2012JUL211621.00
Do not adjust your eyes, this isn't an instagram. It's a Polaroid.
I last used my Polaroid camera 12 years ago. The film wasn't cheap but nothing beats an instant image. The image shown is shot on Polaroid film with a give-away fridge magnet frame over the top. Polaroid used to give these away so you could take an image and put it on the fridge. Taken in the summer of '88/89 in Hustbridge, the original image remained in a tin of 50 or so images I'd taken while the film was available.
At that time, this technology was at it's pinnacle. I could walk into a store, pick up a film pack of 10 images for twenty or so dollars. Load it into the camera and just shoot. As the film was spat out, put it in your pocket and repeat until you ran out. The camera is a Polaroid 680 I picked up for $50 bucks a dozen years before that. Polaroids at this time were a bit of an oddity. The camera is cheap and not really good for anything but portraits, maybe the odd landscape, but nothing more. The limitation is the cheap camera lens. I lived with the limitation because I could see the results straight away. No shooting the extra 14 or more images, sending it to the processor, waiting, paying more money to get the result. The only real advantage was getting access to the negatives. Did anyone ever really use the negs? I can't ever remember re-printing from negatives. The whole process was a pain.
A few years went by and the I couldn't get Polaroid film. Specialty stores sold a few boxes but nothing reliable. Then digital cameras exploded. By 2005 digital accelerated and replaced film. Now, seven years later I still see a few Kodak Instamatic el-cheapo cameras for twenty or so dollars in super-markets. The era of cheap, high quality analogue film ended.
Then in steps the Impossible project attempting the impossible, re-creating and distributing the Polaroid film I used to love.
Remembering I had my old 680, I picked up some PX600 film from Michaels on Friday. Next day I pulled the film from the fridge (heat has a direct effect on the photo sensitive chemistry) loaded up the camera. Next comes the fiddly bit. The Impossible film isn't yet at the peak of the Polaroid film in terms of usability. With the same camera and Polaroid film I'd shoot anywhere with total confidence of full colour saturation, fast developing (within 4 min) and stability. The Impossible film requires shielding after the image is taken. So I hacked up a light resistant box for an image to insert after being taken. Now into the field for some test shots. It's worth investing in a shield. For about $30 that's about the cost of a pack of film but reduces the chance of extra exposure as the image is released.
So off I go, I lugged a bag, a tin, the Polaroid 680 and my trusty Panasonic DX-FT1. I chose a known location where the afternoon light. I'd first frame the shot with the digital, take a few shots for comparison. Then shoot, hold the trigger to retain the image and quickly grab/drop the image into my bag. Wait four minutes and see what happened. It was interesting. For the outdoor shot I took all those years ago I just grabbed the camera, saw something interesting, pointed and shot. There was a lot more fiddling this time. The results were so, so but the film is new and we'll see how it goes.
For the amount of stuffing around to get the image, Hipsters using their iPhones and filters may have the edge but it's not as much fun. Why isn't there yet a commodity digital device that takes pictures and prints?
next >>>
2012JUL211621.00
Do not adjust your eyes, this isn't an instagram. It's a Polaroid.
I last used my Polaroid camera 12 years ago. The film wasn't cheap but nothing beats an instant image. The image shown is shot on Polaroid film with a give-away fridge magnet frame over the top. Polaroid used to give these away so you could take an image and put it on the fridge. Taken in the summer of '88/89 in Hustbridge, the original image remained in a tin of 50 or so images I'd taken while the film was available.
At that time, this technology was at it's pinnacle. I could walk into a store, pick up a film pack of 10 images for twenty or so dollars. Load it into the camera and just shoot. As the film was spat out, put it in your pocket and repeat until you ran out. The camera is a Polaroid 680 I picked up for $50 bucks a dozen years before that. Polaroids at this time were a bit of an oddity. The camera is cheap and not really good for anything but portraits, maybe the odd landscape, but nothing more. The limitation is the cheap camera lens. I lived with the limitation because I could see the results straight away. No shooting the extra 14 or more images, sending it to the processor, waiting, paying more money to get the result. The only real advantage was getting access to the negatives. Did anyone ever really use the negs? I can't ever remember re-printing from negatives. The whole process was a pain.
A few years went by and the I couldn't get Polaroid film. Specialty stores sold a few boxes but nothing reliable. Then digital cameras exploded. By 2005 digital accelerated and replaced film. Now, seven years later I still see a few Kodak Instamatic el-cheapo cameras for twenty or so dollars in super-markets. The era of cheap, high quality analogue film ended.
Then in steps the Impossible project attempting the impossible, re-creating and distributing the Polaroid film I used to love.
Remembering I had my old 680, I picked up some PX600 film from Michaels on Friday. Next day I pulled the film from the fridge (heat has a direct effect on the photo sensitive chemistry) loaded up the camera. Next comes the fiddly bit. The Impossible film isn't yet at the peak of the Polaroid film in terms of usability. With the same camera and Polaroid film I'd shoot anywhere with total confidence of full colour saturation, fast developing (within 4 min) and stability. The Impossible film requires shielding after the image is taken. So I hacked up a light resistant box for an image to insert after being taken. Now into the field for some test shots. It's worth investing in a shield. For about $30 that's about the cost of a pack of film but reduces the chance of extra exposure as the image is released.
So off I go, I lugged a bag, a tin, the Polaroid 680 and my trusty Panasonic DX-FT1. I chose a known location where the afternoon light. I'd first frame the shot with the digital, take a few shots for comparison. Then shoot, hold the trigger to retain the image and quickly grab/drop the image into my bag. Wait four minutes and see what happened. It was interesting. For the outdoor shot I took all those years ago I just grabbed the camera, saw something interesting, pointed and shot. There was a lot more fiddling this time. The results were so, so but the film is new and we'll see how it goes.
For the amount of stuffing around to get the image, Hipsters using their iPhones and filters may have the edge but it's not as much fun. Why isn't there yet a commodity digital device that takes pictures and prints?
next >>>