Fuji wanted to get out of the B&W market. It's already heavily saturated by Ilford, Kodak, and others. It didn't make much sense for them to remain in that market and try to compete with them. It's also why Fuji is slowly backing out of the C41 color film market. Kodak has a pretty strong foothold in that one, and it doesn't make a whole lot of sense for them to continue. Fuji is instead focusing on E4 slide film and RA4 color paper. Up until recently, they were the only game in town when it came to E4. And Kodak just has the one film. And while Kodak makes RA4 paper, they only sell it in rolls. Fuji sells theirs in sheets (and some rolls). Fuji doesn't make B&W paper, because there are so many other companies that do.
The trend here is that Fuji is being proactive and trying to keep their products with low sales volume from weighing down the rest of the company. So they're focusing on the market segments that actually have better long term viability for them, thus keeping themselves and the other photographic companies, in better financial health.
So while it may seem like Fuji doesn't care about film photographers, they actually care a good deal about them. Fuji pretty much just makes photography products as a service to their old customer base out of a sense of loyalty. Fuji, as a company, makes the majority of it's income through non photographic products, like healthcare equipment, pharmaceuticals, the print industry, and what they call "highly functional materials". If they were like most companies, they'd abandon photography all together since they don't need it to survive, there's not a lot of future growth potential, and it induces a lot more risk than possibility of reward.
Despite the price it has a clean look and a low reciprocity failure than many long exposure photographers like. I had the impression it has always sold well. So why they discontinued?
I'm not sure "just" is the right word here.They'll just bring back a previous emulsion they discontinued.... like Presto. They would need to fill a void... perhaps 1600. I shot quite a bit of it in Japan in the 90's. I loved it.
+1I am more interested seeing them bring Astia back. Acros was a nice and unique film but not different enough to be indespensible.
Acros was a nice and unique film but not different enough to be indespensible.
Down the line, I'll have to find the lowest recip. film I can with an image structure I like.
I'm not sure "just" is the right word here.
While colour transparency film is a lot more complex than black and white film, the reliable information I've received about the return of Ektachrome, including how much Kodak had to do to change its procedures in order to deal with the change of availability of source components, indicates to me that bringing back a discontinued emulsion is certainly not an easy process.
Fuji is almost completely out of the color neg film business except for a few amateur products, and their current offering of positive chrome film is an endangered species too, even more so if Kodak doesn't step back in. There are decent workarounds for ACROS, even better in certain respects. But it did have a certain combination of traits making it quite desirable, so I put a decent stash of it in my freezer.
I'm not sure "just" is the right word here.
While colour transparency film is a lot more complex than black and white film, the reliable information I've received about the return of Ektachrome, including how much Kodak had to do to change its procedures in order to deal with the change of availability of source components, indicates to me that bringing back a discontinued emulsion is certainly not an easy process.
Fuji is almost completely out of the color neg film business except for a few amateur products,
and their current offering of positive chrome film is an endangered species too, even more so if Kodak doesn't step back in.
Pro160NS
As far as I understood, 160NS is now discontinued. Note how it doesn't appear on the advert you attached.
As a printmaker, there's no future there.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?