Mr. Wiley also claims that the new papers only need an extra 5cc of magenta to bring them in line with the old papers, a claim that suggests he either has no idea what he's talking about or he's confused as to which paper he's testing. Fuji CAii is the equivalent of kodak's edge or kodak royal (same as edge but with thicker base and back-writing). All three of these papers were designed for laser-light minilab exposure. The pitiful dmax that all three papers exhibit with traditional exposure could be due to the difference between the intensity of laser light/led vs. tungsten exposure, in other words, these papers might be capable of delivering a black in conditions of extreme exposure but I don't know as I've yet to test them using a lambda. However, there is no doubt that these new papers have radically different reciprocity values as longer exposures to conventional lightsources have absolutely no bearing on the dmax values. The other feasible explanation for the pitiful dmax of Fuji CAii could be due to the fact that it is a commercial minilab paper, not to be confused with their professional papers like Fuji P or PD, and that the intended market is not critical of such things as dmax or color gamut especially at sizes 5x7 and smaller. But don't take my word for it, you need to find out for yourself - a box of this crap is available for $40 at b and h. Clearly, a separate thread with scanned examples is in order so as to dispel some of the ridiculous, polly-annish "this new stuff is just as good as the old stuff" claims some people continue to make with zero substantiation to back it up.
I remember how heart-broken I was when Portra was discontinued. However, I should have saved my tears for kodak's cancellation announcement of Supra since that truly marks the obituary of traditional RA-4 for the discerning color print-maker. Anyhow, I'm not complaining as my lambda printed exhibition prints from drum-scans look even better than the traditionals.