PDA

View Full Version : Kodak Supra Endura Discontinued?


Mike O'Pray
18th October 2009, 06:34 PM
I know that very few of us here are colour users and those that are may well keep their eye on APUG where there's a much bigger contingent but in case someone here doesn't visit APUG, Kodak appears to have dropped Supra Endura from its website and people are putting 2 and 2 together and making 4 or hopefully 5.

It would appear to leave Ultra Endura as its only paper suitable for optically exposed RA4. Supra will exist but designed for the other system with maybe a possibility of its being suitable for optical exposure(maybe) but not aimed at the optical exposure market i.e. the home enthusiast.

If colou printing is your bag then you might want to keep an eye on APUG and maybe Matt from Ag will know more.

If it's all true and it looks ominous then its Ultra Endura or buying rolls of Fuji paper and cutting as and when required.

I might give Ultra a try but it sounds as if it isn't the "bread and butter" paper people need for most prints. If it wasn't ideal for most prints then frankly I don't know I could be bothered with the expense and hassle of trying to cut sheets from rolls.

Sad news if Supra has been dropped. The home enthusiast market is likely to get the last rites very soon, I am sorely afraid.

Mike

Mark-NY
19th October 2009, 09:56 AM
I am afraid its true. The Kodak data sheet now states that it will be discontinued by year end 2009 or when current stocks are depleted.

Mike O'Pray
19th October 2009, 06:59 PM
Well Mark it looks like it's you and me only on this thread but just in case anyone else is viewing I have just spotted Martin Reed's announcement on APUG that a deal has been concluded and an announcement imminent to the effect that someone has taken on the role of cutting Fuji paper up into sheet sizes for onward sale which is very good news for RA4 home enthusiasts.

Who it is, what sizes and what prices remains to be seen

Mike

Bob
20th October 2009, 03:05 PM
We are watching Mike - we just have nothing new to offer on the subject ;).

Interesting news about the Fuji - I wonder if they will consider doing the same for Metallic and other papers only available in rolls - unlikely I guess, but it would be nice.

pentaxpete
20th October 2009, 07:09 PM
I use Kodak Supra Endura from Photomart and it USED to be cheaper than the Fuji Crystal Archive sheets: I also got some Ultra which is higher contrast for thinner negs or lower contrast subjects and it needs very different filtration from the Endura. Luckily I have a good supply still in the fridge!

Keith Tapscott.
21st October 2009, 10:50 AM
It`s been a very long time since I last made a colour print, but I do sympathise with those who still do their own colour enlargements.

Martin Reed
22nd October 2009, 02:23 PM
....Interesting news about the Fuji - I wonder if they will consider doing the same for Metallic and other papers only available in rolls - unlikely I guess, but it would be nice.

Don't make me laarf, it's going to be basic rations, but I believe all the previous sizes will be available, in glossy as well as semi-matt, except the 10x12" which will at long last be brought into line and reduced to 9.5x12".

We did actually make enquiries about cutting it in-house at Silverprint from 20x24" pre-cut stock, but the order size to get this going was so large it was a total non-starter. I had nightmares of coming into work one morning & finding Valentine Place jammed with fork-lift pallettes. The new supplies are going to be cut from parent rolls by a professional outfit.

Dave miller
22nd October 2009, 02:35 PM
Sounds like a reasonable compromise Martin.

Bob
22nd October 2009, 03:11 PM
I rather thought that might be the case - but one can always dream ;) - I'd like to try metallic but at 150+ quid for a roll it's not an option - especially as I use so little colour paper anyway - I bought my most recent box from Valentine Place over a year ago...

Can't be that many companies left with the ability to cut and pack photosensitive paper from a master roll.

Mike O'Pray
22nd October 2009, 08:40 PM
Well I looked on APUG tonight and it would seem as if the very confusing reply Kodak was giving to all the protest e-mails about the discontinunace of Supra which was being interpreted as deliberate obfuscation was simply a clumsy way of saying that Supra is being discontinued in roll form and will still be sold in sheet form.

There will be now be a version of Supra for minilab laser printing which will be in rolls which makes sense for minilabs.

Kodak could have simply said that the protesters had got it wrong and that Supra would continue in sheet form but its reply left most wondering, including even the U.S protesters so it couldn't have even been clear American-English let alone the Queen's English.

So we can all relax - I hope :D:

Mike

Bronnie
24th October 2009, 04:22 PM
I'm glad it looks like supra is continuing. Just getting back into colour printing and never could get on with Fuji crystal for some reason but like the Supra for printing.

Thanks for the update.

CJB

Mike O'Pray
24th October 2009, 11:16 PM
Unfortunately this thread on APUG has largely died a death quite quickly as is often the case on APUG after a short period of intense interest and as is equally often the case the final position is still not unequivocal.

It would seem that we can rely on Supra being available until 2010 and most are assuming this means production continuing until at least 2010 rather than stocks made by end 2009 being available until 2010.

Unfortunately Kodak hasn't made things entirely clear. You'd think it would be simple and understandable if Kodak were to say: "We are sorry that our badly phrased statement on our website led consumers to think that we intend to cease production of sheet Supra by end 2009. We'd like to state that we are committed to producing Supra until 2010 when a review of its future commercial viability will take place. If we are forced to end production at that point we intend to give consumers as much warning as possible as we realise that home enthusiasts will want to make arrangements to lay down as much stock as they can for the future"

This is what I'd want to say if I was in charge of the Kodak but unfortunately I'm not.:D:

Mike

Martin Reed
3rd November 2009, 04:37 PM
Another option we're having a look at is sourcing sheet colour paper from Agfa-Gevaert in Belgium. Their aerial division keep 2 colour papers C1 (glossy) and C2 (semi-matt) in a useful range of sheets. There wasn't much interest in these products some years ago, but it's a more rarified market now.

http://www.agfa.com/en/sp/solutions/aerialphotography/color/papers/index.jsp

Mike O'Pray
3rd November 2009, 05:53 PM
Martin, nice to see that these avenues are being explored. I wonder how the Agfa paper differs from Kodak and Fuji. Agfa colour neg film certainly had a different colour signature from Kodak and Fuji.

In my experience Kodak Supra Endura seemed more forgiving in terms of its colour balance i.e. it was easier to eliminate colour cast within a bigger range of Y and M settings whereas the Fuji paper seemed to need very precise setting. I could detect a difference with Fuji with as little as 2 units change in Y but Supra allowed more leeway while still producing an acceptable print. I hope this makes sense in the way I have explained it.



Mike

Mike

Martin Reed
3rd November 2009, 07:07 PM
I wouldn't like to stake a bet that the Agfa isn't Fuji or Kodak product; it's ended up with 2 giants slugging away at each other, while the margins have fallen to levels where smaller manufacturers couldn't compete. Rather than being involved in that it would make more sense for Agfa to be buying in & packaging one of the 2 main producers papers.

Mike O'Pray
3rd November 2009, 10:34 PM
Very true and if the latest posts on the subject on APUG are to be believed then it might pay to cut both Kodak and Fuji as it seems that both companies are foresaking cut sheets. It now seems as if Kodak's obfuscation was deliberate and in fact cut sheets of Endura will end at end 2009 and the stocks then run down to zero.

Kodak does know the confusion it has caused and the fact it has chosen not to clarify suggests we should believe the worse.

Mike