Polaroid Cameras! They are fun and worth it if you do your research. I stick with B&W 2.0 from the impossible project. Their color film is not quite perfected but they upgraded thier color stocks. Best results with proper lighting. I wouldn't waste your film indoors. If you want something super reliable and cheaper gow ith FUJIFILM INSTAX WIDE. Also, lomogrpahy has their version coming out soon
Also, don't waste your film at night. Make sure to clean your rollers or else they will distort your shots.After loading film, don't bother taking cartridge out. Your polaroid will auto eject(and waste your film).
Does anyone know why Impossible project film takes 30 goddamn minutes to develop? it's hardly "instant," but it's still more convenient than developing film and scanning it I guess. If they bought the old machines off of polaroid, why can't they make the film work in the same way?
It has something to to with the chemical process that the don't have down yet, They have Polaroid's tooling but they don't have the formulas. It might also be a a problem with sourcing the raw materials
>>2708923 as >>2709106 said, it's the fact their formula is not the same. They can make the actual film packs in the same way with polaroid's machines, but they do not have the same formula for the film, for various reasons. Copyright is one, but resource procurement is another. a lot of the elements that were in Polaroid process are unavailable, mostly due to the fact that those chemicals or compounds can't be produced for environmental reasons, I believe.
I don't believe in editing photos. I'm not gonna buy a 600$ camera so I can become an edit-bro. Anyways, Yeah i'm not that great. Still learning. The B&W2.0 from impossible is basically instant. If i'm not mistaken, impossible is actually just leasing the factory. But yes, the chemical formula isn't down yet for color. Like I said, if you can't wait, FUGIFILM INTAX WIDE.
This is probably the best place to ask so I don't muck up the board; Does anyone know if the polaroid snap will take any 2x3 zink paper or is there a specific type I need? I just bought my wife one yesterday for funzies, and I wanted to order more paper.
Also, as a modern take on a polaroid, it is pretty damn fun to use, although nothing beats waving that picture around like a Chinese fan.
Just curious but Cyber Monday is here and I was wondering if you guys would consider this a good deal. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00M1XIPKG?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=ox_sc_act_title_1&smid=A1RUOWZ2794IXS
Installed mini film typically is 20 bucks for 20 shots. The neo classic usually runs in the 150$. It has double exposure mode. I would say it's good for the price. Only downer for me is smaller pictures. I would prefer the WIDE 300 but that baby is huge.
That Polaroid snap has some cool features but picture size is too small for me. Also, the only instant film you're suppose to shake "like a polaroid" was for the original peel apart film = P. All other shaking disturbs the process!
They've got this guide up on instructables to get an old polaroid land camera to take normal batteries (since you can still use these types of cameras with FP-100c). Although not as instant as some of the cameras in this thread (1-2 minutes vs 30 seconds), the pictures do come out pretty nice. Its also cheaper in the long run.
Heres the guide if you guys want to check it out: http://www.instructables.com/id/Resurrect-a-Polaroid-Land-Camera/
>>2714225 I have an Instax Wide 300. I love it, but I lean more towards Polaroid cameras. I imagine if FUJI made b&W instax i'd probably switch in heartbeat.I just enjoy the different frame borders via TIP. I can't wait until they release Color 2.0. There's a video where Steven herchen says TIP is devloping a camera 2016, unless I heard wrong...
>>2714148 Man I haven't taken my 240 out in ages. I still wish they made FP3000b. I LOVED how that stuff looked.
As for how I feel about Polaroids? They fun. That's about it. The quality is garbage, the film is expensive, and it can be temperamental (especially expired Polaroid and the older Impossible Project stuff; haven't had a chance to try the new formulation but I plan to one of these days). They're great fun to experience, and are good conversation starters.
If you want instant film, spring for a peel-apart camera like the Polaroid 250; or go for one of the newer Fujifilm Instax cameras. The quality is better (especially if you get one of the Polaroids with glass lens elements), film is somewhat cheaper, and the film is more stable.
>>2714876 I feel the same way except I am in love with the B&W2.0. I don't know of any Instax Cameras with glass lens. Unless mayber the Older AF model? I even think the Lomo Instant Wide is plastic lens.
>>2715483 Plastic lens indeed to my knowledge for the 210/300. It's the main reason I'm pushing for a folding SX-70... Specifically MiNt's SLR670M. My only recourse is people modifying the Wide 300 to accomodate high end manual lenses by removing the existing lens. I find the B&2 2.0 gorgeous. Supwer instant too in comparison to to the color stocks. But then again I'm a newb.
>>2718255 It's the first 600 I've owned. Swore by it until roller issues. I like the compact body/the off grey green. Keep it mind it's not an slr so you don't always crop out what you want via viewfinder. There's a lighten,darken switch, and a close up option. To be honest I never use it because I can't tell the difference. There are sonar models but I haven't tried those out. It's basically box 600.
>>2718445 Not sure because I don't own one yet. But, it has a grid to frame your shots. Extra plastic lens to attach. Gel filters for flash. Double exposure/timer options. Definitely has more to offer than Wide. Wish fuji would make a real camera already...
Wish I could have a instant camera that can. Save images via sd card? OR VIEW IMAGE BEFORE FILM PRINT SLR AUTOFUCKING FOCUS? MANUAL FOCUS? Manual LENS? GLASS LENS? LIGHTEN DARKEN FLASH OVERIDE TRIPOD SOCKET GEL FILTERS? ATTACHABLE LENS? Wish I could cobine Folding SX-70 with polaroid snap with those modified Wide 300's floating around from Asia.
Just picked up a Polaroid Snap the other day. First impressions are mixed, but I haven't had the chance to shoot in daylight yet, so bear that in mind.
The prints (Zink) are pretty small and may suffer from slight banding issues. The dynamic range isn't great, and colours aren't all that good. The flash definitely needs a gel taped over it too as it's obviously got a strong cool cast to it.
On the plus side, the camera is a decent mix of small and holdable. Cute colours, nice contours and the choice of colour modes, borders and the ability to print film and save digital are winning factors for me.
The daylight examples I've seen are pretty neat, much better colours. But again, yet to test it.
>tl;dr >Shit dynamic range, may suffer from banding issues >Sticky back, cute size make it great for non-serious pics
>>2720431 Is that an sx70 or slr680/90?>>2720442 It amazes me on the hate. Who references male erections then proclaims the other to be a gear faggot. Lol. So intellect to brand a hobbyist so you copy every other as hole and their lingo.
>>2707493 The film is expensive and not the same quality as original Polaroid film. That's honestly the worst part of it all. if you can find the camera in a antique shop it'll make the hobby worth it since you can score it cheap. I got mine for 10 dollars with the original tote bag. you can try to shoot with the original roller but you'll almost never get a good shot outdoors or in intense lighting. Makes beautiful pictures in low to complete darkness.Depending on the camera, the flash sensor isn't sophisticated enough to know when not to flash and you'll still get the flash sometimes outdoors. If you want a low risk, instant gratification camera then go with a instax or for a more physically pleasing and advanced camera go with the lomography version
I've played with everything short of Instax, Kodak's patent-infringing stuff, Polaroid's 180/195, and any of the special cameras for dentistry/passports, etc. Ask away.
Impossible's new B&W is the shit, up there with FP-3000B in contrast. Highly recommend. That yellow film is great, too - same chemistry.
Impossible's older-gen color stuff was OK and develops faster with heat. Haven't shot color in awhile but I have a few packs of their newest SX-70 on standby.
>>2714148 AAA-mod is pretty easy to do. Thank fuck my nearest RadioShack survived the cut, I get the battery holders from them.
>>2719866 SLR-680/690 with Mint lens set is as close as you're gonna get. Or there's that Instant Lab if you just want to print digital flicks on instant film.
>>2721374 Except for the 660 which had the sonar AF, literally all the plastic cameras take the same-quality pictures. I rarely shoot with any of the plastic cams (I usually flip the ones I find at Goodwill, the ones i still have were gifts or family-owned) but have a soft spot for the 660.
>>2721480 I have all the acessories for the sx-70 but no camera. Gonna order the SLR670M from mint next paycheck. Only thing I'm worried about is Impossible is making their own camera. But then again, I doubt it will be high end. Also, all I shoot is bw2.0. I've read rumors of Gen 3.0 when "I-1 camera is released".
>>2721480 Super jealous of your blue Impulse. Even though I'm done with 600 series, unless I find a sonar impulse. I have 2 of the green grey I wanna get rid of. Don't care much for the 600one step either. My favorite 2 is my 600sunlms and One600. Is that film on your shelf empty or?
>>>2721506 I'd bite the bullet and just go with the 670m... unless Impossible comes up with something completely out of left field, the I-1 should be just a box-type camera (like a OneStep) with a manual shutter. Before Florian Kaps left the company, they were planning a pinhole camera based on the Film Processing Unit that makes up the base for the Instant Lab, along with a manual lens camera like aforementioned. Kaps got his pinhole camera when he founded Supersense.
Also wait and find a donor SX-70 before getting the 670m, Mint was running an upgrade program earlier this year if you send in your own camera for conversion. Contact them first and see if they still do it - if so, and if I read everything correctly, it'll save you about $250.
>>2721509 I believe they made the Impulse in grey, maroon, yellow, blue, and green. The Impossible stuff is fresh, the 600 is from early-2009 and turning crappy - I can't use it in my 680 due to low battery voltage, the 779 stock is completely dry (it was free), and the Image (Spectra) is still usable despite being a decade old.
>>2721615 In the bag on the lower far-right is one of the cop Spectra kits, got it from the Mundelien, IL PD. The 1:1 copy stand is really nice but the close-up attachment lens has so-far proven to be pretty worthless, I'm yet to get a sharp image with it.
>>2722725 Not the most practical camera out there but a ball to shoot with and turns out decent shit for being cheap and all-plastic. Pic related.
>>2722818 The original Spectra was actually a fairly high-end consumer instant camera for its time; image quality was usually better than the OneStep-type cameras. At one point Minolta had a rebadged version with a glass lens, too. They sold like hotcakes, which is why you can find them so cheap. The 180/195 was a legit, professional camera produced in a really limited run, and I believe they were even assembled by-hand.
>>2722304 Patience, man... stalk Craigslist, eBay, local flea markets, antique stores, and estate sales for awhile and you'll find a deal. I've owned a total of eight SX-70's and never paid more than $40 for one; I just got another Alpha off Chicago Clist for $35 shipped
I'd love to see what happens when you load Instax into a medium format camera. I'm not sure if the blurriness is entirely down to the crap lens or if the emulsion being squeezed as it's developed also plays a role.
>>2723032 Despite crappie 300 camera, instax film shows some pretty fine detail. >>2722989 Hate. Mint tells me depending on model different discount. Most I'm seeing is a lot of Sonar One steps for under 100$. Which I don't mind because it has the tripod hole which is neglible because I have the tripod mount/pola accessory kit. It also has the tabs for the neck strap.
>>2726124 SX-70 Alpha 1. More expensive and fragile; but better optics, easier to carry (fits in a large pocket), more film versatility (ND4 filters let you use 600 films), gets in close at 10.5" compared to about 1-2' with the Spectra, and a little wider aperture at f/8 compared to f/10. SLR670m conversion option is also nice.
You can adapt the Spectra's radio-based cable release to work with the SX-70 by changing the plugs, or build your own cable release for dirt cheap. The Spectra is otherwise a fancy 600-type camera with AF that shoots wider film - it's nice but not really anything special unless you find an Onyx or Image 1200 (one's just got fancy cosmetics, the other was a 2000s-modern version with a digital viewfinder).
>>2728051 The folding-type or the Pronto? If it's the folding type remember to always keep the camera closed when not in use, for some reason the sonar-equipped SLR's will always meter light when open and drain the battery after a few days. I've had other electrical gremlins with the few I owned.
Never played with the MIP so I can't compare; I imagine it's a bit sharper than the plastic lens, though.
