Fujifilm discontinue variant of Velvia

[Black]

Those lovely hypocrites at Fujifilm are discontinuing variants of Velvia, whilst still continuing to champion their "Choose Film" community. They're getting rid of all their best lines

http://goo.gl/dsKbI

[thegman]

A great shame, but name calling does not help anyone.

I don't want to see Velvia versions be discontinued in any way, but companies are there to make money and serve their shareholders, not us.

[Black]

Originally Posted by thegman

A great shame, but name calling does not help anyone.

Neither do abject lessons in fence sitting. You can't serve share holders if you don't have customers - its a symbiotic relationship, so I can't agree with that.

If people do not voice their opinion, companies, such as Fujifilm will continue to make decisions that will displease many of its customers (I am aware of the percentage of revenue that film provides to Fuji - 1% still does not mean a lot of dissatisfied loyal customers).

I concede that people need to buy the product and/or vote with their feet, however.

[digitalintrigue]

They wouldn't do this if there were a viable market for the products. Personally I never liked 100F, and don't use a 4x5 or 8x10 so won't miss Velvia 50 in those sizes...

[ruby.monkey]

They're discontinuing one variant (RPV 100F, presumably to be taken over by RPV 100) and reducing the range of formats offered in the other (RPV 50) by dropping sheet film. I can't say I'm surprised.

[thegman]

Originally Posted by Black

Neither do abject lessons in fence sitting. You can't serve share holders if you don't have customers - its a symbiotic relationship, so I can't agree with that.

If people do not voice their opinion, companies, such as Fujifilm will continue to make decisions that will displease many of its customers (I am aware of the percentage of revenue that film provides to Fuji - 1% still does not mean a lot of dissatisfied loyal customers).

I concede that people need to buy the product and/or vote with their feet, however.

I 100% agree with voicing an opinion on this, it's possible with enough people making a fuss the decision could even be reversed. What I don't like is this business of calling the company names without considering the reasons behind a decision.

[jwc57]

When my wife needed a P&S, I chose a Fuji digital camera for her....because I use Fuji film--a company with a reputation for quality film, should be able to make a digital camera with equal quality. Film customers may be a small percentage, but we also buy digital cameras for family, as well as ourselves.

[Black]

Originally Posted by thegman

I 100% agree with voicing an opinion on this, it's possible with enough people making a fuss the decision could even be reversed. What I don't like is this business of calling the company names without considering the reasons behind a decision.

I have considered the reasons though - and, from a clinical business point of view, I would expect that it makes sense. I think what really galls me is the whole "Choose Film" community that Fujifilm champion, that completely flies in the face of such decisions.

As I said, if people don't want to lose such products, they need to buy them ( I liked the thread here for a "call to arms" for slide film) but in the case of these variants of Velvia, its too little, too late.

As an aside, I hardly shoot colour film, but I do love the look of Velvia and Velvia 50 was a nice option when abroad. I'll stock up, like I have with Neopan 1600, and when it runs out, it runs out. There is absolutely no milage in one person wailing and gnashing their teeth, so I'm not going to get stressed out over it. I did want to air my opinion though - which I have achieved, so all is good

[folville]

I do shoot large format, so it is a shame to see a great landscape film go, but processing large format color is a huge hassle.

If Fuji serves its core audience by keeping Velvia 50 in 35mm and 120mm, I will walk away from this content (this time).

[texchappy]

Does that mean their going to take it off the X series cameras 'film modes'?

[Nikon Bob]

I guess it is a case of not putting your faith in a company PR line but in what they actually do. That does not make it any less disappointing though.

Bob

[stompyq]

Velvia 100F sucks compared to 50. However it's really sad that they are removing Velvia 50 in 4x5. A Velvia 50 slide in 4x5 (properly exposed) is something to see.

[NLewis]

100F was always on the way out. It was an early attempt to get better skin tones while preserving some of the wild Velvia saturated magic. It was not very popular, because it was not as good for landscapes as Velvia 50 and not as good for people as Provia. Velvia 100 (no F) replaced it, and is better in most every way. If you want better skin tones than Velvia 100, use Provia. If you want the old-fashioned Velvia magic, use Velvia 50. It would make sense to eventually get rid of Velvia 50 and just keep Velvia 100, which is just as good but with a faster speed and much better reciprocity at long exposures. However, people love their Velvia 50. It's like the Tri-X of the film landscape crowd. Velvia 50 has a bit of reddish/orange skew that makes people look ruddy but pumps up sunrises and sunsets.

[Black]

For clarity, an addendum to my original post. Velvia 50 is obviously (thanks to the updated BJP article) still being continued in 35 & 120 and this is somewhat of a relief to me, personally, however, ending any line of film is always sad and I, by no means, expect this to be the end of the line for Fuji killing off ranges of their (in some cases) lovely film. Bitter sweet.

[anjoca76]

When I saw Provia 100F out of stock at B+H this week, I had a hunch something was up, even though I think it was merely a coincidence, seeing as how that's not being discontinued. Very disappointing. Well, looks like I better start stocking up on it now. I've always thought it was the oddball of the Velvia/Provia line, but more film options is always better than less.

[znapper]

It's sad, but I cannot think that 100F was any popular really, I think most people used Provia instead.

I do have 20 rolls of 120 Velvia 50 (10 exp June 2012 and 10 exp Aug. 2012), they have been sitting in my freezer for well over a year already.
- My 9 rolls of 35mm velvias expired way back in 2004 (still good though)

Maybe it's because I don't shoot much landscape these days, but I do tend to use digital for colour (although I love the velvia look).

Not sure if I will miss it all that much (to be brutaly honest), I use mostly b/w film with analog. :/

Going to Turkey in a few hours and I am bringing as much slide and color neg for my 120 as possible (porta 160 and velvia 50), after that is gone, I seriously doubt I will buy more.

[Matus]

Velvia 100F had higher contrast the 50 or 100 while having muted colors - I never understood much why it was introduced. So if Fuji can save some overhead on this film and will keep the remaining (few) lines up - that is fine with me ...

[wblynch]

As long as they have at least one color reversal, one color print and one black and white film available we will be ok.

I never understood the need for so many confusing offerings. With scanners we can adjust the output to suit anyway.

For projection, then we just have to take what we can get and make it work.

[thegman]

Originally Posted by wblynch

As long as they have at least one color reversal, one color print and one black and white film available we will be ok.

I never understood the need for so many confusing offerings. With scanners we can adjust the output to suit anyway.

For projection, then we just have to take what we can get and make it work.

I agree to an extent, although it would be good to keep a couple of different speeds too, like 100 ISO and 400 ISO. I think the worst part is the sheer uncertainty. Velvia 100 may be here now, maybe next year, maybe the one after, but then what? I think people take bad news better than they take not knowing.

I'd personally like to see both Kodak's and Fujifilm's film businesses run as independent companies, without the overhead of being part of a larger "strategy". Simple exist to sell and develop film, that's it.

[Sarcophilus Harrisii]

Originally Posted by Black

Those lovely hypocrites at Fujifilm are discontinuing variants of Velvia, whilst still continuing to champion their "Choose Film" community. They're getting rid of all their best lines

http://goo.gl/dsKbI

In my not so humble opinion the real hypocrites are the people who whinge and moan about the demise of film, or a certain type of film, but don't actually use it. Are you one of them? How much 4x5 or 8x10 Velvia 50 or Velvia 100F have you used this year? If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem. I don't shoot as much film as I would like, but I don't shoot digital, and use as much as I can afford (arguably, more).

It's easy to point the finger at Fuji but they are the ones who are still making transparency film. If you want to criticise one of the manufacturers you may like to start with Kodak, who have stopped making tranny altogether.

