will not happen in a good way - it is the final end of all plans Ferrania worked
since years.
Because they aren't able to spent more of their OWN money into their project.
I am quite sure they have spent private money to finance Ferrania because the sum from crowdfunding is away.
Yes that is real enthusiasm - my respect is for sure to this all.
On the other hand Ferrania is not a group of total idiots - with much of luck it can
be a good business - if everything would work perfect.
And Fuji - what is their intention to film in the future?
Their intention is to sell films wich are foolishsly already produced in the past.
And if this mission is accomplished from emulsion to emulsion they will discontinue film to film - as we noticed in the last month.
A simple advertising campaign to Fujis
new cosmetics line devours much more money as Ferrania ever saw the last 4 years.
How would it be Fuji only spent a part of this money to introduce a simple new emulsion.
Wouldn't this be a good strategy to avoid the destruction of the remaining demand to films.
With higher pricing to E6 every 2 month
they do the opposite.
I realy don't want to know how much money Kodak gave into their grandious marketing campaign to relaunch E6.
I don't want to hear how much costs has gone into facilitys and research of Kodak.
Also Kodaks new management isn't a group of guys wich are not able to count.
They just have a vision.
The vision of Fuji I see is to say good buy from annoying matters into film business.
They are on a good way to this target.

Meanwile they have to reduce their inventories.That is the reason to some films from Fuji we saw no price increasing and wonder about.
Pentaxuser believe me or believe me not :
WHAT WE CAN SEE TODAY WITH FUJI FILMS IS NOTHING ELSE THAT A FINAL
CLEARANCE SALE TO ALL FUJI EMMULSIONS.
Do you just remeber this lucky guy who
called Fuji and asked :
"Please tell me about your definite stocks of Fuji Velvia50 in 8x10"

trendland · Nov 7, 2017

Source : Petapixel

with regards

pentaxuser · Nov 7, 2017

Trendland, I am unclear which bits of your last two posts 88 and 89 address the points I made in my post 87. Any help you can provide me with to help clarify your specific answers in post 88 and 89 to my post 87 will be appreciated. Thanks

pentaxuser

trendland · Nov 7, 2017

FUJI don't care about their film department in any way is the answer.
It is no conspiracy theory from Fuji managers to decide to make us mad from a policy of destructive plans in concern of their own business model -
as you ask !
It is normal sharholder value behavior
we can often see from very big companies.
Complete devisions were sold, closed,
sourced out from following reasons :
1) extreme high costs / ineffective yield
2) high losses
3) new strategic direction
a.s.o

It is part 3) Fuji decided to say good by to films. And this although it generate profit with high pricing (look again to E6).
But this is not enough to shareholders.

Notice : Shareholders want to see a yield
of 8 - 10% sometimes this may be a little
unrealistic and to higher risc.

But they will not see 8 - 10 % of a real small devision with unclear perspektive.
The relation of Fuji Film devision with its
results is very very smal to the rest of the
whole Fuji Group.
It is less that 1% - so my Personal guess (just from speculation) is 0,35%.
Kodak Film division is a little different so it has a more relative role in the Kodak Group.
Ferrania is a good example : 100% relation to films.
The situation to Ferrania managers is quite clear we should know : Make films production successfull hurry up immediately - or you lost everything and this very very soon. And your childs will have nothing to eat.
Friends that is Ferranias background .
But from whom do we here this whimper
of highest costs in production, less demand, problems to get raw compounds
inefective selling bilances ?
From the "Billion Dollar Group Fuji"
It is just a farce !
Is this now clear enough pentaxuser

with regards

pentaxuser · Nov 7, 2017

I think your position on what you are sure is Fuji's decision to abandon film production is clear but in that respect your position was clear before. What I question is this: If Fuji's decision is driven by the shareholders' demand for a higher return than film can provide and the shareholders are "king" then would not the shareholders regards an announcement by Fuji to instantly stop film production as the best outcome. If shareholders want a higher return that film can give them then presumably they do not want to waste time by the longer, more cowardly route of making consumers stop Fuji film production rather than the Fuji board announcing a stop?

If I am more frightened of you who wants me to do action A( stop film) than others then I'll do action A won't I?

Oh and I am not really sure of why Ferrania or Kodak comes into your attempt to make things clear for me in terms of Fuji's alleged position. It didn't really help me understand, unfortunately

pentaxuser

trendland · Nov 7, 2017

....what is the meaning of shareholders value ?
It means everything in concern of a company has to serve the sharholders interest.
After this the rest is on scedule.
The sharholders interest isn't the sucsess of a company.It is the focus to 3 simple numbers.
1) last quarter results
2) estimated results next 2 quaters
And this means "long term investment"
today.
From this concern you may see the more and more no logic affairs in big companys.
And notice pentaxuser : Nobody want to stop you using film.
From Fujis part you should buy all of their
stuff - until they discontinued it.
To the last batch you have to pay most.
IS Fuji still producing Fuji Velvia50?
One of some interisting issues !
From my point they stopped it a time ago.
Wy did Fuji don't tell us? Shareholders forced them not to tell or to tell ?
There is no need to Fuji to tell us - because we will just be informed about when Velvia50 is discontinued.So we know all we have to know.
But meanwile Fuji is selling Vevia50 and if they are going short we will see two price increasments and then the final game with Velvia50 is also finished.
Thats sharholders value pure : Make the max. money and care about NOTHING.
So if you like Fuji films don't wait and buy
this stuff - the cheapest Fuji films are those you see today.Tomorow you have to travel in other Countys just to get the last remaining films in some stores.

