Impossible = Possible

Amateur Photographer reported yesterday that The Impossible Project's new black-and-white films for use in traditional Polaroid cameras will go on sale this week.

Mike

Send this post to a friend

Note: Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. More...
Original contents copyright 2010 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved.

Comments

[Michael Matlach`]

Truly Great News!

[Jacek Sztandera]

Will try that on pinhole .

[Barb]

Is there hope for 669, 690?

[Nick]

Some room for improvement though, looking at BJP's testshots...
http://www.1854.eu/2010/03/handson_with_impossible_px100.html

[BWJones]

Outstanding!

[charlie]

That is rather exciting.

[Dkonigs]

I've noticed that other companies (i.e. Fuji) still make various forms of instant film. How does this compare to the Polaroid we all remember?

Another use of Polaroid I've heard of is for test exposures with large-format cameras. Anyone still doing this with the alternatives?

[Jim]

At $3 a shot, I won't be using it. Just too much.

[Adam Lanigan]

While I certainly applaud them and am glad for their efforts at keeping instant photography alive, I have to say that I'm balking at the $2.75 per shot price tag (8-pack for $22). I'm afraid I'll be sticking to the ~$1 per shot Fuji packfilms for now (on my wonderful 1964 Land 101) and I'm curious how many people will do the same. Are they really betting that much on the Polaroid marquee to sell this? Of course, the Lomography guys have convinced people to pay $80 for a Holga, so anything's possible, I guess.

[Justin Ribeiro]

The The British Journal of Photography blog, 1854, has a number of sample images made with the new film:

http://www.1854.eu/2010/03/more_from_the_impossible_colle.html

http://www.1854.eu/2010/03/introducing_the_impossible_col.html

The also published a hands-on preview today, which basically said the packs they had acted liked expired Time-Zero:

http://www.1854.eu/2010/03/handson_with_impossible_px100.html

My wife loves shooting with her SX-70 and their TZ Artistic, so I'm keen to buy her some of this new stuff for a run. I can't find the link at the moment, but they're hoping to introduce color film in the summer.

[robert e]

So impressed. They exceeded my expectations. That they would kick off with SX-70 film is very cool. That they plan to tackle 8x10 format is super-cool.

[Antony Shepherd]

Eeek! The report at the British">http://www.1854.eu/2010/03/handson_with_impossible_px100.html">British Journal of Photography blog looks pretty horrible.

[cb]

the future has just begun.

[Jamin Bickel]

So I just pulled an old polaroid out of a box and fiddled around with it.

I couldn't figure out where the batteries went and I had to look it up on the internets.
Shame on me, eh?

I'm excited for those that have 'roids and use them but I'm the kind of guy that'll put a dozen rolls through a Holga and not get anything I love. All I want is a hot shoe and B (and a coffee maker) ((and a cute girl))

As much whining as I've done I will admit that I'll probably buy a couple packs when they're available. Maybe _this_ is the new thing that will make me an amazing artist!

better start saving now!

[Mark S.]

Somewhere, Edwin Land and Lady Gaga are smiling.

[Paddy C]

I must confess that I've never understood people's fixation with instant film. It's from, like, before my time.

These results at about $3 a shot isn't making my heart quicken. That's ghastly expensive.

[Robert L.]

I'm happy for them launching anything, and the news that they may try for 8x10 pack film is very exciting, but for now...well, I'm glad I have Fuji FP-3000 and my Tech 70. Never quite got the 'bad is good' school of holga/lomo society ripoff products/sx-70.

Maybe Cosina will build a new SX-70. Never a huge fan of the final product, but man, I love the design of that camera.

[aizan]

a lot of great work has been done using expired polaroid film, since that's pretty much all there was lately. the last time i shot a fresh pack was 7 years ago. if they do work the "flaws" out of the initial batch, would people like the film as much?

[Noons]

Heh! Am I witnessing the "death of digital"?
LOL!

[ctein]

Ohmigawd, just looked at the BJP report, and if ever I saw a product that looked DOA this one is it.

On the negative side: terrible quality, super finicky, and extraordinarily expensive. On the positive side: ... ... ummm ...

pax / Ctein

[misha]

They cannot be serious.

[misha]

"Ohmigawd, just looked at the BJP report, and if ever I saw a product that looked DOA this one is it."

That's exactly what I thought. Those who lust for it - huh?

[hugh crawford]

Ctein
"On the negative side: terrible quality, super finicky, and extraordinarily expensive. On the positive side: ... ... ummm ..."

So you are saying it's like an english sports car?

[Mani Sitaraman]

Nah, its a cottage industry restart and a labor of love. Give them a chance. They'll get the chemistry and the process right after a few tries.

[Soeren Engelbrecht]

Surely, that particular package of film must have been defective ?? Otherwise, it would be like buying a set of 8 lottery tickets for USD 22 :-)

In any case, I would hope that the positive/negative variety could be relaunched at some point.

[Dennis]

I can't see the fascination, but I have to check my camera cabinet - I seem to recall a relative giving me a Polaroid kit they'd picked up at a yard sale (back when I was thinking about collecting cameras) and it might be a nice SX-70. Not that I want to try it - I just saw how much they're going for on eBay !

[charlie]

Ctein said

"On the negative side: terrible quality, super finicky, and extraordinarily expensive. On the positive side: ... ... ummm ..."

I'll grant you the cost, but that will come down in time we hope. On the positive side

"terrible quality, super finicky, and..."

This is not geared for people doing test shots of CEO's environmental portraits for TIME magazine!

Every art student in the country will be buying this stuff. Lomo Schlomo, this is where it's at.

[robert]

Judging from the BJP results, Impossible is about right.

[Jim in Denver]

I am simultaneously very happy that an enthusiast has made his dream a reality, but also quite bewildered that the same think there is a market for a dead technology...

Polaroid was always for the masses without patience. The art and professional market was always (very) secondary. The masses won't even hear about this, nevermind buy any.

The sample images can be reproduced with any cell-phone camera ever made, with a little bit of post-processing on any web-photo-sharing website.

That's what the kids are going to do, especially at 3 bucks a pop.

The photo geek in me thinks it is really cool... But the rest of me sees a painful belly flop - it will be impossible to sustain production at the volumes that sell.

[John Yuda]

I couldn't care less about the film, but that is some fantastic packaging design they've got there.

[Frank Petronio]

I always thought the SX-70 would be an awesome large format camera if only you could get a real film negative from it instead of a blurry muddy Instant print. Nothing else that small can make such a large negative.

[David Dyer-Bennet]

I had a Polaroid back for my 4x5 (I guess I still do, but it's a size not available), and I was never happy with the results. I didn't find it useful for testing, since it didn't behave anything like real film. And even as a current product, the film price was horrid.

I've seen a lot of Polaroid snapshots over the years, and they were all unsaturated and veiled and generally ugly.

Still, good luck to the company and the fans! I hope this is what the people who want it, want :-).

[robert e]

Yike! The BJP test shots are so bad. Not bad in any good way, either. Other than the nice sepia tone, very unimpressive.

[charlie]

naysayers!

;-)

[Dennis Ng]

The picture looks horrible (partially due to removal of ND) but I think it can improve on time if more takes it on.

More importantly, now that Quickload is gone, we need another one to revive the Type 55 so that we can have some kind of easy loading sheet and light weight as well. Not hopeful as the new direction is mainly for lomo.

[Imants]

These results at about $3 a shot isn't making my heart quicken. That's ghastly expensive.........cheaper than a chuckdonalds hamburger and probably a lot higher on the taste scale