>>2729105 I have the folding Sonar Onestep. The baby works, orignally bought it to trade into MiNt. However, the 80 I spent + the hong kong shipping fee doesn't merit the discount estimate. If I acquire a Minoltra pro I will discard one spectra System. I have about 6, 600Cameras I won't to clear out too. One Pronto that doesn't work. I really want the SLR670 but instax film is so much cheaper and I am, cosnidering the lomo instant wide. I'm really not holding out for for impossible's new camera because I'm certain it will be shit tier 600 model...
>>2732270 i was thinking the same, however, my little research has led me to believe shipping to Hong Kong is expensive. I think some website said in the region of 70$.. Haven't bothered to research further.
Polaroid film is fun.The fuji stuff is fantastic for the price. This is taken with a custom modded Pathfinder with an Packfilm back. Modding is really the best way to get good photos from most of these cameras.
>tfw I started a polaroid collection in the mid 2000's before all the hipsters caught on >now when people come into my house and see my (non-fixie) bicycles and massive collection of polaroids they just assume I'm one of those faggots
>>2736156 I give the hipsters credit for keeping the format alive (money is money to Impossible and Fuji), but as far as it being against the social norm or whatever it just comes down to how you use and present it. There's a difference between being a Brooklyn trustfund fuck, who bought an overpriced "refurbished" OneStep as a fedora accessory to be the life of some hipster parties, and being a legit photog who shoots the format as a fun diversion. I dunno.
>>2737818 there's a best if used by date on the boxes now, but years ago they recommended using it within a year of the manufacture date (which is no longer on the box, in favour of the best if used by date)
dan finnen said that he experienced defects after about 6 months of storage
keep it refrigerated, don't freeze it, and give it an hour after taking it out of the fridge
>>2742075 I don't see what that would have to do with the sepia tones coming out later - if it's like their older stuff, there's probably still a chemical reaction going on long after the initial image has developed.
>>2742093 Instax Mini is about as close as it gets right now - packfilm compatibility with old Land Cameras is merely a fortunate coincidence, and Impossible is a niche brand.
>be me bored as hell >dig into some old stuff in home >found polaroid 600 that i had when i was kid >feel nostalgic and happy at the same time >time to take pics >there is no film in it >get suicidal so any /film photographers/ here? where can i get cheap ass films for polaroid? also any advices with this kind of camera, tutorials, howtos are appreciated
>>2742732 Film wouldn't have been good, anyway - either the battery would be dead or the developer pods dried-up.
Cheap-ass film doesn't exist, unfortunately. Impossible's stock runs you about $30 for a pack of 8 after shipping - however if you know where to look you can usually get free shipping which cuts it down to $24. Impossible has expired bags which have three random films for $40 which might help some. Expired Polaroid stock is garbage, these days.
OneSteps are pretty idiot-proof; stick film pack in, point, shoot, shade your color film while it develops (b/w you can watch develop like back in the day). Too dark, move slider left; too bright, move slider right. Don't bother with the sliding close-up lens, it just distorts your images.
It looks like there's 2 levels of quality for the paper, at 50 cents a picture and 31 cents a picture. I got both to see what the difference is. Not a bad price for an instant photo, though I wish they were a bit bigger than 2x3.
I use a polaroid 350 rangefinder camera and would recommend it. you can't obtain the batteries which you need for the electronic meter and shutter but it's simple enough just to rewire a 9v battery socket into its place. You can then use fp-100c which is quite cheap considering its a negative positive colour film.
>>2748420 Those still ran 4.5v cells, I think. I forget when and which models went to just 3v. You can still get the battery brand-new, but not easily or for a resonable cost. I take the 4x-AAA holder Radio Shack sells, jump a terminal to make 4.5v, remove some plastic from the battery compartment, and solder that in.
>>2748438 Impossible Project. The Sonar 660s were probably the best box-type 600 cameras Polaroid made. Pic-related was taken with one on older TIP stock.
I have pic related. The latest fuji cameras have Wifi and can wirelessly send pics to the printer, which fits perfectly in my back pocket. Great for parties and events where you can give copies of photos to qts.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at [email protected] with the post's information.