with regards

The last you will get from Fuji is Instax.
Therefore you haven't to hurry up

.

trendland · Nov 7, 2017

The policy of Fuji in regard of films is so much out of expected strategy like the policy of Volkswagen due to clean Diesel!

remember this centence!

with regards

NJH · Nov 7, 2017

That one key question is when where the last master rolls for E6 made and are they planning to make more? You state it above but I haven't seen anyone yet answer that question. Its a scary thought but for all we know they may have already made their last of some of the remaining films we love. The way neopan 400 disappeared suddenly left a very sour taste in the mouth, the date on the cartons was close to the time when everyone became aware the film had been killed off which means Fuji themselves knew 2 maybe 3 or more years earlier but didn't tell anyone.

trendland · Nov 7, 2017

NJH said:
That one key question is when where the last master rolls for E6 made and are they planning to make more? You state it above but I haven't seen anyone yet answer that question. Its a scary thought but for all we know they may have already made their last of some of the remaining films we love. The way neopan 400 disappeared suddenly left a very sour taste in the mouth, the date on the cartons was close to the time when everyone became aware the film had been killed off which means Fuji themselves knew 2 maybe 3 or more years earlier but didn't tell anyone.

Sure Fuji is knowing it a couple of month may be years earlier.Perhaps they are waiting to the last few weeks with a decition to start a further production run of backing such or such emulsion again.
But may be also - they prepaired everything to start a new batch run and were told on last moment :"No way - forget it, this film is from this day to classified as discontinued."
But if desicions are made in this way at FUJI Films it should be always this same
procedure......as we can notice it since
????? Since a couple of years.
To Velvia50 is it hard to say if this film is still in production.
But to me it is sure 95%.Just look on pricing, regard bigger formats a.s.o.
If this emulsion would be in production from backing - where is the problem from
confection in 8x10.
Let us say : only a special limited "last edition"
Less demand to this in 8x10??? - I am just laughing

.
Guess it should be sold out within 4 month.

with regards

BradS · Nov 7, 2017

Q: what is the reason?
A: economics.

trendland · Nov 8, 2017

BradS said:
Q: what is the reason?
A: economics.

B : TOTAL INABILITY

SO - THIS IS THE FUTURE OF FUJI FILM. ( next step in 2018 )

IS IT A SHAME ?

with regards

Ces1um · Nov 8, 2017

trendland said:
B : TOTAL INABILITY

View attachment 189642

SO - THIS IS THE FUTURE OF FUJI FILM. ( next step in 2018 )

IS IT A SHAME ?

with regards

not sure if inability is a great answer. They have the ability to produce it, they've just made a decision to not continue producing it. Is it a shame? I think so. Fuji superia was a great film and losing the only 1600 iso colour film out there that still remains in a digital world is a loss. Does it surprise me? No. Film is a niche market, one that is quite small now. I'm surprised we still have as much film availability as we do. Cool picture though.

trendland · Nov 8, 2017

Ces1um said:
not sure if inability is a great answer. They have the ability to produce it, they've just made a decision to not continue producing it. Is it a shame? I think so. Fuji superia was a great film and losing the only 1600 iso colour film out there that still remains in a digital world is a loss. Does it surprise me? No. Film is a niche market, one that is quite small now. I'm surprised we still have as much film availability as we do. Cool picture though.

Sure you may see this in concern of todays film market. I just remember photo magazines from the 80th, 90th with some upcomming articles every 2 - 3 years. They where nearly identical - but not boring to me.

They always started with : All the worldwide films in color. At the end of 2-3 sites they introduced part 2 of there article : " Next month we will show you : All the worldwide films in b+w" So Part 3 was of cause : All the worldwide films in E6 !

To me it is a fundamentally basis to have some different films with different characteristice at same speed from different manufacturers. And last Time we saw this was beween 2000 - 2003 !

Imagine you could buy just only 3 different digital cameras : 9 MP , 25 MP, 100MP from the same manufacturer with price increasments every 3 month ! And you also have a choise of 2 different CELL PHONES :

Thats socialist planned economy to me !

Yes film is indeed a niche market - but ( and that is the case to me ) manufacturers made a much more niche with their total inability for just doing their job. Their task has to be ( in regard of decades of billion dollars profit ) to change the production to smaler volume,
"Oh .... indeed that is a kind of task not easy to hande".... of cause it is not easy but therefore managers in such kind of business are responcible for. Kodak employers lost their jobs from managing inability.Agfa was buncropt due to some money - their sister company
forgot in quarters bilance.

But Fuji has no need to get any problems with film production from economic issues
because they SWIM IN FRESH MONEY. From where they have theese finacial resources ? Of cause from film sellings the last 45 years.And of cause from many other new business.

And they got this money from us ( $ 17,95 to simple 135-36 E6 )..... and sure I believe it is fresh film to very small volume backed from emulsion 1. quarter 2017 ( therefore theese high costs ) AND OF CAUSE FUJI CAN´T CREATE PROFIT FROM SELLING THIS 2011 MADE
FILMS FROM LAST BATCH

.....

I would guess Fuji Magagers are still angry to themselfes to these issues : "By the hell why we produced not the double volume with last batch of xxy xy xx films in 20011, 2009, 2012 because now we where forced to discontinue again such emulsions produced to much less cost in the past with much phantastics price increasments. Now we have not the machines for it and are also not allowed to restart like KODAK..

with regards

Is it a shame Fuji discontinued Superia200 ? What is the reason ?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency