Irrespective of broader organisation, a head company can raise only so much capital. I am not saying this is definitely the case for Fuji, but when Kodak closed their Melbourne plant in 2004 it was profitable but the US operations, as they were then, were not.
But to design a new Pro 400H successor without 4th layer, not much capital is needed. The design without 4th layer is even simpler, and production costs can be lower, too.
Fujifilm already did exactly that some years ago with Superia 200 and 400, and removed the 4th layer. So nothing new for them at all.
Converting is important, of course, but it is a small proportion of the whole process.
You are underestimating the importance of converting. Let's have an example:
You are coating film for just
one single day, with two masterrolls per hour (it is even more in reality). That makes 24 masterrolls with 1.35m width and 2.000m lengths.
That makes 64.800 m². From that you can make 1.1 million film rolls of format 135-36.
The converting lines for 135 film at Kodak, Fuji, Ilford can convert 1 film per second (easily seen in the factory videos). That makes 28.800 135 films per day in a normal 8h shift.
For your 1.1 million rolls you have coated in just one single day you would therefore need moren than one month (!) - 38 days to be precise - to convert them all.
So you see that film converting is the bottleneck in the production chain. It is really a crucial step.
It is unclear how much scaling back has happened at Fuji since peak film in 2003, or in what areas. So it is hard to know what proportion of their factories are used at any given time, or even why they outsourced part(s) of the production process.
The following is known about scaling down at Fujifilm:
1. They closed film production in Tilburg, Netherlands in 2008. In that factory only amateur color negative film for the European market was produced. And RA-4 photo paper. The RA-4 photo paper production has continued. This factory is delivering the European market with real silver-based RA-4 photo paper.
AFAIK they also stopped film production at their factory in the US.
But they continued to produce RA-4 photo paper in the US for the American market.
2. They have scaled down at their Japanese film factory, too, as they can make lower volume niche film products like their Fujichrome films or S100 and Pro 160 NS negative film, which are for the Japanese market only.
Master rolls can be transported:
https://www.exportimportstatistics.com/ITC-HS-Code/3702.aspx. But it is expensive. Very expensive. Film is not cask whiskey - you can’t ‘sea age’ it so it has to go in temperature and humidity controlled containers.
But that isn't such a big problem at all. Agfa Germany has for decades done the whole film and photo paper converting in a separate factory which was far away from their coating plant. All masterrolls had to be shipped, and at that time film production was at its peak! So they shipped thousands of masterrolls of film and photo paper every year, also across borders.
Polaroid is today doing the same, by the way: Their masterrolls are coated in Germany by their daugther company Inovisproject, and the finishing is done in their factory in the Netherlands, Enschede.
And Adox is shipping coated masterrolls from their factory in Switzerland to their headquarter in Germany, where the converting lines are.
For Fujifilm shipping Acros II masterrolls to Ilford for converting wouldn't be a problem. You can put several huge masterrolls in one cooled container. And you would need such a shipment only in a 2-3 year rhythm. ISO 100 BW film is extremely stable, so you can use a coating schedule with longer time spans.
It was reported when Agfa Germany closed that they did BW coating runs in a 1.5 year rhythm. So such longer time schedules are well known in the industry.
I am interested from the perspective of understanding what and why. Obviously Ilford worked out it was feasible and profitable, but it is interesting to contemplate what would be necessary and viable for Fuji and feasible and profitable for Ilford.
The cooperation certainly make sense for both Fuji and Ilford, otherwise they would not do it.
I have done the same, and asked all the local processing labs to let them know too. Fuji 120 colour print film is the biggest loss with this discontinuation, so I am also asking the labs to let Fuji know numbers and trend for 120 film use (it seems to be picking up here).
Marty
My labs and film distributors in Germany all have told me demand is significantly up,for all film brands, including Fujifilm. Pro 400H has seen much increasing demand since 2018, they all told me.
I am convinced that contacting Fuji on multiple ways and channels and asking for an improved (without 4th layer) successor makes sense and is the best we can do. As here on rff and in many other photo groups other photographers have suggestes that before and I completely agree with them.
Cheers, Jan
