I understand you’re focusing on B&H but the chart is missing the potentially important point that Freestyle offers E100 in 8x10. It’s the only provider that does, I think, under some sort of experimental trial to see the demand.Originally Posted by r.e.
I’m in no way affiliated to anyone, just an interested user since if people buy it Kodak may keep it going.
I would not take Fuji's word on why they decided to drop production and distribution of V 100 in the US.
Labs will care less about emulsion chemicals for as long as it falls into E-6 cat.
P.S.
That quoted price for V50 in 4x5 is close to insanity. I moved to using it in 120 a long time ago. A 6x9 or 6x12 renders quite enough details for a good 40 inch print if needed.
Digital processing almost eliminates the difference between Fuji E6 emulsions and in many situations Provia wins by being more "flexible" and subtle.
Gosh. I would NEVER EVER print a med format chrome to 40 inches. 4X5 OK, though I prefer an 8x10 original. The cost of a box of 8x10 chrome sheet film is indeed getting up there. Price-wise, 4X5 seems to be the new 8x10. But just how many damn shots does one need? If it's for sake of big prints, how many distinct images can you print well that size anyway? But I print optically, where detail gets directly reproduced distinctly better than typical digital options, so am nitpicky about real content on the original shot itself. Yeah, I too am shooting 6X9 color film a lot more often these days due to price and spontaneity issues, but don't like printing MF any larger than nominal 20X24 in color, or nominal 16X20 from b&w film. Not saying it's wrong for others to do so; we each have our own specific objectives.
I was never thrilled with Provia, but shot an awful lot of it in 8X10 simply because it was the realistic mid-range choice back then. Once E100G showed up from Kodak I greatly preferred that, mainly due to its dimensionally stable polyester base. But since, I've switched entirely over to color neg for original shots. I still dig through old sheet film chromes for sake of making color internegatives, and printing a few of those at a time. It can take multiple sheets of film to do that correctly, including black and white films masks, so add all those multiple 8x10 sheets up per printed image and it does get expensive. Fortunately, in my case, a lot of the up-front work was done in advance, back when sheet film prices were way more reasonable. And my own freezer stash of sheet film also goes back to better priced days, while it lasts, at least.
I waiting to see if a break form all this smoke will arrive in time to tempt me to thaw out another box of 8X10 color sheet film or not. In fact, I'm down to my last three sheets of thawed 4X5 color film. I'm shooting conservatively at the moment, mostly black and white in either rolls or sheets, and color mainly in 120 rolls. Ektar has made a huge difference for me - the most chrome-looking color neg film ever, but with some real idiosyncrasies which have taken me quite awhile to successfully iron out. It can accept a great amount of detail per surface area.
I have printed quite a few Cibachromes from Velvia, along with making a few really good internegs from it more recently. But one is really skating on the edge of the ice rink - not much room for error.
The Darkroom have announced they will no longer process RVP 100 after September 6 due to the new regulations.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
>> I would NEVER EVER print a med format chrome to 40 inches . 4X5 OK
6x12 is 4.72 inch long. 6x17 is 6.6 inch long
I make prints up to 24x30 from 4x5 and 6x12. But mostly 8x10s from all formats from 35 to 4x5.
Oh, you're doing wide strips from 6X12, not 30X40 inch rectangles. That makes sense. Now I understand. I just finished making a 24X30 drum and equivalent position stops on the paper roll cutter, but am currently out of color paper itself. Want to get a 30 inch wide roll for sake of both 30X40's and 24X30's. Somewhat unhealthy forest fire smoke here, so not a good time to be running the darkroom air intake much. Using it lightly for ordinary black and white work isn't so bad.
16X20 prints are my normal portfolio size, drymounted, mixing prints from 8X10, 4X5, 6X9cm, and 6X7 originals. 35mm is just too small for that, so I segregate those into smaller prints by themselves. But in color, 20X24 is more the sweet spot, and that size, though displayable in itself, also functions like a trial run if I wish to go bigger still. But back when I was doing relatively frequent exhibits, I broke all the ordinary conventions and displayed tiny prints right beside big ones, and color mixed with black and white prints. It worked, and worked well. Even the frames were customized to each specific print, and not boringly generic.
What is that unaproved substance? (I bet it is very damaging, scary and will erase all life on the planet.)
“
On March 8, 2021, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finalized a rule regarding the chemical phenol, isopropylated phosphate (3:1) (PIP (3:1)) (CASRN 68937-41-7) under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), which prohibited the processing and distribution in commerce, including sales, of the chemical and products containing the chemical. EPA also issued an enforcement policy on the same day stating that it will not enforce the ban on processing and distribution until September 5, 2021.
A miniscule amount (less than 0.0003%) of PIP (3:1) is present within the layers of FUJICHROME Velvia 100 Professional films. Fujifilm believes that the trace amount of PIP (3:1) in the FUJICHROME Velvia 100 Professional films pose no risk to the environment.
As a global leader in imaging, Fujifilm is committed to acting sustainably, and complying with all country regulations. As such, Fujifilm will discontinue FUJICHROME Velvia 100 Professional film in the U.S. effective immediately (July 6, 2021).
If you’ve purchased FUJICHROME Velvia 100 Professional films please read the accompanying Safety Data Sheet carefully.”
Just a hypothesis based on valid prior knowledge, but in the greater LA area the only way the previous severe pollution problem got under control was by actual enforcement of some of the strictest rules in the country, with real teeth. For example, if a particular company illegally disposes of a noxious substance down a storm drain, they'll trace it clear back to the source, and not only levy a fine, but potentially convict and even imprison whoever authorized it, even if that goes clear to the top. There is a track record; big shots really have received prison sentences. Probably nothing as minor as the Velvia ingredient in question, in such tiny quantity, would even begin to raise official eyebrows; but in that district, the whole point is to keep people on their toes. And whenever there's a discrepancy between national EPA rules, CA EPA, and local regulations, the strictest legal standard always applies.
The truth is that if it were important to you, you can process it yourself or find places that will process it. Like I said earlier, you could trim the notch and no one can know (no one cares enough).
The regulation may or may not be the real reason Fuji stopped distribution in the US. At least they cared enough to give one reason, rather than being silent. I appreciate it even if it’s a sweet lie.
But it’s Velvia 100. Not a lot to care about this loss, IMO.
And Velvia 50 in sheets was already not available in the US.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks