Discussion in 'Color: Film, Paper, and Chemistry' started by ashokgoyal42, May 31, 2011.
Is it really really true that this film is being discontinued?
No, it's been renamed to 160NS.
Thanks edp. I had no clue despite all my searches and enquiries to Fuji.
There was a long thread here last year about Fuji discontinuing their whole colour pro line except 400H. Some very well connected people were adamant that all the other films bar 400H were gone in all sizes - a letter existed to this effect and there had been face-to-face meetings on the matter with Fuji. Now, we learn that 160S has become 160NS, so in a sense 160S is 'discontinued' but it is also re-branded. To me, this shows just how appalling Fuji's PR is and that by not only misleading the public, but also their own reps, they made a terrible decision to cut some films seem wholly worse than reality - something which internet rumour needs no help with.
What Steve said. It was confirmed with letters from and interviews with Fuji that all pro color neg films but 400H were done for, and that 160S, while being pulled for the time being, would eventually be renamed 160NS (with the product itself unchanged) and brought back. But I haven't actually seen 160S, 160C, or 800Z disappear from the shelves of all of the local stores that I frequent. (This may be a testament to how poorly they were selling.) I have not seen 160NS show up either.
In all honesty I'm surprised Fujifilm is still making colour negative film at all, Kodak has been releasing new films a lot recently which are noticeably finer grain than the Fujifilm counterparts. I'd be happy if they focused mostly on the E6 products, where they still have the edge on Kodak, in my opinion. Either that or do what Kodak has done in the past few years and release great new films like Ektar, Portra 160, and Portra 400. Yes, other films got discontinued as a cost of doing this, but realistically, companies have to discontinue products to make way for new ones, or Ford would still be making the Model T.
Rumours can spread out of a different meaning people give to words. From an industrial or a commercial point of view, if you stop 160S and make a different (doesn't matter how different) film, 160NS, you really "discontinue" 160S. This has important implication for production, marketing, stock management, relations with distributors and retailers.
We shouldn't try to read internal communications because that might cause unnecessary panic.
I'm just glad I have a whole freezer full of Fuji QuickLoad film.
In fact one wonders whether this whole rumor mill of discontinuation actually serves Fuji well. People like me have spent a tiny fortune in hoarding up the 160S because we love the fineness of the film. Agree with what everyone says. I like the new Kodak Portra too - smooth as silk.
Just an afterthought, all Fuji needed to do is put up a press release on it's website.
As usual I maintained it was bs, as only Fuji Japan can discontinue a product.
Sorry to re-open the thread, but it appears that Fuji 160NS is not available in the US -- the usual places (B&H, Adorama, etc.) don't seem to have it. If so, I would be reluctant buy a discontinued product (160S can still be purchased) and will probably switch to Kodak for all of my C41 needs.
Does anyone have any information about this? Thanks.
I have also heard that it won't be imported, which would be real shame if true. I haven't contacted Fuji USA, but that should be the first stop to verify this rumor. However I see no reason not to purchase the discontinued product. If stored correctly my experience is 160S works as well as new (to my eyes, not lab equipment) as newer film. So until it's gone I will continue to purchase 160S that is close to expiring.
I have also been buying the new Kodak Portra line, but have not printed any of it yet. The one roll I scanned looks great, and the contact prints also show very nice color. So I think it's a winner, but I don't like the higher cost the new films have.
I just shot a roll of Porta 400 and developed it using the Jobo chemicals (my first c41 development, but I did it at 39C and it seemed to come out fine) and printed it on Kodak Edge paper, processed at room temperature using Kodak Chemicals. I don't particularly like the Kodak paper compared to the Fuji (which has more intense colors), but I was fairly pleased with the result. The skin tones, in particular, were extremely accurate. I think I will be inclined to move to Kodak (Porta 400 for people and Ektar 100 for landscapes, flowers, etc.) instead of Fuji -- the annoying behavior of the latter's marketing doesn't make me want to give them my business.
And what about the new Portra 160?
I have been using both the new Portras. I like them both but prefer the 400. The 160 has finer grain but not by a huge margin and I find while the 400 is a true 400 I still like to overexpose 160 a bit (shoot at 125 or 100) like I did with 160NC. Unless I'm pushing the 400 to 1600 I can't see the grain when printed to 8x10 from 120 negatives so unless I'm going really big, 12x16 or larger I'm not sure I need the 160 (in 135 the story might be different). Ektar is finer grained still but its latitude is much narrower so you need to be more careful of exposure.
Separate names with a comma.