It's time for those who are as passionate and committed to using film as they say to put up or shut up. I am SO over these types of threads. Rather than whining about Fuji (who are still actually making reversal) why don't you shut the **** up and shoot some tranny instead? THAT would be doing something to help.
Regards

[Sarcophilus Harrisii]

Originally Posted by Black

As an aside, I hardly shoot colour film, but I do love the look of Velvia and Velvia 50 was a nice option when abroad.

Hang on, you've already answered my question. Yeah, I thought so. Enough said...

[Black]

Originally Posted by Sarcophilus Harrisii

In my not so humble opinion the real hypocrites are the people who whinge and moan about the demise of film, or a certain type of film, but don't actually use it. Are you one of them? How much 4x5 or 8x10 Velvia 50 or Velvia 100F have you used this year? If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem. I don't shoot as much film as I would like, but I don't shoot digital, and use as much as I can afford (arguably, more).

It's easy to point the finger at Fuji but they are the ones who are still making transparency film. If you want to criticise one of the manufacturers you may like to start with Kodak, who have stopped making tranny altogether.

It's time for those who are as passionate and committed to using film as they say to put up or shut up. I am SO over these types of threads. Rather than whining about Fuji (who are still actually making reversal) why don't you shut the **** up and shoot some tranny instead? THAT would be doing something to help.
Regards

Thanks for your not so vaguely infantile, patronising and to be quite frank, insulting response.

I'll attempt to offer reasonable responses to the "issues" you have raised - however, my response will be proportionate and justifiable.

Lets get one thing clear. I shoot film. So thats that assumption circumvented.

With regard to the format of film I have used, I see this as, frankly, irrelevant. I, for one, do not have the gift of foresight, so can not tell what anyone else would be doing in the future, but riddle me this: Would I be in the best position to hazard a guess what I may chose as a format in my future? Yeah, I'm sure there's a saying about assumptions...

Are you suggesting that just because you haven't indulged in something yet, you should not be allowed an opinion on it? Perhaps my opinion would hold more weight if I shot transparency more? Yeah, I'll give you that - but the bigger picture is what effect this will have on film as a medium as a whole. From tiny acorns...

You're right. I could have brought up Kodak and their conspicuous absence of transparency films, but maybe I already have? And if I did do here and now, perhaps some faceless Dudley Doright on the interweb would would just simply post a impotent diatribe saying that the issue with Fujifilm was now more relevant?

You state that you are done with posts like this, yet you quite obviously are not, or else you would not have engaged in it. And, not only having done that, you have done so in a way that to any reasonable person comes across as just being nasty. You could have asked the same questions in a reasonable manner and I would have answered them all, graciously, but instead you wanted to be one of those internet hardmen. For shame. Does not paint you in a very good light, really.

And, with regard to your last "input" about me shutting the **** up and shooting some tranny (I'm not overly interested in cross dressers as a subject by the way, but each to their own), I'll do you a deal. I'll shoot some transparency, because I'm open to reasonable criticism and I'm all adult like that, but I won't be shutting the **** up any time soon, because some random, faceless member on a forum says so via an ill thought out e-rant that they would never likely do in the same "format" if such a discussion was face to face

Oh yes, mustn't forget to end my post with a polite..

"Regards"

[Black]

Originally Posted by Sarcophilus Harrisii

Hang on, you've already answered my question. Yeah, I thought so. Enough said...

Oh yeah, with regard to that pleasantry, you obviously didn't read my post correctly. I hardly shoot colour does not equate to I do not shoot colour, just like I'm sure that your mention of not shooting as much film as you'd like doesn't equate to hardly shooting any.

Have I shot with Velvia? Yep. Velvia 50 was nice to use abroad, as I said in the very same post you "addressed".

Assumptions and speed reading do not a good reply make....

[Joop van Heijgen]

http://choosefilm.com/news/recent-fi...inuations-faq/


Statement" ... According to our notification it is global ..."