Ellis or Anyone?
Any word on NPS Quickload availability? I asked one of the film guys at B&H Frid ay. He looked it up on the computer and lo and behold, it came up as To Be Annou nced. That's one step ahead of Portra 160VC ReadyLeaks, which are listed as unav ailable/not in production. Reason for hope? Pipedream?
BTW, any more substance to the rumor Kodak's revamping ReadyLoad yet AGAIN?!
Marshall
Marshall, see the post from Wednesday (titled "Readyload Systems"; it's a few below this thread on the "New Messages" list), where this subject was discussed at some length.
Please note that some people--including me--who use hundreds of Kodak Readyloads per year without a problem are getting tired of photographers who blame their own mistakes with Readyloads on Kodak. But I guess since we can't engage in the "Nikon vs. Canon" wars they have on photo.net, this dispute fills a need, eh?
extra
Simon:
In fairness to Marshall, he did not initiate a QL versus ReadyLoad argument, you did.
Like you, I use both systems and agree that careful operation is critical. But the issue now has become Kodak's lack of support for their own system and Fuji's reluctance to import some products into the US.
Pro100 has been discontinued, and Kodak has not offically announced whether the successor, PortraVC will be available in RL, let alone shipped any product. Those of us who need color negative film have a legitimate question as to whether Fuji or Kodak are going to meet this need.
We were told that Fuji is coming out with their new film (NPC) in Quickload format.
Woooo!
I feel a little like a firebug with a new book of matches.
Have a cream soda, Simon! Easy Big Guy! I use Readyloads, too; am obsessive about technique, and don't find them to be THAT bad-- about one partially fogged shot in 25-50.
Nonetheless, the lack of 160NC really stings. Why should neg shooters still have to spot prints and fumble with holders? Seems to me switching EVERYTHING over to Polaroid-compatible holders would be a cost-saving, not a costly move for Kodak. Standardization, Rochester?
What's more, if Fuji's sellin' 'em as fast as it can make 'em, well, oughtn't that tell Kodak something?
Jeff. Thanks for the reply, but what's NPC? Some higher-contrast answer to 160VC? If so, RATS! I'm looking to use neg film for those situations when I need an extra zone or two of range. (And PLEASE! Don't anyone jump in with the old Chrome-Print rant! I'm looking to record a longer SCENE range, not just stack up density on film for viewing on a lightbox.)
Oops!
I meant to write Polaroid-compatible PACKETS, not holders. And no, I don't want to start a Slide-vs.-neg war, fun as that seems to be on Usenet.
Fuji NPC(160) is their version of Kodak 160VC.
Fuji NPC? Is this a daylight negative like the NPS but with higher saturation? T his would be handy for some shots! But FujiFilm does not import Astia nor the 64T in QuickLoad here in Switz erland. I doubt this film will be available either.
Paul, yes NPC160 is a new film, a higher contrast sister to NPS. I've only read about it, not tried it. I can't wait to try it especially in Quickload.
Simon, you are correct: if you are slow and methodical with the Readyload packets you'll get better results than if you aren't, but the truth remains that my failure rate with Fuji Quickload is 000%. On a brighter note, Kodak has acknowleged that the Ready load design has an inherent flaw and is currently starting to have some professionals (unfortunately I'm not one of them) test a resign of the Readyload system that utilizes a single sheet per film packet design. I can't wait to try it! Kodak makes some great films.
(Pardon me for blatantly and publicly sucking up to a large corporation!)
Paul, yes NPC160 is a new film, a higher contrast sister to NPS. I've only read about it, not tried it. I can't wait to try it especially in Quickload.
Simon, you are correct: if you are slow and methodical with the Readyload packets you'll get better results than if you aren't, but the truth remains that my failure rate with Fuji Quickload is 000%.
On a brighter note, Kodak has acknowleged that the Ready load design has an inherent flaw and is currently starting to have some professionals (unfortunately I'm not one of them) test a redesign of the Readyload system that utilizes a single sheet per film packet . I can't wait to try it! Kodak makes some great films.
(Pardon me for blatantly and publicly sucking up to a large corporation!)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks