Everything you want to know about FUJIFILM color RA4 papers

[faberryman]

B&H told me they cannot acquire Maxima. That might have to do with the special tweak of RA4 chem allegedly necessary to attain full DMax on Maxima, as well as the rumor that both that particular paper and its necessary developer are being sold direct to dedicated labs via Fuji's own traveling sales Reps (or Rep), and who knows what pandemic circumstances did to those? Ironically, Pako (a broad line Fuji lab distributor) lists all kinds of Fuji/Hunt RA4 chemicals, but apparently can't get Maxima either. There was also a really big Kodak paper distributor right around here, in the SF Bay Area, which had a Fuji account too, which couldn't get it either. But between the collapse of Kodak paper coinciding with the covid pandemic itself, it appears they went out of business.

So, other than Maxima, a big enough selection of other Fuji CA options has already come into the US to allow some interesting experimentation. If I had time for it, I could now order almost any roll size (clear up to 50 inch wide) of CA Super type II, for example, which is a nice thick paper. But I need to take a break from color printing, and begin some house painting, once our infamous early summer coastal cold winds die down somewhat. We call it, "natural air conditioning". Sure beats the terrible summer heat inland.

Unique Photo carries Fuji Maxima in several roll sizes and finishes.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I have a life. And I'll continue to make prints, and apparently of the kind you keep implying is no longer possible at a high quality level given current materials. Just move on yourself, and come up with positive answers, and perhaps the sober recognition that your personal perspective on all this might not be anywhere near as broad as you pose it to be.

 

[Joakes]

Joakes - again, let me clarify that B&H is not really a Fuji distributor, but does order certain products directly from them. In the past, they have stocked a representative selection of Fuji roll goods, as well as a cut sheet selection (back then clear up to 30X40 inch boxed cut-sheet even in old-style Fujiflex, Super-C, etc), applicable to their specific clientele. All that kind of cut sheet selection ended 15 or 20 yrs ago, and more recently, the pandemic nuked all kinds of availability and distribution variables, and now it's catch-up time. Probably the only reason they still list Fujiflex is due to my personal orders. If it hypothetically catches on, they might actually keep a roll or two in stock again. But it's better to have something relatively fresh via special order than something in stock which sells slowly and risks becoming outdated.

B&H told me they cannot acquire Maxima. That might have to do with the special tweak of RA4 chem allegedly necessary to attain full DMax on Maxima, as well as the rumor that both that particular paper and its necessary developer are being sold direct to dedicated labs via Fuji's own traveling sales Reps (or Rep), and who knows what pandemic circumstances did to those? Ironically, Pako (a broad line Fuji lab distributor) lists all kinds of Fuji/Hunt RA4 chemicals, but apparently can't get Maxima either. There was also a really big Kodak paper distributor right around here, in the SF Bay Area, which had a Fuji account too, which couldn't get it either. But between the collapse of Kodak paper coinciding with the covid pandemic itself, it appears they went out of business.

So, other than Maxima, a big enough selection of other Fuji CA options has already come into the US to allow some interesting experimentation. If I had time for it, I could now order almost any roll size (clear up to 50 inch wide) of CA Super type II, for example, which is a nice thick paper. But I need to take a break from color printing, and begin some house painting, once our infamous early summer coastal cold winds die down somewhat. We call it, "natural air conditioning". Sure beats the terrible summer heat inland.

But in Australia, wouldn't it be easier to acquire Fuji papers from Japan? - or is there some kind of difficult pricing/shipping issue involved?

I’ve spoken to fuji here and I can get paper but sizes are limited. It is the best way actually. Essentially what I can get is based of interest from various labs. As of last year I could only get 10inch roll of DPII. I can get fujiflex also but I have to wait for their next order which can be 6 months. Not ideal but that’s what I have to do hence why I’d consider ordering from B&H. This was 12 months ago during the paper panic as Kodak had disappeared, probably for good it looks like.

As I know allot more about paper now I will enquire as to what other paper they have “interest” in and see what I can order. I’d imagine that there will be more as Fuji is effectively supplying the entire market

Article here re fuji:

Fujifilm is ‘100 percent committed to silver halide’ - Capture magazine

Film is not dead!

www.capturemag.com.au

 

[Joakes]

Whenever ever mottling is mentioned, the first thing I think about is condensation

The mottling issue I am now convinced is real and not solvable. Unless you can produce evidence that current entry level CAII paper that most amateurs use doesn’t do this people should consider this topic dead

Get professional paper if you don’t want it. Happy printing!

 

[Joakes]

Good idea. Just take a photo of a box with your phone and post it. No need to ship the box. Let's nail this down once and for all. It is just too important to leave it hanging.

Or just google it lol

 

[Joakes]

Unique Photo carries Fuji Maxima in several roll sizes and finishes.

Thanks. I’m going to go direct through Fuji her in Aus. Spoke to them last year can get DPII and fujiflex possibly some others. Shipping from US is horrendous, small stuff like film is fine

 

[DREW WILEY]

Hard to say about these things. Since it's a thinner paper than most of the others, perhaps they accidentally coated a bad batch of paper without being aware of the issue. I dunno, since it never happened in my case. But after decades with no problems, Kodak suddenly got a bad batch of 120 film backing paper. I wasn't even aware of that problem either until I read the complaints, since I never bought nor used any of the affected film batches. But the long-term solution involving a completely new backing paper was conspicuous enough, proving there had been a real issue. Same kinds of things sometimes happened in equipment mfg, which I heavily dealt with, where after decades of reliable switches, suddenly an entire bad batch of switches showed up, and no one detected the issue until those affected machines were already distributed an in attempted use.

And if there is an inherent mottling issue, it would be helpful to formally complain to Fuji about it, so any affected batch numbers can be identified and removed from the market, just as was the case with flawed 120 film backing paper. But I can't help on my end, because nothing of that nature occurred to me.

As per Fujiflex, just be aware those rolls are a lot heavier than RC paper, so you'll want an especially solid roller axle and cutting table or whatever. Mounting and display wise, Supergloss is analogous to Cibachrome, but otherwise much easier to handle. Great product.

I've gotten some very bad information from Unique, and they list all kinds of things they don't actually have in stock. Last time I called them they never heard of Maxima, and they sure don't list it on their site. Allegedly someone in their purchasing dept a few years earlier deferred those requests to the Fuji sales Rep's phone number direct. Never order from Unique's web link; call first, so they can check inventory, if you can even reach a knowledgable person. That's not terribly unusual. Quite a few companies have website operations out of synch with the real inventory picture. But all kinds of things are still in flux right now, as distribution steadily recovers from the pandemic era. Still less would I trust anything fa..... states, whoever he actually is.

 

[Joakes]

Hard to say about these things. Since it's a thinner paper than most of the others, perhaps they accidentally coated a bad batch of paper without being aware of the issue. I dunno, since it never happened in my case. But after decades with no problems, Kodak suddenly got a bad batch of 120 film backing paper. I wasn't even aware of that problem either until I read the complaints, since I never bought nor used any of the affected film batches. But the long-term solution involving a completely new backing paper was conspicuous enough, proving there had been a real issue. Same kinds of things sometimes happened in equipment mfg, which I heavily dealt with, where after decades of reliable switches, suddenly an entire bad batch of switches showed up, and no one detected the issue until those affected machines were already distributed an in attempted use.

And if there is an inherent mottling issue, it would be helpful to formally complain to Fuji about it, so any affected batch numbers can be identified and removed from the market, just as was the case with flawed 120 film backing paper. But I can't help on my end, because nothing of that nature occurred to me.

As per Fujiflex, just be aware those rolls are a lot heavier than RC paper, so you'll want an especially solid roller axle and cutting table or whatever.

I've gotten some very bad information from Unique, and they list all kinds of things they don't actually have in stock. Never order directly from their web link; call first, so they can check inventory, if you can even reach a knowledgable person. That's not terribly unusual. Quite a few companies have website operations out of synch with the real inventory picture. But all kinds of things are still in flux right now, as distribution steadily recovers from the pandemic era. Still less would I trust anything fa..... states, whoever that actually is.

not a batch issue as I have paper dating back 10 yrs and the issue is the same. The photo I posted I first printed 10yrs ago and again recently because it is literally all black. I think the best thing for me is go directly through Fuji for paper as you say as shipping a roll from US cost over $200. I think now that fuji is the only supplier they will have more paper coming in.

RE fujiflex how would you compare it to say endura or Fuji? Is there a resource somewhere? I really like glossy paper. Yeah heavy but I’m making a special frame for cutting from a series of shelves sitting on rollers/castors. Do you think the rollers will affect the paper? As long as they are clean?? Sketch attached

 

[DREW WILEY]

Fujiflex is unique. It's coated on thick polyester sheet, not on paper at all. True high gloss, like Cibachrome, but even better. Richer color and depth of blacks than ordinary papers, excellent gamut, and a marriage made in heaven with Ektar sheet film - the results are more like those taken with chrome film than a typical color neg look.

By rollers, I meant end roller. They are cone-shaped and plug into the end of the hollow cardboard core of the roll. Fujiflex is EMI (emulsion side is wound toward the inside). I wouldn't recommend narrow rollers below the material itself or you might get compression creases. A set of thick rollers the full length of the roll might work. And they'll only make contact with the base side. But as the roll gets used up, it's diameter will obviously decrease. Make sure that stand idea is well reinforced. But how do you plan to cut it exact length and squarely at the same time?

 

[Joakes]

Fujiflex is unique. It's coated on thick polyester sheet, not on paper at all. True high gloss, like Cibachrome, but even better. Richer color and depth of blacks than ordinary papers, excellent gamut, and a marriage made in heaven with Ektar sheet film - the results are more like those taken with chrome film than a typical color neg look.

By rollers, I meant end roller. They are cone-shaped and plug into the end of the hollow cardboard core of the roll. Fujiflex is EMI (emulsion side is wound toward the inside). I wouldn't recommend narrow rollers below the material itself or you might get compression creases. A set of thick rollers the full length of the roll might work. And they'll only make contact with the base side. But as the roll gets used up, it's diameter will obviously decrease. Make sure that stand idea is well reinforced. But how do you plan to cut it exact length and squarely at the same time?

Thanks. Paper sounds amazing, not for all images of course. Almost sounds like very thin piece a acrylic bonded to the front, that sort of effect. That’s good emulsion down.

What I will do is place a steel channel at the shelf where paper is and just run a blade along. Put another channel lower at the desired length. Maybe 5 rollers each side to distribute weight more evenly. Image on top left is something I made for drums so similar concept. Use wide rollers easily place up to 40 in

 

[DREW WILEY]

Yeah, keep the pressure from accumulating at any one point. It cuts easily enough with a box knife etc. I happen to use a four-foot wide Rotatrim mounted to a large laminated table with a positionable stainless steel length bar, plus an ss squaring edge; but that takes up quite a bit floor space. Cut it in total darkness, though I keep a tiny Jobo Minilux safelight in my pocket which can be momentarily used if some kind of disorientation or misalignment issue occurs.

It's a lot less static-prone than Cibachrome was, so attracts dust less easily. It's also way more resistant to kink marks or accidental scratching. But more like Cibachrome, it's difficult to retouch, so try to print as dustlessly as you can. The starting CMY balance on colorheads is likely to be close to other Fuji Crystal Archive products you have used, and the processing regimen of time/temp will be the same. I hope you enjoy it as much as I have; but as you already intuitively recognize, not every image is suitable for a deep, almost 3d shiny surface, capable of holding as much sheer detail as if a giant piece of sheet film.

 

[Joakes]

Yeah, keep the pressure from accumulating at any one point. It cuts easily enough with a box knife etc. I happen to use a four-foot wide Rotatrim mounted to a large laminated table with a positionable stainless steel length bar, plus an ss squaring edge; but that takes up quite a bit floor space. Cut it in total darkness, though I keep a tiny Jobo Minilux safelight in my pocket which can be momentarily used if some kind of disorientation or misalignment issue occurs.

It's a lot less static-prone than Cibachrome was, so attracts dust less easily. It's also way more resistant to kink marks or accidental scratching. But more like Cibachrome, it's difficult to retouch, so try to print as dustlessly as you can. The starting CMY balance on colorheads is likely to be close to other Fuji Crystal Archive products you have used, and the processing regimen of time/temp will be the same. I hope you enjoy it as much as I have; but as you already intuitively recognize, not every image is suitable for a deep, almost 3d shiny surface, capable of holding as much sheer detail as if a giant piece of sheet film.

The beauty of this is floor space and handling large rolls. You run the exacto blade along the channel and the cut would be pretty clean and straight. I have a rotatrim 4ft also but this I think this is better. The first time I cut in the dark the first cut was off so they were all not square, usable but not ideal for the easel which has guides etc. this would be perfectly square and easy to load the paper without a central rod. You could place any size roll on it. With wide rollers say x3 each side the weight would be very evenly distributed. The whole thing would cost next to nothing

Have you ever used that DELTA fluorescent tape? Says it can be used with color??

 

[DREW WILEY]

I wouldn't trust anything like that without testing first. It only glows awhile anyway. And I have to be extra careful if unexposed film is handled in the same room. But what I have successfully done with that kind of tape is take a regular 1/4 inch paper punch and make little dots of it to individually apply to things like light switches or potentially risky counter corners etc. I've never experienced fogging to either film or paper when using it in that tiny of a manner.

 

[Joakes]

I wouldn't trust anything like that without testing first. It only glows awhile anyway. And I have to be extra careful if unexposed film is handled in the same room. But what I have successfully done with that kind of tape is take a regular 1/4 inch paper punch and make little dots of it to individually apply to things like light switches or potentially risky counter corners etc. I've never experienced fogging to either film or paper when using it in that tiny of a manner.

Would def do some fogging tests absolutely. Your idea with the dots is a good one. There are also these Heiland and RH designs amber LED not sure how good they are but for orientation momentarily should be fine

 

[DREW WILEY]

I'd avoid any LED's, amber or not, unless very weak and brief. But that is what my Jobo Minilux is, with a single amber LED capable of being momentarily used. I've tested it up to 12 sec a few inches away from Fujiflex, but would never use it that long or that close for anything serious.

 

[braxus]

Coming from a Noritsu lab using Kodak RA-2SM papers, what is the longevity and life expectancy of Fuji RA-4 papers? Does it have low fade like Kodaks papers did? I know all papers will fade if constantly exposed to the light, but the newer stuff fades slower.

 

[koraks]

what is the longevity and life expectancy of Fuji RA-4 papers? Does it have low fade like Kodaks papers did?

I'm going to reply based on what Fuji engineers involved in producing current paper produced in The Netherlands told me.

First off, the present/recent production 'Kodak' papers are suspect; the Fuji people buy some of it from time to time and subject it to analysis. Based on such analysis, one of the engineers remarked to me "I'd be surprised if prints on current Endura would last even a decade". This suggests that today's 'Kodak' paper isn't what Kodak paper used to be.

As to the longevity of the Fuji papers, I addressed this very specifically with them. Hard and fast numbers are difficult to give because they depend greatly on the conditions the prints are kept in. For dark storage (in otherwise favorable conditions), these engineers mentioned we should think in terms of centuries, not years. They gave 200 to 400 years as a ballpark figure. I've since seen that same number in a publication somewhere, although I don't quite recall where that was. Of course, none of this paper has been around for 300 years, so what really happens in that time scale, nobody knows. What it does mean, is that there's a lot of technology packed into these papers that ensure a long life, in particular in dark storage. For display under muted, artificial light, the life expectancy should be a couple of decades, but it depends greatly in light intensity and in particular the presence of UV light. For the amateur Fuji papers (entry-level Crystal Archive) was quoted lifetimes on indoor display of 25-30 years, and up to 45 years for professional papers (e.g. DPII), at 450 lux 12 hours per 24 hours. The Maxima paper has the best longevity of the paper range and they called it 'museum quality' (note that that's not some kind of objective industry standard or anything).

The above numbers are subject to proper processing; for instance, the health of the blix is quite important (needs to be replenished to spec and blix times must be sufficient), as is washing after blixing. A single stabilizer bath is not a good substitute for a thorough wash of the paper. Don't be afraid to "wash out the optical brighteners from the emulsion" as some people say, because the OBA's (which are certainly there in significant amounts) are not in the emulsion, but in the PE coating. Nothing washes out of that layer.

Fuji papers have multiple protections against degradation; for instance, there are UV blockers in the topcoating, which protect the dyes from incoming UV light. Moreover, there are sacrificial compounds in the emulsion itself which absorb the energy that's released as UV radiation hits dye molecules, which reduces the degradation since the excess energy is dissipated into the emulsion. For prints on display, I imagine it will furthermore help greatly to have additional UV blocking in the form of picture frame glass with an UV-blocking layer etc.

As an anecdote, I took down a print some time ago that I had on a wall right next to a south-facing window, with no significant UV protection. This was a FUJIFILM Crystal Archive (consumer-grade paper) print. On sunny days, this print was exposed to multiple hours of intense and direct sunlight, especially in summer. Although I never noticed any fading, when I took it out of its frame, the difference between the exposed surface and the edge that was underneath the matte was quite clear, with the exposed area showing very visible fading. The fading, however, is virtually equal in all three color layers, so it only looked like fading and not like color shifting. This is one area in which paper manufacturers, and most definitely Fuji, spend attention - not only should the print fade as slowly as possible, when it does, it should do it as gracefully as possible. I was actually amazed at how well the color channels tracked in the significant amount of fading.
This print had spent about 10 years on that wall; given the lighting levels, which far surpassed the indoor levels I mentioned in connection with the lifetimes (25-30 years for this kind of paper), I would say that the estimates I got from Fuji for on-display lifetimes are realistic. It's only a single comparison/benchmark point, of course.

You might be able to obtain additional information from Wilhelm, who does accelerated fading testing, also for/on Fuji materials. For instance, one particular publication I was able to find easily gave a longevity for Crystal Archive under display conditions between 26 (bare print exposed to bulb light) and 50 years (framed under UV-filtered glass) and album-storage of >100 years (page 2). There may be more data on Fuji materials in the Wilhelm publications, but you'd have to do some rooting around.

Note that when it comes to permanence testing, there are some aspects that will spoil the broth. Especially the lighting levels under which materials are being tested, as well as the acceptable degree of shift or fading, can make massive (up to orders of magnitude!) differences. This, to a large extent, has always been the explanation of the historical difference between Kodak and Fuji materials, with Fuji generally testing under twice as high lighting levels as Kodak (1000lx vs. 450lx IIRC). As a result, Kodak always came out on top - but the playing field wasn't level...If you search on this forum a bit, you'll find some posts by Photo Engineer (RIP) where he mentions discussions with Henry Wilhelm and some differences in opinion on relevant testing conditions. This is a good (albeit not very detailed) hint at how profound such differences have always been, and why interpreting test results is complicated.

 

[Samu]

It should be added that commercial rolls of paper are in fact quite precisely and predictably coated in such a manner these days that specific laser parameters can be given as reliable starting points. BUT these differ from one laser exposure system to another. Therefore four different settings are prescribed realtive to four different predominant models of big commercial laser printers. Small roll only products, apt to be used in high-volume snapshot style printers, have their own different settings, for those kind of machines. But none of this is written in stone, because some of the above machines are no longer in production, and at some point will be incapable of being serviced.

So in that respect, and given the huge investment expense in replacing comercial laser printers, optical enlargement is far more dependable in the long run. Replacing a quality light bulb costs about fifteen dollars; replacing a high-end laser printer can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. And those require expensive periodic servicing too.

But colorhead models also differ from one another, and even with respect to what the CC increments on their dials or readout monitors exactly mean. But for someone starting out, in most cases you can simply begin with the old generic advice of trying
30 cc Y, 30cc M, and 00 C, and simply go from there. These newer papers are very close to the older ones in that respect. Of course, you still have to fine tune all that not only with respect to your own colorhead, but you own chemistry time/temp factor, and even each specific color negative. But all this is pretty damn simple with a bit of experience. It will, however, be interesting to see how some of these new LED light sources correspond to that.

As far as miracles go, all it takes is one pair or a particular style of sports shoe to be worn by a famous athlete for million of pairs of the same to be purchased by teenage wannabees. I don't know of any cut-sheet color printing superstars a big corporation is going to take note of. But still the analogy itself applies. If some major artist did their own darkroom printing and started promoting it, the value to overall paper sales might be enough for at least a token discussion at some higher level. But in brass tacks terms, rigging up a decent roll paper cutter isn't all that difficult. I can handle up to 40-inch wide rolls in my own setting.
So don't hold your breath. Just do what you need to do with existing options.

What I have found, even the different brands of RA-4 chemistry produce slightly different colors, and do not produce exactly the sama colors with same filtration. I've used mainly Fuji Hunt CPRA and Tetenal SD-SLR-SP80 developers. Fuji Hunt is my regular brand, but I had to buy Tetenal during the Covid outbreak as I was unable to find Fuji, and opted for Tetenal instead. Actually this is a mixture of Tetenal developer and Fuji starter, but it seems to work perfectly well. I've grown wary of using anything marketed as "simplified kits" for hobbyists, and opt fot professional bulk chemistry. I bought once a kit marketed by Adox, presumably a Chinese made chemistry, and was not satisfied with the results. Also, there is no universal standard for filtration, and necessary basic filtration needed differs wildly between the color heads made by different manufacturers. If the filtration needed for my Durst is normally in the M50 Y30 range, for my older Meopta it means M110 Y40 for most Kodak films (Ektat being a bit different). For RA-papers, DP II is probably the best choice at least in the European market from papers widely available nowadays. Standard CA looks a bit too thin in my opinion. Especially the blacks are better on DP II, and it looks a bit more contrasty. Fuji papers can be bought even locally here in Lithuania. Cutting paper has never been a problem for me, as the prices for rolls have always been a fraction of the ready cut sheets. Also, these are mostly made of the standard CA, which is not a paper I would like to use. The Lithuanian retailer I mostly buy my paper from, sells also single rolls of paper. They supply mostly for photofinishers, but are glad to sell to anybody in the country.

For the papers, I am referring to Fuji papers available in the European market, made in the Netherlands and Fuji Hunt chemistry made in Belgium. Papers sold in the US market seem to have different names I am not familiar with.

 

[DREW WILEY]

RA4 chem is supposed to be completely standardized, or else gets a specialty designation. Besides the standard kind, Fuji-Hunt has special optional Eco and high temp versions, which I have no experience with, and they aren't sold in small volumes. But I have used three different brands of conventional RA4 interchangeably with identical results. But Tetenal was way off back when I tried it, admittedly long ago. And I don't opt for anything like "room temp" chemistry. The past several years I've been optically printing on Fujiflex Supergloss made in Japan, which is really their top end product, and the results have been superb. But it only comes in wide expensive rolls.

Lifespans of current RA4 Fuji papers are just educated guesses unless someone decides to live a couple hundred years and report back. Wilhelm's opinions are out of date with respect to specific current products, and relied far too much on questionable accelerated aging torture chamber tests. But the general trend of Crystal Archive papers has been steadily improving, and my own real-world display results leave me optimistic. But there are just so many potential variables; and any individual or gallery who cites hard number of years is basically talking BS. Same with inkjet prints, which haven't been around long enough for that kind of talk either. Aardenburg has addressed some of the shortfalls in Wilhelm's methodology.

With respect to chromogenic RA4 prints, you not only have to contend with dyes fading over time, but the progressive yellowing or staining effect of residual color couplers. Fuji has made advances with respect to both issues, but primarily with their premium papers. Anxiety about all this would be far better spent selecting display lighting free of UV.

 

[adamlugi]

Do you have any information that Fujiflex is disappearing from the market.

The Polish branch of Fuji is currently unable to import it . Lack of stock in Europe .

 

[koraks]

Do you have any information that Fujiflex is disappearing from the market.

I wouldn't hold my breath for it to become available again.

 

[DREW WILEY]

koraks - Fujiflex is a routine option for some of the big laser-printing labs in this country. And there is no formal word suggesting that its discontinuance is planned. There aren't many personal users of it like myself, so I have no idea of how much of it is actually in stock for distribution here. But any big Fuji direct account using it in relation to ad display or showroom purposes probably used more of it in a week than I do in three years. Even Fujiflex is cheaper to offer than inkjet when it comes to significant multiples of a same large image. Mounting anything high gloss is a headache; but those who laser print onto it also have the appropriate mounting equipment and skills. I can do it too, but not at their kind of volume.

So I'm not going to hold my breath with anxiety over any doom and gloom rumors begun on this forum. But being directly on the opposite side of the Pacific, shipments from Japan are relatively easy to warehouse on our own Pacific coast, regarding all kinds of products.

On of the largest users of Japanese Fuji was Peter Lik, whose images I find downright abominably kitchy, but who has a big lab in the Las Vegas area capable of printing and mounting these on large scale, including Fujitrans backlit imagery. His main sales gallery was in Lahaina, catering to cruise ships, unquestionably destroyed by the terrible fire a few days ago. But that was basically just a showroom. People didn't purchase what was actually there, but selected images from the big display samples and specified the size of framed print they wanted, the specific medium, and then that would be printed and framed in Vegas, then shipped to their own location afterwards. He has other showrooms too, including one on the Vegas strip itself. So who knows how this all this fire devastation will affect his own sales volume. So many eggs were scrambled already, during the pandemic, that it's still going to take awhile more to unscramble all that.

 

[adamlugi]

If there is demand from large laboratories then they should not stop the product.

In Fuji's internal system there is no info ze production ended . Fuji Trans is also not available at the moment.

I hope that it will be available in the near future

Thank you for your opinion.

 

[koraks]

Fuji's internal system

Fuji has many internal systems. The one you'd have to have access to is the production schedule of the Japanese coating facility. Evidently, none of us are privy to data in that system.
Ordering systems and the presence of SKU's in those are not indicative of which products are actually being made. SKU's can linger for a long time even if they've become inactive.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Having myself having interacted with Japanese manufacturing schedules for many years before I retired, I'd imagine that these specialty Fuji products are basically on a feast or famine basis. When sufficient demand builds up, AND the price and availability of ingredients is fortuitous, then they coat a big batch and coast on that awhile.

That is really no different than what is going on with certain black and white printing papers right now, or even special size cuts of Kodak sheet film. It's either abundant or else it's seemingly impossible to get, depending on the specific point in the manufacture and distribution cycle. It took me 6 months to get my own order or Fujiflex. That was two years ago, and it came fresh, from a whole new batch. That batch has apparently sold out in some distribution settings. When the next batch might arrive, I have no idea. Fuji is sometimes inscrutable.

You also need to realize that once the collapse of Kodak branded RA4 media became obvious, the big labs pounced on Fuji inventory hard, and have probably stockpiled and hoarded as much as they reasonably can for their own use. Fujiflex is unique per its own look, now that Cibachrome is long gone. But Kodak has their own RA4 transparency material (Duratrans) which was being used in high volume by specialty labs, and now Fuji is the only game in town for that too.

The bright side is that, now that Fuji is the only viable source, it might give them the incentive to coat these products more often. But as I hinted earlier, the cost of all kinds of materials and ingredients is especially high and volatile at the moment; so manufacturers have to be very wise about their own timing if they hope to move volume as well as make a decent profit. Expect a roller coaster ride.