Nervous Breakdown

[Helen B]

Max,

Yes, I've heard of a few people who do it, but I've never done it myself. Here's a thread about it on LF Info.

Same as you, I don't much like Type 57 (the Polaroid ISO 3000 B&W material) for pictorial work. It has some attraction for use hand-held, however.

Good luck,
Helen

PS Here's another TPF thread about the sad news.

 

[Alpha]

Ilford is doubtful. While they're in film production for the long haul, new film products they're not quite as much into. They don't have the production means for instant film. They could, in theory, make it if they wanted to setup the machinery but there would be a huge expense involved. Fuji already has the manufacturing capabilities. All they need is a license.

 

[JC1220]

Max, come on, polaroid film?

If you are as serious about your photographic endevours, as much as I think you are, screw the instant film, find a currently produced negative film you like and move on. This won't be the last time we have to find new materials and in the search find a better way.

Polaroid? for christ sake Max.

 

[ScottS]

Max, come on, polaroid film?

If you are as serious about your photographic endevours, as much as I think you are, screw the instant film, find a currently produced negative film you like and move on. This won't be the last time we have to find new materials and in the search find a better way.

Polaroid? for christ sake Max.

Polaroids are not for pros, they are for people who enjoy taking photos.

Like mother said, if you haven't anything nice to say, DONT say anything at all.

 

[Helen B]

Polaroid is still used by pros for proofing and layout. Now they will probably either switch to digital, or retire.

Best,
Helen

 

[craig]

Polaroids are not for pros, they are for people who enjoy taking photos.

Like mother said, if you haven't anything nice to say, DONT say anything at all.

Polaroids are for pros. Instant film is a beautiful medium.

Check out these links.

http://www.tfaoi.com/aa/6aa/6aa398.htm

http://www.mammothcamera.com/thecamera.html

Love & Polaroid

 

[JC1220]

Polaroids are not for pros, they are for people who enjoy taking photos.

Like mother said, if you haven't anything nice to say, DONT say anything at all.

First off, Polaroids are used by "pros" it is/was most likely their largest user.

Second, I am pretty sure Max knows where I am coming from and what I mean, so as some other mother said, mind yer own damn business.

 

[Alpha]

Max, come on, polaroid film?

If you are as serious about your photographic endevours, as much as I think you are, screw the instant film, find a currently produced negative film you like and move on. This won't be the last time we have to find new materials and in the search find a better way.

Polaroid? for christ sake Max.

Well for starters, Type 55 produces a neg, as well as a positive. And at $80 for 20 sheets, you can rest assured it isn't an amateur product. Instant film also has some intrinsic value as a different medium.

As for currently produced negative films, there aren't many I'm wild about in black and white. PanF and Acros are probably my favorites, but PanF isn't made in 4x5. Acros is prohibitively expensive in QL's and supply of 4x5 sheet is limited. PXP was great for portraiture...not made in 4x5 anymore. I'm running out of options here without switching to staining developers for my stand dev.

 

[DSLR noob]

I was really hoping this thread was gonig to be like

"So I was in the park, taking pictures of people, or so I wanted to if I didn't leave my battery at home. So when I realized this I started pulling out my hair and screaming and cursing, andI kicked a homeless man in the head then realized my battery was in my pocket. "

 

[Alpha]

Now that I would like a Polaroid of

 

[DSLR noob]

Yeah, well good luck with Fuji making something you can happily shoot with, or at least settle on.

 

[Puscas]

Old materials or not, being so passionate about this as you are Max...I like that.



pascal

 

[JC1220]

Well for starters, Type 55 produces a neg, as well as a positive. And at $80 for 20 sheets, you can rest assured it isn't an amateur product. Instant film also has some intrinsic value as a different medium.

As for currently produced negative films, there aren't many I'm wild about in black and white. PanF and Acros are probably my favorites, but PanF isn't made in 4x5. Acros is prohibitively expensive in QL's and supply of 4x5 sheet is limited. PXP was great for portraiture...not made in 4x5 anymore. I'm running out of options here without switching to staining developers for my stand dev.

Yes, I know, I understand your concern and I know its not an amateur product, perhaps I am wrong about your goals, but, you want to produce the best pictures possible with greatest controll over that product? Yes? No? You are quite limited in the developing with type 55, and controlling contrast. Don't get me wrong, it makes a very nice, smooth negative quite like PanX and prints well, but you seem to be all over the place with all your different films and developers, etc. I know it is fun to try so many different things but I think you would get where you are going faster with better results, if you focused on one or two particular film/paper/developers. I would think you could be quite happy with Adox/efke, Illford or Bergger, I only mention the later as I recently started using it again and believe it is one of the finest films. And Efke has wonderful tonal range in the 25/50/100

Why not switch to a staining developer, what are using now? Feel free to PM if you want, just trying to help.

JC

 

[Alpha]

Yes, I know, I understand your concern and I know its not an amateur product, perhaps I am wrong about your goals, but, you want to produce the best pictures possible with greatest controll over that product? Yes? No? You are quite limited in the developing with type 55, and controlling contrast. Don't get me wrong, it makes a very nice, smooth negative quite like PanX and prints well, but you seem to be all over the place with all your different films and developers, etc. I know it is fun to try so many different things but I think you would get where you are going faster with better results, if you focused on one or two particular film/paper/developers. I would think you could be quite happy with Adox/efke, Illford or Bergger, I only mention the later as I recently started using it again and believe it is one of the finest films. And Efke has wonderful tonal range in the 25/50/100

Why not switch to a staining developer, what are using now? Feel free to PM if you want, just trying to help.

JC

I know I can be a bit of a pack rat. Some of my older stuff I don't have much control over anyway. I shoot RSX regularly but don't do my own E-6. Tech pan only goes in Technidol, so that's that. KC goes to Dwayne's-- no control there. I have bulk-rolls of PanX...enough to develop a good workflow with. Enough Super XX in sheet to do the same.

As for the newer stuff, I know what you mean. But as I said I just don't have an easily available favorite in 4x5. The Efke 25 has the widest tone range of any modern emulsion I've worked with, but it blocks in shadows more than PanF and that's hard to stomach when I really want it to perform like PanF but doesn't. I have seen Delta do beautiful things in staining developers. In normal developers it's way too flat for my tastes. I'm not a big fan of FP4 and HP5. I've already spoken on Acros in sheet. Bergger also does produce beautiful results in staining developers. But I don't have consistent enough darkroom access at the moment do develop a staining dev workflow. It's just a hazard of being in undergrad at a school with a poor arts department.

 

[Helen B]

Type 55, especially, will be getting a candle-light vigil from me. They're only making enough to last through 2009.

That might be a typo for 20:09, judging by the way things have gone in the last few days. Today my job is to help someone choose between a Phase One and a Betterlight back. The inability to proof on Polaroid means that future shoots will no longer be on 8x10 and 4x5 Ektachrome.

Oh well,
Helen