New Arista Paper

[DeBone 75]

Any idea what this is: http://www.freestylephoto.biz/40184...e-VC-RC-Semi-Matte-8x10-100-Sheets?cat_id=501.
Is this to be another paper to like just to loose later. Now I know that may sound cynical but every time I get to like one, bye! Any how who do you think makes it.

 

[david b]

Losing b&w materials is the way of our world right now, so either get a freezer and stock up or just roll with it.

 

[ath]

Comparing the very few data given in the datasheet by Freestyle I found that the sensitivity matches AGFA MCP but not Kentmere VC select or Fomaspeed Variant. IIRC EFKE is significantly slower.
If this is (another?) reincarnation of AGFA MCP this would be very interesting.

 

[Chazzy]

Any idea what this is: http://www.freestylephoto.biz/40184...e-VC-RC-Semi-Matte-8x10-100-Sheets?cat_id=501.
Is this to be another paper to like just to loose later. Now I know that may sound cynical but every time I get to like one, bye! Any how who do you think makes it.

"Exclusively manufactured for Freestyle Photographic Supplies, this high quality B&W photographic paper is supplied to us by a major manufacturer in the European Union"

There aren't that many major photographic manufacturers in the European Union. If it were Foma, Freestyle would label it as Arista Edu Ultra. Besides Foma, who is left? It can't be Ilford, unless they have changed their policy about no longer supplying private label brands.

 

[Ian Grant]

It can't be Ilford, unless they have changed their policy about no longer supplying private label brands.

Ilford do supply Private label brands. Bergger, Adox (Fotoimpex) etc, in the past they've supplied Fuji, and reportedly Oriental.

What they don't do now is re-badge an Ilford product as private label, but they will manufacture to contract, they are supplying the new "Impossible Project".

Ian

 

[Chazzy]

Ilford do supply Private label brands. Bergger, Adox (Fotoimpex) etc, in the past they've supplied Fuji, and reportedly Oriental.

What they don't do now is re-badge an Ilford product as private label, but they will manufacture to contract, they are supplying the new "Impossible Project".

Ian

So do you think it is probably made by Ilford especially for Freestyle?

 

[Ian Grant]

I wouldn't speculate, no ones reported anything about the quality & characteristics yet. Remember Freestyle were the Kentmere distributors in the US, they used to own the Kentmere.com website and currently supply Adox - both EFKE & Fotoimpex (Agfa), Foma, etc papers as well as Maco/Rollei's rebadged stuff so they have close business links with all the companies.

Ian

 

[el wacho]

if you look closely it's rc ...

 

[Ian Grant]

RC can equal VC just as FB can .

So MCP is RC & VC

MCC is VC & FB.

And some Rock Fans like AC/DC

Ian

 

[wrench]

From what I've been able to put together, the private reserve line used to be rebranded Agfa, but was discontinued when Agfa went under. Since Adox recently replaced the Agfa line, my best guess is that the new stuff is rebranded Adox MCP. I called a freestyle rep last week and asked point blank if it was Adox, she hesitated for a moment and then said 'yes'. This certainly fits with the EU production. I've ordered a box of it so I'll let you know for sure when I get it. If it is indeed Adox, we should consider ourselves lucky, I've been using the MCP with great results since it first came out, and what could be better but to get it for even less!

 

[DeBone 75]

Now we're talkin

 

[Ian Grant]

Just remember the really big profit's have gone, coating film or paper is much more hand too mouth.

So you need to sell all you can before you make more.

At one time Kodak was like a milk cow that just never stopped increasing lactating, it generated huge profits b& dividends. Agfa & Ilford would have had their own similar histories.

Ian

 

[clayne]

I bought 1000 sheets of it in 5x7 gloss RC. It's quality paper. Bright base that stays white, sits flat, quite usable contrast range, and sharp. The price is too ridiculous (in a good way) not to buy some. I've even ordered some more.

I've always been under the impression it was MCP.

 

[AgX]

There aren't that many major photographic manufacturers in the European Union. If it were Foma, Freestyle would label it as Arista Edu Ultra. Besides Foma, who is left? It can't be Ilford, unless they have changed their policy about no longer supplying private label brands.

You forgot about Agfa and Fuji.


Actually Agfa did a production run of that new paper.

 

[wrench]

Well, I haven't run a side by side test, but I did get a chance to use the paper quite a bit. So far it seems identical to the Adox MCP line in surface texture, contrast range and speed, so I'm fairly confident that that is what it is. FWIW, I was using the semi-matte surface.

 

[Anscojohn]

So do you think it is probably made by Ilford especially for Freestyle?

_____

Pardon my ignorance, but is GB a member of the European Union. It's not a Euro currency nation.

 

[mwdake]

Yes, the UK is an EU member.
But, they did not join in the Euro.
There are some things the Brits won't give up; pints of beer and the Pound.

 

[bsdunek]

Yes, the UK is an EU member.
But, they did not join in the Euro.
There are some things the Brits won't give up; pints of beer and the Pound.

Cheers for the Brits!

 

[aldevo]

If this actually is the ADOX 111 paper, I have to admit I don't know why Freestyle is private-labeling it.

Doesn't Freestyle already have an exclusive on the distribution of this paper in the USA?

Not that I'm complaining, mind you

 

[ath]

If this actually is the ADOX 111 paper, [...]

This is a good question. Does Fotoimpex / Adox / Mirko have the exclusive rights for all the paper currently coated with the MCP type emulsion or not?

I don't think so. They have a cooperation, they do not own it. Other companies might get paper from the same coating run.

 

[ADOX Fotoimpex]

Does Fotoimpex / Adox / Mirko have the exclusive rights for all the paper currently coated with the MCP type emulsion or not?

yes.

Best regards,


Mirko

 

[brianmquinn]

Quality control is meant to increase the odds that items that come off an assembly line meet the quality standards of the company that produced them. It does not guarantee that the items always do. That is why we have recalls. These standards are not necessarily the highest standards just the standards the company in question has chosen. The company wants each item to be similar in quality so the customer knows what to expect from the product.

If you bought a film from a company and each roll gave different results you would stop using buying it. A given photographer may use Ilford film in his Nikon and XYZ China film in his Holga. That is because he knows what to expect form each type of film.

If a company makes a batch of product and it does not meet standards what are they to do? Trash the batch? Maybe if it is really bad. But what if it is just a little under standard. If they sell it under their brand name they risk their reputation with their best customers. These are the costumers who have been buying it and expect certain results. These people may try to reprint a negative and have it be an exact match to an existing print. They can do a side-by-side comparison.

The company could sell the batch of paper that was OK quality but not perfect under another name. It may perform well and may be very similar to their regular product but just not perfect.

Perhaps that is the case with ADOX and this batch of paper. This does not say ADOX has poor quality control. On the contrary it says they have good quality control and they only want their best product to have the ADOX name.

 

[lns]

Actually, contrary to the implication in the previous post, private label brands are not the same things as "irregulars" or "seconds." I would be shocked if Freestyle agreed to market under its private label a product that was rejected by a manufacturer. Certainly not without disclosing it. I'm not even sure that would be legal under U.S. law. To the contrary, Freestyle is marketing this product as high quality. So I just don't think that's the case.

One reason a manufacturer would choose to relabel some of its product for private label sale would be to sell extra product it makes but doesn't think it can sell at full price. Think of Freestyle's Arista Premium film. I assume the manufacturer has to make a certain number of feet of film per run, but believes it cannot sell the entire run at full price. So it is willing to sell the remainder for private label use.

Another common reason a manufacturer turns to private label sales is to guarantee a larger production run. If, for example, a manufacturer can get an order for 10,000 boxes of paper for private label sale, its initial sales are increased, creating cash flow and giving creditors confidence, as well as keeping the lines running. That's a great way to start a business, in fact. Especially when you're not sure what your initial sales will be.

-Laura

 

[MattKing]

Product that is off specifications, but otherwise high in quality, would be an excellent candidate for private label sales.

For example, if Kodak had a master roll of Plus-X that turned out to be closer to 100 ISO than 125 ISO ...... .

Not saying that this actually happened, but ....

Matt

 

[brianmquinn]

Actually, contrary to the implication in the previous post, private label brands are not the same things as "irregulars" or "seconds." I would be shocked if Freestyle agreed to market under its private label a product that was rejected by a manufacturer. Certainly not without disclosing it. I'm not even sure that would be legal under U.S. law. To the contrary, Freestyle is marketing this product as high quality. So I just don't think that's the case.
-Laura

Many people continue to insist that you can buy a name brand product in a generic box and be guaranteed the same quality as the name brand item? You can’t. You get what you pay for. However just because you pay less does not mean you are getting defective product. There is no law or Freestyle policy about this.

Every film and paper has characteristics; some “good” some “bad” all the properties are trade offs. You can’t get 1600 speed and 100 speed fine grain in the same film. Price is one of those characteristics that you trade off.

For example Freestyle sells Arista EDU ultra 400 film. However this film is not even 400 speed. It is closer to 200 speed. I would not be happy with a box of Tri-X that turned out to be 200 speed. That said, I use the Arista EDU film from Freestyle. I like it and know what to expect from it but I also use Kodak Tri-X.

It is said that the Arista Premium films are Kodak Plus-X and Tri-X. I have used them and I agree they perform very similar and I am convinced that Kodak makes them in Rochester and finishes them in Mexico. However with Kodak you pay more but expect and demand consistent performance. If I use Arista Premium and the film does not perform like Kodak films I have nobody to blame but myself. This film is less then half the price of Kodak. I might get the same results but should not expect and demand them.

I use have used Ekfe films that have a very soft emulsions that scratches easily. In that manner they are inferior to Kodak but I use them because of the other qualities they have. In short, I know what to expect with Ekfe film.

Go ahead and buy generic film and paper if you want to save money. I do. But do not insist it is exactly the same thing as Kodak or Adox or Fuji unless Kodak or Adox or Fuji says it is. I am sure they never will.