Old 4 Weeks Ago   #41
Timmyjoe
Registered User
 
Timmyjoe's Avatar
 
Timmyjoe is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 2,920
Just keeping my fingers crossed that my Nikon Coolscan 9000 keeps chugging out the scans. The quality is fine for me, and it covers the film formats I still shoot.

Best,
-Tim
__________________
http://www.timcarrollphotography.com

New Photo Books
Sturgis Stories
& Scenes From Sturgis
now available
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #42
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 45
Posts: 19,746
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ko.Fe. View Post
Shocked? Why? Film is not in use anymore by professionals where super high resolution is needed. You could scan 135 for decent prints with Plustek and MF, LF with Epson flatbed. For web even camera will do or cheap MiC scanner.
®

Plenty of artists still use film and I certainly see scanned film printed as ink jet prints in galleries.

Quote:
Resurgence, if any, happened among amateurs, those are happy with iPhone scanning gizmo, because it allows to dump their scans to their major place, Insta. This needs only 600x600 pixels to get hundreds of likes .
It might not be mainstream, but there is more to photography than amateurs and commercial pros.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #43
HHPhoto
Registered User
 
HHPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,686
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ko.Fe. View Post
Shocked? Why? Film is not in use anymore by professionals where super high resolution is needed.
Well, that is not correct. Film is used also by professionals.
The professional demand for film is even increasing in the following market segments: Portrait, wedding, fashion.

Cheers, Jan
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #44
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 45
Posts: 19,746
Quote:
Originally Posted by HHPhoto View Post
I am not surprised at all. Because
1) we have new scanners in the market, from ICG drum scanners to Noritsu minilab scanners to good Reflekta and Plustek amateur scanners to Epson flatbed scanners.
To me these choices reflect the low end and the high end. There isn`t something great at an affordable price that I know of...
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #45
HHPhoto
Registered User
 
HHPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,686
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
To me these choices reflect the low end and the high end. There isn`t something great at an affordable price that I know of...
For example Reflekta 10T and RPS 10 M, Reflekta 5000, Plustek 8200.

Cheers, Jan
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #46
Ko.Fe.
Kostya Fedot
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Posts: 7,116
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
®

Plenty of artists still use film and I certainly see scanned film printed as ink jet prints in galleries.



It might not be mainstream, but there is more to photography than amateurs and commercial pros.
How crazy priced, next to unknown to masses of film users scanners are related to it?
Huss owns the gallery and he is OK with scanning with camera.
Colton scans his color and bw negatives for books. I have them. They are good.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #47
Bill Clark
Registered User
 
Bill Clark's Avatar
 
Bill Clark is offline
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Minnetonka, Minnesota
Age: 71
Posts: 2,503
Quote:
The professional demand for film is even increasing in the following market segments: Portrait, wedding, fashion.
At our PPA affiliate, TCPPA, we conducted monthly workshops to help professional photographers as we all were operating our businesses. There isn’t any discussion on film or film vs. digital. It’s all digital.

Info:

https://tcppa.org/

Around 2003 maybe 2004 a guest presented would ask folks in the audience how many captured with film? I would venture to say it was over half maybe even three quarters still used film. By 2008 a speaker would ask how many captured using digital and 90 to 95% were digital. Now it’s 100% digital.


For me, there were several challenges with film that digital answered.

How did I analyze what I was getting during the film days? I had to use a Polaroid back. PITA.

How could I show a client what I was capturing with film? Just try to get them back for a review!

How can I offer as an option a group of wedding day photos I could upload to their electronic device at their reception to look at while on their honeymoon?

How could I transmit to audience members using wifi photos as I make them using film?

How do I immediately determine a good portrait from one that’s great using film?

How do I tell a client you need to wait until I get the film processed, including scanning, so as they can make their business cards, use on social media sites or face a deadline with a company HR department?

Get the idea?

That’s the way the business has gone, at least here.
__________________
I make photographs as a return ticket to a moment otherwise gone.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #48
brbo
Registered User
 
brbo's Avatar
 
brbo is offline
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skiff View Post
The Reflekta RPS 10 M delivers a picture quality level even a bit higher compared to Coolscan V and 5000:
https://filmscanner.info/en/ReflectaRPS10M.html
Take a guess which one is Reflekta:



__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #49
Skiff
Registered User
 
Skiff is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 957
Looks like they have put the wrong picture online.
Because, quote from their test results:
"The reflecta RPS 10M boasts an effective resolution of 4300 ppi, thus reaching a solid 86% of its nominal 5000 ppi. Scanning at 10.000 ppi will not boost the effecitve resolution. With an effective resolution of 4300 ppi, the Reflecta RPS 10M trumps the long-standing frontrunner Nikon Super Coolscan 5000ED, which yields "only" 3900 ppi. Whilst the Reflecta RPS 10M reaches its 4300 ppi only at 5000 ppi, the Nikon 5000 does reach its 3900 ppi at a nominal setting of 4000 ppi. The actual difference in quality between the two devices - in terms of resolution, that is - lies in the difference of the percentage basis. They reach 98 - versus 86% of the nominal resultion."

A friend of mine has both, and he came to the same conclusion: Slightly higher resolution with the Reflekta. I have seen his scans.
And if you compare the price new of the RPS 10M to the used price of the Coolscan 5000, the price-performance ratio of the Reflekta is really good.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #50
Ko.Fe.
Kostya Fedot
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Posts: 7,116
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Clark View Post
At our PPA affiliate, TCPPA, we conducted monthly workshops to help professional photographers as we all were operating our businesses. There isnít any discussion on film or film vs. digital. Itís all digital.

Info:

https://tcppa.org/

Around 2003 maybe 2004 a guest presented would ask folks in the audience how many captured with film? I would venture to say it was over half maybe even three quarters still used film. By 2008 a speaker would ask how many captured using digital and 90 to 95% were digital. Now itís 100% digital.


For me, there were several challenges with film that digital answered.

How did I analyze what I was getting during the film days? I had to use a Polaroid back. PITA.

How could I show a client what I was capturing with film? Just try to get them back for a review!

How can I offer as an option a group of wedding day photos I could upload to their electronic device at their reception to look at while on their honeymoon?

How could I transmit to audience members using wifi photos as I make them using film?

How do I immediately determine a good portrait from one thatís great using film?

Get the idea?

Thatís the way the business has gone, at least here.

Wedding still done on film. Hipsters getting married too. Niche market, but exist in populated areas. I have seen film wedding pictures thread at LUF from London based photog. His wedding pictures are anti-digital and done in completely opposite way you described. Some are not in focus, some are not perfectly exposed. And according to this photog he is still not jobless after all of this.

Our daughter went on first long time trip alone with two film cameras. Then Mama asked her why not papa's digital, she told what film gives something different.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #51
Skiff
Registered User
 
Skiff is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 957
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
Interesting that there's high demand for a "defective" scanner.
Look at the last sentence from one of the biggest European scanner distributors:
https://filmscanner.info/en/PlustekOpticFilm120.html

"Since we and lots of our customers had many problems with the Plustek OpticFilm 120, we have taken that scanner out of our assortment."

Confirmed by a survey here on rff in which about 24% of users reported severe problems:
https://www.rangefinderforum.com/for...ts&pollid=1589
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #52
brbo
Registered User
 
brbo's Avatar
 
brbo is offline
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skiff View Post
Looks like they have put the wrong picture online.
Because, quote from their test results:
"The reflecta RPS 10M boasts an effective resolution of 4300 ppi, thus reaching a solid 86% of its nominal 5000 ppi. Scanning at 10.000 ppi will not boost the effecitve resolution. With an effective resolution of 4300 ppi, the Reflecta RPS 10M trumps the long-standing frontrunner Nikon Super Coolscan 5000ED, which yields "only" 3900 ppi. Whilst the Reflecta RPS 10M reaches its 4300 ppi only at 5000 ppi, the Nikon 5000 does reach its 3900 ppi at a nominal setting of 4000 ppi. The actual difference in quality between the two devices - in terms of resolution, that is - lies in the difference of the percentage basis. They reach 98 - versus 86% of the nominal resultion."

A friend of mine has both, and he came to the same conclusion: Slightly higher resolution with the Reflekta. I have seen his scans.
And if you compare the price new of the RPS 10M to the used price of the Coolscan 5000, the price-performance ratio of the Reflekta is really good.
No, that IS what you get from Reflekta. The resolution is indeed there (far from that 10.000dpi of course), but everything else...

They can fool you and your friend with resolution numbers, but they can't fool most of the people that have seen proper scans before.
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #53
HHPhoto
Registered User
 
HHPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,686
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Clark View Post
At our PPA affiliate, TCPPA, we conducted monthly workshops to help professional photographers as we all were operating our businesses. There isnít any discussion on film or film vs. digital. Itís all digital.
So what. Your events are one small part of the whole market, but not representative for the global market.

Get out of your 'bubble' and just have a look at all the labs who do huge business with professional film photographers.
Just some examples (on these sites you will find pictures and links to thousands of prof. photographers using film):
https://www.instagram.com/richardphotolab/
https://www.instagram.com/photovisionprints/
https://www.instagram.com/indiefilmlab/
https://www.instagram.com/thefindlab/
https://www.instagram.com/goodmanfilmlab/
https://www.instagram.com/carmencitalab/
https://www.instagram.com/impressionfilmlab/
https://www.instagram.com/lighthousefilmlab/
https://www.instagram.com/artisanfilmlab/
https://www.instagram.com/canadianfilmlaboratory/
https://www.instagram.com/statefilm/
https://www.instagram.com/fast.foto/
https://www.instagram.com/racquetstudio/
https://www.instagram.com/boutiquefilmlab/
https://www.instagram.com/sreda.photo/

On youtube who will also find reports about professionals using film.
Just two examples:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtZolt2hISg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQgVQeDv8Fk

And that are just a few of hundreds of labs worldwide which do significant business with professional film photographers.
This statement "professional photography is 100% digital today"
is simply wrong. Of course film photography is a niche. But a quite healthy and increasing one.

Cheers, Jan
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #54
Bill Clark
Registered User
 
Bill Clark's Avatar
 
Bill Clark is offline
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Minnetonka, Minnesota
Age: 71
Posts: 2,503
HHPhoto:

You seem to know a lot about photography.

Can you point me to your web site and maybe I can learn something.
Never mind. Looks like I found photos on a model site.

Even tho I’m pretty much retired I’m always looking for ways to improve. I’m culling my past work I put on CD’s and now I have some from 2004 I’m getting rid of. Then working through each year. Then on to the many external hard drives. My first 500 gig external was a whopper case size compared to today.

Please hurry with your link as I’m getting ready to go to L.A. for a photo gig. The compensation is right!

Just thought, Mr. Gandy lives somewhere in the basin. I’m staying in old town Pasadena. And connect for lunch. Nice Italian restaurant, Gayles, I dine at when ever in Los Angeles.

All digital capture. Maybe my iPad mini will work! They don’t care about equipment I use as they like the results I achieve. Maybe take one reflector just in case I need some garlic light.

Smiles.
__________________
I make photographs as a return ticket to a moment otherwise gone.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #55
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 659
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skiff View Post
Look at the last sentence from one of the biggest European scanner distributors:
https://filmscanner.info/en/PlustekOpticFilm120.html

"Since we and lots of our customers had many problems with the Plustek OpticFilm 120, we have taken that scanner out of our assortment."

