das
Well-known
If Fujifilm were smart, it would reintroduce its pack film it so unwisely discontinued long ago. Have people seen what ebay/online sellers are charging for NOS expired film like FP-100c? Up to $100 or more EACH. So many cool cameras and medium format polaroid backs have fallen into obsolescence for lack of film. And bring back C41 color 100-foot rolls!
Pál_K
Cameras. I has it.
Sadly, Fuji destroyed the equipment for pack film. At the time, I wish they’d offered it to Impossible. I remember several prominent (?) advocates met with Fuji representatives in the hopes of saving pack film shortly after their announcement that FP-100C was discontinued (FP-3000B had been discontinued a few years earlier). That’s when Fuji told them it was an impossibility because the equipment no longer existed.
I’m still miffed about it because I’d discovered pack film just after the FP-3000B discontinuation. I never hoarded the stuff: I was able to get about 20 packs of B&W and 20 of color before prices topped $35.
The results I’ve got with these films has been spectacular.
Funny as it may sound, I actually enjoy the process of pulling out the dark-slide strip and the little tabs for each exposure. It’s such a tactile, engaging, process.
But the complex construction of the film, tabs, and pack means that it’s expensive to manufacture. Only the Chinese could make such an endeavor profitable today. If they did, I’d welcome it.
I’m still miffed about it because I’d discovered pack film just after the FP-3000B discontinuation. I never hoarded the stuff: I was able to get about 20 packs of B&W and 20 of color before prices topped $35.
The results I’ve got with these films has been spectacular.
Funny as it may sound, I actually enjoy the process of pulling out the dark-slide strip and the little tabs for each exposure. It’s such a tactile, engaging, process.
But the complex construction of the film, tabs, and pack means that it’s expensive to manufacture. Only the Chinese could make such an endeavor profitable today. If they did, I’d welcome it.
das
Well-known
That's a shame about the original equipment. Fuji should be able to modify its Instax Wide to somehow work. There are a few DIYers out there who have modified medium format pack film backs and cameras to use Instax Wide. Really cool projects.
https://www.zluxtech.com/store/products/fujifilm-fp-1-instax-camera
https://www.zluxtech.com/store/products/fujifilm-fp-1-instax-camera
Skiff
Well-known
Bringing it back would be the most stupid they could do!
It was discontinued 5 years ago, nevertheless there is even still stock of this film at the dealers after that long time. Why? because no one is buying it!
Fuji had to discontinue it because of lack of demand. And that hasn't changed at all.
Packfilm was a product which has been used almost exclusively only by professional photographers (for studio light test shots and passport photography). But these two markets were destroyed completely by digital over a decade ago.
Skiff
Well-known
That is wrong. One of these numerous stupid internet myths. There was only one who met with Fujifilm in Tokyo, Florian Kaps. And Fuji made clear to him that it would be impossible for him to produce Fujifilm packfilm, as he would not only need the specialist converting machinery for it, but also the emulsion making and coating machinery. But that emulsion making and coating machinery is of course needed by Fujifilm itself for their own film production.
No, the Chinese can't do that profitable. Because the only cost advantage the Chinese would have is labour cost. But such a product like packfilm need fully automatic high-complex machine based production. Big investments. And that would not be significantly cheaper in China. And furthermore there is no Chinese company with the know-how to build such complex systems. There are only Lucky and Shanghai left as Chinese film manufacturers.
brbo
Well-known
Not many people are buying it because it's a) WAY past expiry date and b) WAY more expensive than it was before. Otherwise, at regular price it was gone from online stores just as fast as Acros 100 or 400H recently after discontinuation notice.
Market for pack film wasn't destroyed in 2015. It was gone a decade before. Fuji just wants to have one "instant" product line. There is no point in keeping pack film along with Instax. The demand is nowhere close to Instax (but the same is true for Acros 100) and then all it would do is remind people how awful Instax really is.
Coldkennels
Barnack-toting Brit.
The other big problem with pack film as opposed to Instax is that it's an utter mess. It creates a lot of waste, it's not particularly environmentally friendly, and you've got caustic chemicals exposed to the user (which then has to be handled carefully until you can find a place to dispose of it - not easy on a casual walkabout). The prints are then wet (well, tacky) and easily damaged compared to Instax.
Don't get me wrong: I LOVED FP-3000b and FP-100c. My Polaroid 100 still sits in my sideboard, and I get a little sad every time I see it. All of the best instant shots I ever took were on FP-3000b. But think about the average instant film user today - whether they're an Instax, Polaroid, or Impossible user. Are they likely to want to deal with the problems or process of pack film? Not really.
The thing is... Instax isn't a bad medium. Not really. I bought one of the Instax Mini printers to "print" from my X-Pro2. The latitude is very unforgiving, but the actual "print quality" is great; the results are surprisingly sharp and detailed (considering it's such a tiny print).
The real problems with the format for me are
1) Instax Wide is a really nice size, but gets totally overlooked in favour of the "kawaii" Instax Mini, which seemingly has a new pastel-coloured camera for it released every year
2) All the cameras which use Instax have sub-par lenses, sub-par "focusing" systems, and sub-par viewfinders.
If Fuji came out with a good quality camera which took Instax Wide and had a proper rangefinder, I'd be all over it like a rash - but that's not instant's market these days. How many serious Instax Wide cameras would they really sell? Hell, how many people even have a regular Instax Wide camera now?
Don't get me wrong: I LOVED FP-3000b and FP-100c. My Polaroid 100 still sits in my sideboard, and I get a little sad every time I see it. All of the best instant shots I ever took were on FP-3000b. But think about the average instant film user today - whether they're an Instax, Polaroid, or Impossible user. Are they likely to want to deal with the problems or process of pack film? Not really.
The thing is... Instax isn't a bad medium. Not really. I bought one of the Instax Mini printers to "print" from my X-Pro2. The latitude is very unforgiving, but the actual "print quality" is great; the results are surprisingly sharp and detailed (considering it's such a tiny print).
The real problems with the format for me are
1) Instax Wide is a really nice size, but gets totally overlooked in favour of the "kawaii" Instax Mini, which seemingly has a new pastel-coloured camera for it released every year
2) All the cameras which use Instax have sub-par lenses, sub-par "focusing" systems, and sub-par viewfinders.
If Fuji came out with a good quality camera which took Instax Wide and had a proper rangefinder, I'd be all over it like a rash - but that's not instant's market these days. How many serious Instax Wide cameras would they really sell? Hell, how many people even have a regular Instax Wide camera now?
brbo
Well-known
You bought the Instantcon RF70 and didn't like it?
The case about convenience of Instax vs. peel apart film is similar to digital vs. film. Nobody wants to use film, right?
das
Well-known
The idea that pack film was primarily used by professionals seems to be belied by the fact that the overwhelming number of Polaroid cameras of the 1960s were sold to consumers in the consumer-version of the cameras. But it is probably true that by the very end of production, the market may have been pros and amateurs holding onto their old Land Cameras and such. Also, if one really wants to see what a good photographer could do with pack film, check out Robert Mapplethorpe's Polaroids. Incredible work. But this digresses....
It seems to me that a solution would be to make Instax Wide somehow compatible with older cameras. This is already being done by DIY'ers with the Fuji FP-1, a Hasselbad Instax back, an Instax-compatible Mamiya Universal Press back, as well as Lomo's new Instax back for 4x5 cameras.
It seems to me that a solution would be to make Instax Wide somehow compatible with older cameras. This is already being done by DIY'ers with the Fuji FP-1, a Hasselbad Instax back, an Instax-compatible Mamiya Universal Press back, as well as Lomo's new Instax back for 4x5 cameras.
Skiff
Well-known
But if the popularity would be as big as some claim, all stock would have been bought fast just after the discontinuation notice. And no stock would have left at that time. That there is still stock 6 years later is a clear indicator that the demand at that time (with lower prices) was not so high.
To be most precise: The market for prof. studio test shots was gone a decade before. The market for passport photography a bit later due to usage in newly industrialized countries.
But both markets were definitely dead in 2016, when Fujifilm had to discontinue it.
I have to disagree here: The reason was only the lack of demand. Period. Because for about 18 years Fujifilm has offered both products. If they wanted only one instant film product line they would have cut packfilm long before.
And the bottleneck of Instax is not the film quality, it is the camera and lens quality, which is lower than the film quality, unfortunately.
Skiff
Well-known
No, because in the 1960s packfilm simply was the only instant film solution. Amateurs just haven't any other choice.
That changed completely in the 1970s (from 1972 on) with Polaroid's invention of the integral film, which overtook the whole instant amateur film market in only a few years.
And it was invented because Polaroid knew very well that the inconvenience of packfilm was the main hurdle for bigger success in the amateur market.
And they were completely right: The success of integral film in the amateur market was much much bigger than that of packfilm.
And over the years integral film replaced packfilm completely in the amateur market.
Because of the huge success of integral instant film Kodak also entered this market (which failed due to patent struggles and a court decision).
Skiff
Well-known
Exactly! I agree completely.
You cannot put the sticky packfilm shot in your camera bag, backpack or handbag. You need an extra bag for it when you are shooting outside a studio.
+1.
f.hayek
Well-known
Instax isn't a particularly high-resolution film. Pairing it up with a Hasselblad Zeiss lens won't negate the underlying deficiency and may explain why Fuji only continues to churn out toy cameras for the film stock.
HHPhoto
Well-known
Nope.
The resolution is much higher than that. That is the reason why meanwhile Mint is producing higher quality cameras for Instax film, and it is also the reason why several newcomer entrepreneurs have started producing Instax backs for medium format cameras (like Coyote and Zinstax).
Cheers, Jan
f.hayek
Well-known
Don't get me wrong, I'd love to buy a Hasselblad back if one existed. A few Kickstarter failures and no product as yet.
HHPhoto
Well-known
There are already some existing ones for Mamiya. Probably those for Hasselblad will follow. If you want that, just get in contact with the manufacturers and show your demand for a Hasselblad Instax back.
Cheers, Jan
Pál_K
Cameras. I has it.
That’s why I had the question mark. I knew Florian Kaps went, but I thought he was accompanied by others. At the time, someone was posting a blog leading up to his visit. It was overly optimistic.
Yes, I also read that once the use of pack film for passports had been supplanted by digital or whatever, that was truly the end.
As for the “mess” - yes that was a problem and remains so even as I use it today. I can’t simply walk around with one of my Polaroid pack film cameras and make numerous photos conveniently. I’ve been known to take a small bag with me to hold the peeled-apart components. Two books I have on Dr. Land and Polaroid state that one of the incentives for integral (SX-70) film was that people were complaining about the mess from discarded Polaroid material in national parks, beaches, etc.
PKR
Veteran
In the film days, i used a lot of both color and B&W Polaroid film. I mostly used a Forscher back for an F3 and the standard 4x5 holder with the view camera... and went through a lot of Polaroid when checking lighting.
When assisting, and this was most interesting to me, we had an 8x10 Polaroid film holder and processing machine in the Studio. The prints were pretty good. Keeping the machine clean, especially the rollers, was a PITA. And, the film was really expensive.. but billed to the client most of the time. Lots of trashcans got filled with chemical wrappers and other Polaroid paper products. But, that system was great for spotting lighting errors or checking Bellows Factor settings. etc.
I found this eBay link with some photos of the hardware for any interested.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/2747386337...MIpdLjgZaJ8AIVExvnCh0j3wLTEAQYAiABEgJHhPD_BwE
Skiff
Well-known
I had followed that very intensively at that time (being a peel apart film user myself), and Kaps was the only one who really met with Fujifilm representatives in Tokyo (probably accompanied by 1-2 of his team members). Kaps said he had also financial backup (investment capital) to prove to Fujifilm that he is very serious about that project. But as explained above, financing wasn't the major problem.
Concerning the blog post: I remember it, written by someone without any knowledge of the film industry.
And then there was an announcement by CatLabs at about the same time, that "they are working on packfilm".
But after that announcement, nothing really happened.
Last edited: