Fuji 50 and why don't they consider sound film again??

[Guest Retrogorilla]

Wondering if anyone has heard the latest on the Fuji 50 ASA??

 

Maybe someone can chime in with any thoughts on why not one sound film is being made?? It would seem to me they'd do quite well with it if one was available.

 

Is it the ecological concern or just perceived lack of interest?

[Alessandro Machi]

Wondering if anyone has heard the latest on the Fuji 50 ASA??

 

Maybe someone can chime in with any thoughts on why not one sound film is being made?? It would seem to me they'd do quite well with it if one was available.

 

Is it the ecological concern or just perceived lack of interest?

 

I don't know about fuji but for Kodak I would guess it's higher inventory levels of other super-8 vnegative stocks that keeps Kodak from introducing the 7201. Kodak stuck it's neck out (not too far, but...) with the 200ASA and 500ASA negative Super-8 and probably didn't sell it off as quickly as they would have liked. However, Super-8 was doing well when the combination of clean looking low ASA Super-8 (Kodachrome 40) with the other higher ASA Negative stocks (plus Black and White reversal) was available.

 

It does make sense to balance out the higher negative ASA stocks with one low ASA negative stock as well. Hopefully the upcoming anniversary of Super-8 (I think it's in April) would be the time to annouce a 50 ASA 7201 negative. I'd like to see Kodak offer pre-sales opportunities of the 7201 to see if they could get an initial order off the ground that does not cause them to have too high of an inventory.

 

There are more and players in the super-8 arena who might all be willing to buy 100 to 1000 cartridges at a time. At some point, the pre-sale quantity should reach a comfort zone for Kodak. I don't believe the introduction of 7201 would affect sales of the 200T or 500T as they seem to have entirely different uses.

[Guest santo]

I don't know about fuji but for Kodak I would guess it's higher inventory levels of other super-8 vnegative stocks that keeps Kodak from introducing the 7201. Kodak stuck it's neck out (not too far, but...) with the 200ASA and 500ASA negative Super-8 and probably didn't sell it off as quickly as they would have liked.

 

Huh? You must have read that Kodak is moving all super 8 production to the US and installing brand new machinery because things are going like gangbusters. It's only been mentioned a few dozen times on the webboards you frequent, Alex. Remember that clown with the "supermag 400"? He was trying to get orders a few months back because Kodak was doing one big run of super 8 stocks before they shut down the France operation? There wasn't going to be any new super 8 for several months after that. Could be 6 or more, I forget now.

 

However, Super-8 was doing well when the combination of clean looking low ASA Super-8 (Kodachrome 40) with the other higher ASA Negative stocks (plus Black and White reversal) was available.

 

:lol: :lol: :lol: What in the world are you talking about, Alex? Krappy K40 was doing so bad that it was no longer profitable for them. The Black and White reversals were doing well for them and that's why they're still here in updated form. Kodak added Vision2 500t after testing the water with the original Vision 200t and, obviously, finding that it did well enough to make a business case for the continuation of it's successor and the introduction of the 500.

 

I'd like to see Kodak offer pre-sales opportunities of the 7201 to see if they could get an initial order off the ground that does not cause them to have too high of an inventory.

 

I don't think you'll see this kind of thing happening, Alex. It won't happen because they don't have to.

 

There are more and players in the super-8 arena who might all be willing to buy 100 to 1000 cartridges at a time. At some point, the pre-sale quantity should reach a comfort zone for Kodak.

 

This is exactly the point, and the point that you're missing every time you jump to made-up conclusions about where super 8 is, and to why K40 was axed, and what the statistics really are. You do realize that pro shooters making all those music videos and all the other things super 8 is used for buy a 100 carts at a time. A hundred carts a month, even. How many carts did the average guy who cries over K40 buy? A couple of carts every few months? You spend a little time on filmshooting/slotcars/conspiracytheory/publishmyownnovel.com, and if you pay attention you realize that over half the people there haven't shot super 8 in months. Some not in years. They just think it's a cool old thing. And if they did shoot any, it was some old sound cart they've had in the freezer for 10 years or bought off ebay. These are not customers for Kodak, yet they moan and bitch and complain that their beloved K40 is gone and the world is all doom and gloom and conspiracies.

 

I don't believe the introduction of 7201 would affect sales of the 200T or 500T as they seem to have entirely different uses.

 

If I ran the zoo at Kodak, I'd offer a line-up for super that really reflects how it is being used and really cover the areas the competitors at Pro8 , Wittner, and I guess now Spectra in a small way, are captilizing on.

 

1) First, introduce V2 100t and drop V2 200t. Sure, you can minimize 200's already reasonable grain by overexposing, but hell, everybody is probably using it at 100 speed! Why not switch it for V2 100t? It's finer grained and way sharper. In fact, it represents the perfect all-purpose super 8 negative, in the same way V2 200t represents the perfect all-purpose negative in 16mm size. It is stunningly obvious.

 

2) Keep 500t. Makes total sense to have this stock in super8. Then there's a real difference between the two negatives and reason to employ both depending on the job at hand.

 

3) Keep the black and whites as they are.

 

4) Who needs 50d with V2 100t around? 50d is not as sharp as V2 100t is (the 100 being the sharpest colour negative stock in the world) and as for grain issues -- I doubt you'll see any significant difference worth worrying about. Heck, even overexpose the 100t a little if you're outside! Makes sense? Makes sense! Forget about 50d and focus on the vastly more useable and flexible stock you've got in v2 100t -- which is the natural standard for negative super 8 stock.

 

5) Make those reversal home shooters really happy and give them something they would really appreciate: super fine grain E100G Ektachrome. That stuff with the lower grain rating than K40, a million times better colour, designed for reproduction, and way the hell sharper. Sure it's a daylight stock, but all those guys who actually shot any K40 were all doing it outside. They shoot outside and want the finest grain possible. If the Kodak decision makers realized that, this decision is a no-brainer.

[Mike Crane]

Wondering if anyone has heard the latest on the Fuji 50 ASA??

 

Maybe someone can chime in with any thoughts on why not one sound film is being made?? It would seem to me they'd do quite well with it if one was available.

 

Is it the ecological concern or just perceived lack of interest?

 

Could you be speaking of the Fuji Velvia 50D from Spectra? My understanding is that it will be released somtine near the end of March. I saw a sample of some at their store and it looks much better that Kodak's 64T. VERY colorful and sharp. For better or for worse it still retains some of the contrast characteristics of reversal. http://spectrafilmandvideo.com/Film.html

 

I am almost certian no sound film is planned for by any company. Special sound cartridges must be manufactured in addition to machinery to stripe the film in the dark. Way too expensive.

[John Pytlak RIP]

The big issue with mag striped films was that new environmental requirements to totally recycle the solvent vapors would have required so much capital investment in new equipment that there just was no good business case to continue manufacture of striped film.

 

The paint industry is facing similar challenges:

 

http://archrecord.construction.com/resourc...rch/11_99_1.asp

 

VOC woes

... federal legislation took effect that forces paint and coatings manufacturers to lower emissions of volatile organic compounds, or VOCs. The term "volatile" refers to the liquids in coatings that readily evaporate at room temperature, and "organic" refers to a class of compounds that contain hydrogen and carbon, better known as hydrocarbons. These compounds are carried in the solvents that most coatings contain, including mineral spirits, naptha, xylol, toluene, and ketones. Particularly high percentages of VOCs, measured in grams per liter, are contained in alkyd, urethane, and some types of epoxy coatings, as well as in lacquers, varnishes, and stains. Most latex paints have a small amount of VOCs, depending on the product.

 

The new law is only the latest in a series of regulations that started with the Clean Air Act of 1972. This legislation set acceptable levels of ozone and required states to formulate plans to deal with the problem. When VOCs are released into the air during the application of a coating and subsequent drying, they react with nitrous oxides and sunlight to form ground-level ozone, which can impair breathing, irritate the nose and throat, and depress the body's immune system.

[Alessandro Machi]

Huh? You must have read that Kodak is moving all super 8 production to the US and installing brand new machinery because things are going like gangbusters. It's only been mentioned a few dozen times on the webboards you frequent, Alex. Remember that clown with the "supermag 400"? He was trying to get orders a few months back because Kodak was doing one big run of super 8 stocks before they shut down the France operation? There wasn't going to be any new super 8 for several months after that. Could be 6 or more, I forget now.

:lol: :lol: :lol: What in the world are you talking about, Alex? Krappy K40 was doing so bad that it was no longer profitable for them. The Black and White reversals were doing well for them and that's why they're still here in updated form. Kodak added Vision2 500t after testing the water with the original Vision 200t and, obviously, finding that it did well enough to make a business case for the continuation of it's successor and the introduction of the 500.....................

.

.

.

.

.

and so on.....

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

and so on.......

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

 

Santo, take bigger breaths before responding.

 

Nothing I said warranted such a longwinded response. My point clearly was that 7201 was needed to fill out the Super-8 negative offerings that Kodak presently sells, ESPECIALLY with Kodachrome 40 being axed. Was that really such a controversial point I made that you had to break down your response into a mini-paperback edition?

 

Kodachrome was losing money because Kodak didn't charge for the processing and figured the market that supported Kodachrome was probably too old school to be willing to now pay for something that they used to get for free, aka the processing. Kodachrome was kodak's biggest seller, but probably a money loser because of the free processing. Don't confuse that issue with the fact that Kodachrome was also Kodak's biggest seller.