Confirmed by a survey here on rff in which about 24% of users reported severe problems:
https://www.rangefinderforum.com/for...ts&pollid=1589
Hilarious. Rip roaring hilarious. That page has listed that long before Plustek discontinued the OpticFilm 120. Further, that page has so many errors about the 120, that it is completely and totally discredited. Just one of many dozens of errors: "The Plustek OpticFilm 120 is a very slow film scanner. In order to scan medium format films in high quality a very powerful PC with much memory is needed."

Abject nonsense. I used my OpticFilm 120 hooked up to a simple MacBook (not Pro). The CPU was all of an Intel M3, with just 8 gb of RAM. The scanner worked just fine. I guess a MacBook is a powerful computer!

The survey here at RFF is nothing but anecdotal evidence. It provides no information at all. None. If you cannot understand why an uncontrolled survey is useless, then I cannot help you.

Plustek sold the OpticFilm 120 for well over 5 years. By ANY metric that's a successful product.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #56
Faintandfuzzy
Registered User
 
Faintandfuzzy's Avatar
 
Faintandfuzzy is offline
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
Hilarious. Rip roaring hilarious. That page has listed that long before Plustek discontinued the OpticFilm 120. Further, that page has so many errors about the 120, that it is completely and totally discredited. Just one of many dozens of errors: "The Plustek OpticFilm 120 is a very slow film scanner. In order to scan medium format films in high quality a very powerful PC with much memory is needed."

Abject nonsense. I used my OpticFilm 120 hooked up to a simple MacBook (not Pro). The CPU was all of an Intel M3, with just 8 gb of RAM. The scanner worked just fine. I guess a MacBook is a powerful computer!

The survey here at RFF is nothing but anecdotal evidence. It provides no information at all. None. If you cannot understand why an uncontrolled survey is useless, then I cannot help you.

Plustek sold the OpticFilm 120 for well over 5 years. By ANY metric that's a successful product.
Speaking of anecdotal evidence, or none at all...you've been preaching that Fuji stopped film production years ago...only to have been proven incorrect there as well. You've been remarkably silent on that.

Don't demand hard evidence from others when you have made baseless claims made upon nothing but vacuous opinion.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #57
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 659
Quote:
Originally Posted by Faintandfuzzy View Post
Speaking of anecdotal evidence, or none at all...you've been preaching that Fuji stopped film production years ago...only to have been proven incorrect there as well. You've been remarkably silent on that.

Don't demand hard evidence from others when you have made baseless claims made upon nothing but vacuous opinion.

We'll see. As others have noted, Fujifilm's recent move is profoundly inexplicable. Some have suggested that Fujirilm will be rebranding some Ilford Film, as they did for their monochrome C41 film.



Regardless, I have over a 10 year supply of Acros stored across 5 different freezers. I wont be buying any Fujifilm film anytime soon.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #58
HHPhoto
Registered User
 
HHPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,686
Quote:
Originally Posted by Faintandfuzzy View Post
Speaking of anecdotal evidence, or none at all...you've been preaching that Fuji stopped film production years ago...only to have been proven incorrect there as well. You've been remarkably silent on that.

Don't demand hard evidence from others when you have made baseless claims made upon nothing but vacuous opinion.
+1.
You have exactly nailed it.

Cheers, Jan
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #59
HHPhoto
Registered User
 
HHPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,686
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
We'll see. As others have noted, Fujifilm's recent move is profoundly inexplicable. Some have suggested that Fujirilm will be rebranding some Ilford Film, as they did for their monochrome C41 film.
LOL.....
Seems there is a competition between all these conspiracy theory people who can made the most absurde theory.

Ilford cannot made a film like Acros. Period.
Fujifilm has explained that Acros II will also have unique reciprocity characteristics. And Ilford - nor any other film manufacturer - does not has that technology (Provia 100F is also unsurpassed in that regard).
Fujifilm has also said Acros II will have again extraordinary fine grain - something which Ilford also is not best at. Acros is finer grained than TMX and Delta 100.