 

I wouldn't axe the 200T as you suggested, it's a great indoor stock, vastly superior to the Ektachrome line. All that's needed is the 7201 (aka 50 ASA neg) to round out the line-up. My second point was Kodak may be waiting to release 7201 in Super-8 until their sales figures go up for the 200ASA and the 500ASA, at which point I wrote I that that shouldn't be a reason to not bring out the 50ASA negative stock now because the 200 ASA and the 500 ASA stocks don't directly compete with the 7201, if anything the combination of all three negative stocks will probably enhance overall sales for projects that strictly are to be shot on Super-8..

[Guest santo]

re: the first half of my post. You can have any opinion you want on filmstocks, but when you make up nonsense conjecture like you so often do on a webboard, Alex, you have to expect a thorough discrediting response from time to time. And you'll get one from me, when the mood strikes me, and I choose to strike you down.

[Alessandro Machi]

re: the first half of my post. You can have any opinion you want on filmstocks, but when you make up nonsense conjecture like you so often do on a webboard, Alex, you have to expect a thorough discrediting response from time to time. And you'll get one from me, when the mood strikes me, and I choose to strike you down.

 

But there was nothing I posted that was controversial or innaccurate in my previous two posts, you simply chose to see it that way. Maybe you need your meds doseage readjusted.

[Guest santo]

Kodachrome was losing money because Kodak didn't charge for the processing and figured the market that supported Kodachrome was probably too old school to be willing to now pay for something that they used to get for free, aka the processing.

 

What? THEY DIDN'T CHARGE FOR PROCESSING? Alex, how much did those processing envelopes you guys in the States had to buy cost? Plus postage one way because you couldn't drive down to a local lab and drop it off. K40 was the most expensive super 8 stock everywhere outside of the US because processing was included in the price. More nonsense from Alex...

[Alessandro Machi]

What? THEY DIDN'T CHARGE FOR PROCESSING? Alex, how much did those processing envelopes you guys in the States had to buy cost? Plus postage one way because you couldn't drive down to a local lab and drop it off. K40 was the most expensive super 8 stock everywhere outside of the US because processing was included in the price. More nonsense from Alex...

 

Santo, ALL super-8 negative stocks, when processing is added in, costs in the $32-38 dollar range. Kodachrome was around 16-21 dollars, with processing. Why are you holding onto to such a dumb ass position?

[Guest santo]

Your first post was complete conjecture and not supported by any truth or evidence. Instead you ignored the truths and evidence you were well aware of to put your own spin on things. I simply called you out on it and pointed out the facts.

 

My most recent post was another dosage of reality. To quote you again, Alex: "Kodachrome was losing money because Kodak didn't charge for the processing and figured the market that supported Kodachrome was probably too old school to be willing to now pay for something that they used to get for free, aka the processing."

 

Kodak never had free processing on K40 as you contend, Alex. Never.

 

Kodachrome ran into the $30 US range with processing here in Canada from a retailer like Henry's. I think I paid something like $36 Canadian last time I bought a cart a year or so ago to test a camera because it was all they had in stock at the moment and I didn't feel like driving out to Kodak Canada's headquarters here in Toronto (as nice as they are there).

[Alessandro Machi]

Your first post was complete conjecture and not supported by any truth or evidence. Instead you ignored the truths and evidence you were well aware of to put your own spin on things. I simply called you out on it and pointed out the facts.

 

My most recent post was another dosage of reality. To quote you again, Alex: "Kodachrome was losing money because Kodak didn't charge for the processing and figured the market that supported Kodachrome was probably too old school to be willing to now pay for something that they used to get for free, aka the processing."

 

Kodak never had free processing on K40 as you contend, Alex. Never.

 

Kodachrome ran into the $30 US range with processing here in Canada from a retailer like Henry's. I think I paid something like $36 Canadian last time I bought a cart a year or so ago to test a camera because it was all they had in stock at the moment and I didn't feel like driving out to Kodak Canada's headquarters here in Toronto (as nice as they are there).

 

Santo, 3 and 1/2 years ago I took an extension class and was elegible for two discounts from Kodak. I ended up paying something like 8 dollars and 60 cents a cartridge. I bought several dozen cartridges. Even without any discounts I would have been paying around 12 bucks a cartridge. Processing could have been had as cheap as $4.99 a cartridge at places like Target or Walmartians, or direct from Dwaynes for 9 bucks a cartridge.

 

So Kodachrome and processing could have been purchased for as little as $14.00 to as much as 21 bucks.

 

If Kodak was selling Kodachrome so cheaply, that would explain why they were losing money on the processing.

[Clive Tobin]

.... machinery to stripe the film in the dark. ...

 

Actually, the Kodak super-8 sound film was striped in the light, hundreds of stripes wide on the master rolls, in the correct locations for after the film emulsion was coated and the film was slit. No mean achievement in terms of the required precision.

[John Pytlak RIP]

Actually, the Kodak super-8 sound film was striped in the light, hundreds of stripes wide on the master rolls, in the correct locations for after the film emulsion was coated and the film was slit. No mean achievement in terms of the required precision.

 

Sorry, you are incorrect. The striping was done in total darkness, on slit film.

 

Film is "sensitized" in total darkness as "wide rolls" that are about 54-inches wide and thousands of feet long. Once the emulsion is coated on the film, it is light sensitive. The film wide roll is then slit and perforated in the dark, and only then can the magnetic stripes be applied.

[todd eacrett]

If you are talking about Velvia 50 in Super 8, don't hold your breath. Velvia 50 (in 35mm, occasionally 16mm) has been discontinued, replaced by Velvia 100 and Velvia 100F. Velvia 100 is almost as good as 50, 100F is finer grain but doesn't have the outrageous saturation of RVP50. Would still be an excellent S8 stock. I've seen RVP (Velvia 50) in 16mm and it would knock your socks off.

 

Fujichrome "Regular 8" (same as Super-8, but different cartridge/different cameras) is still available in 25 ASA daylight and 200 ASA tungsten versions. Processing is through Fuji in Japan, AND last I checked they will still post-stripe for mag sound at no extra charge. Note this is POST-stripe, meaning you can't record sound while you're shooting, just add it later.

 

http://fujifilm.jp/personal/film/8mm/

 

(A little googling will find you sites in North America, Europe and Japan that sell the stock and explain how to send it it in for processing and striping. )

[Mike Crane]

If you are talking about Velvia 50 in Super 8, don't hold your breath. Velvia 50 (in 35mm, occasionally 16mm) has been discontinued, replaced by Velvia 100 and Velvia 100F. Velvia 100 is almost as good as 50, 100F is finer grain but doesn't have the outrageous saturation of RVP50. Would still be an excellent S8 stock. I've seen RVP (Velvia 50) in 16mm and it would knock your socks off.

 

Nope! A special supply of freshly made Velvia 50D was put aside for Spectra to make it into both 16mm and super 8. This supply should provide a couple more years of 50D. I've seen some super 8 tests and the results are fantastic! Here are some details: http://www.filmshooting.com/scripts/forum/...ighlight=velvia

[Clive Tobin]

Sorry, you are incorrect....

 

I stand corrected. Don't look for me to be wrong again until 2106 because it only happens once per century. :-)

 

I was positive I heard the other method from an authoritative source but I can't remember who.

 

Was perhaps the other method used only for print films? I do recall an old article in the SMPTE Journal maybe 1963-1964 where someone from Kodak was talking about slitting the print film after striping. They added that the recording and balance stripes were separate (instead of joining them together) to reduce wear on the slitting knives. (I would quote an issue but I have great heaps of Journals, out of sequence.)

[John Pytlak RIP]

I stand corrected. Don't look for me to be wrong again until 2106 because it only happens once per century. :-)

 

I was positive I heard the other method from an authoritative source but I can't remember who.

 

Was perhaps the other method used only for print films? I do recall an old article in the SMPTE Journal maybe 1963-1964 where someone from Kodak was talking about slitting the print film after striping. They added that the recording and balance stripes were separate (instead of joining them together) to reduce wear on the slitting knives. (I would quote an issue but I have great heaps of Journals, out of sequence.)

 

Maybe it had to do with splitting after processing, as was done for Super-8 prints? But for raw stock, the film was slit and perfed BEFORE striping.

[Alessandro Machi]

So the final score is,

 

Kodachrome plus processing high range at $22.00 bucks for film AND processing, on the low end as low as 15-17 dollars.

 

Kodak negative stocks with processing on the high end around 35-38 bucks, on the low end around 29-30 bucks.

 

Kodachrome was losing money because it was underpriced, but if the price had been raised to Negative stock prices, it's quite probable a lot of the Kodachrome loyalists who projected their film originals would have stopped buying it. Kodachrome was Kodak's biggest seller at the time it was discontinued, ergo it would be logical for Kodak to offer some type of low ASA film stock to replace it.

 

Nothing controversial about anything I've just stated.

[Matt Pacini]

Sound film ain't never gonna happen again, ever.

 

Let's face it; there are probably 86 guys in the world who would buy it.

99.9% of all Super 8 cameras are not sound cameras, including some of the best, most popular models.

The market for it is probably .00001% of what it was when Kodak discontinued it, so there's no reason to think they would suddenly think there's a new market for it.

 

MP

[Alessandro Machi]

Would it be possible to create a tiny optical sound generator that could replace the sound head in a Super-8 sound camera? Optical Sound would be an interesting option to have available.