Cheers, Jan
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #60
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 659
Quote:
Originally Posted by HHPhoto View Post
LOL.....
Seems there is a competition between all these conspiracy theory people who can made the most absurde theory.



Cheers, Jan

Fujifilm's ridiculous actions make theories like this more than likely.



Why discontinue a film without mentioning a replacement film is being developed? Absolutely 100% ridiculous. It seems profoundly impossible that they could be so irresponsible to their customers. There was an absolute stampede to get all of the remaining Acros because everyone thought, that was it. No more. I bought over $2000 worth of Acros myself.



Now we learn that Acros will be back, even better, a year later.



This is so stupid as to be not believable. Even Fujifilm is not that stupid.


A very plausible theory is that Fujifilm had no idea their film was in such demand, and to quickly recover from their mistake are re-labeling a film toll manufactured for them from some other coater of film. That's why we never heard about Acros II while Acros was being run dry. That film would have sold out easily even if we knew another film was coming. It took all of 1 week for supplies to dry up. Hardly any stock was available.


All of Fujifilm's talk about finer grain, etc about Acros II is just that: talk. They have proven themselves to be loose with the truth in the past and so none of their marketing spiel is worth the electrons it's printed with.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #61
ptpdprinter
Registered User
 
ptpdprinter is offline
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,644
I would think the marketing worked. Announce the discontinuation of Acros and have all existing stock bought up by true believers. Wait to announce Acros II and be hailed a hero by film afficiandos.
__________________
ambientlightcollection.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #62
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 659
Quote:
Originally Posted by ptpdprinter View Post
I would think the marketing worked. Announce the discontinuation of Acros and have all existing stock bought up by true believers. Wait to announce Acros II and be hailed a hero by film afficiandos.

Ridiculous. Stranding customers is the WORST thing you can do to them. You clearly don't work with customers who buy your products. Had my company been as foolish as Fujifilm was, we would have lost a ton of business, and have in the past when we had production issues that left them stranded.



The idea that Fujifilm executed some genius marketing plan is beyond ludicrous.


Furthermore, Fujifilm is NOT to be trusted with Acros II. I was a regular shooter of Neopan 400. They exited that film market and left customers high and dry. Then, a short time later, brought the film back and so many resumed shooting it. Guess what? Fujifilm axed the film an even shorter time later and once again, stranded customer.


Only Charlie Brown trusts Fujifilm.


I certainly don't.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #63
HHPhoto
Registered User
 
HHPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,686
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
Why discontinue a film without mentioning a replacement film is being developed?
Because R&D is an open process. You never know if and when you will have success. There is no guarantee, and film production is extremely difficult.
It is simply honest and trustworthy to be silent until something substantial can be said.
Acros had to be discontinued because some raw materials were not available anymore.

Certainly Fujifilm started R&D on Acros II before the discontuniation announcement. But at that time it was uncertain whether they will be succesful with Acros II in a short time period. And they don't wanted to create high hopes for something which can fail. Then the dissappointment would have been even much higher in the case of failure.

Cheers, Jan
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #64
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 659
Quote:
Originally Posted by HHPhoto View Post
Because R&D is an open process. You never know if and when you will have success. There is no guarantee, and film production is extremely difficult.
It is simply honest and trustworthy to be silent until something substantial can be said.
Acros had to be discontinued because some raw materials were not available anymore.

Certainly Fujifilm started R&D on Acros II before the discontuniation announcement. But at that time it was uncertain whether they will be succesful with Acros II in a short time period. And they don't wanted to create high hopes for something which can fail. Then the dissappointment would have been even much higher in the case of failure.

Cheers, Jan

I have been in chemical R & D for now 26 years. There's nothing you can inform me about this process.


The idea that Fujifilm could not predict success making a black and white film, with their 100+ years of experience simply is not plausible.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #65
HHPhoto
Registered User
 
HHPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,686
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
The idea that Fujifilm could not predict success making a black and white film, with their 100+ years of experience simply is not plausible.
I have to disagree.
1. The decisive point is that it is not possible to say how long you exactly need.
And saying "we make an Acros II" and then not being able to deliver for two, three or maybe more years would have created another ****storm.
Much much better to be silent instead and concentrating hard on the work.
2. Look at ADOX and their Polywarmtone paper problem: They needed 10 years for it. In the meantime they have finished the work 2x, and then another raw materials were discontinued and they had to start R&D again.
3. Look at Film Ferrania: They have a sever PR problem now because they have said "we are doing it", but R&D is so difficult that there is no product yet. And customers are dissappointed.

No, the way Fuji have done it = "finish the R&D work first, and then announce it" is the best and honest way to do it.

Cheers, Jan
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #66
brbo
Registered User
 
brbo's Avatar
 
brbo is offline
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,427
I don't believe that Acros 100 II is a result of multi-year all-out R&D. I bet Acros 100 II will be close to indistinguishable to old Acros and that it didn't take much R&D (if any at all) for Fuji to re-release it.

The official Acros axing press release clearly stated lack of demand (the raw component unavailability excuse came later). Were they lying? Why? And why would they discontinue everything related to BW along with it? Simply because new Acros R&D was a few months behind schedule? Ridiculous. Even more if you consider Fuji statements that followed, first "raw component unavailability", few monts later "looking into possibility to source needed raw components" and finally, again only a few months later "yes, we are bringing it back".

And I don't believe for a second that disco and re-release was Fuji's plan to get rid of old Acros before releasing Acros II. That would be nuts. Ted Strikers of the world with multiple freezers full of Acros will NOT be buying much Acros II anytime soon.

Let's just hope that the initial test sales in Japan are not too bad so the intl. release will follow and we are not witnessing a re-release of we-told-you-there-is-no-demand-for-Neopan-400.

Actually, it might not be that bad an idea to spread some fear that Acros 100 II might be discontinued shorty after re-release. That way maybe the second Acros hoarding run can convince Fuji that demand for Acros is really strong and they make a much bigger second run that will last for many years
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #67
ptpdprinter
Registered User
 
ptpdprinter is offline
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,644
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
Ridiculous.
Calm down. It was tongue in cheek.
__________________
ambientlightcollection.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #68
brbo
Registered User
 
brbo's Avatar
 
brbo is offline
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,427
Quote:
Originally Posted by HHPhoto View Post
And saying "we make an Acros II" and then not being able to deliver for two, three or maybe more years would have created another ****storm.
If they wouldn't have announced discontinuation they would still be selling original Acros 100 in 2020 with the regular demand. Which would've given them plenty of time if there was more real and extensive R&D needed. And they would still have the possibility to discontinue the film when they are actually out of it (if they established by then that it can no longer be made).
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #69
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 659
Quote:
Originally Posted by brbo View Post
If they wouldn't have announced discontinuation they would still be selling original Acros 100 in 2020 with the regular demand. Which would've given them plenty of time if there was more real and extensive R&D needed. And they would still have the possibility to discontinue the film when they are actually out of it (if they established by then that it can no longer be made).

Yes. Exactly. 100% right. There simply was no reason to act the way they did. Even Fujifilm is not that ignorant of normal business practices.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #70
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 659
Quote:
Originally Posted by brbo View Post

Actually, it might not be that bad an idea to spread some fear that Acros 100 II might be discontinued shorty after re-release. That way maybe the second Acros hoarding run can convince Fuji that demand for Acros is really strong and they make a much bigger second run that will last for many years

As already mentioned, Fujifilm discontinued Neopan 400 once, and then brought it back, and then shortly discontinued it again. Constantly Fujifilm states lack of demand for the reason why they discontinue films.



This whole Acros II situation looks profoundly weird, even for a company as two faced on the future of film as Fujifilm.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 00:08.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.