First SX-70 Results

[RattyMouse]

Well I shot my first 8 frames of impossible project film (b & w, 2.0). Massive overexposure in soft morning light (sun behind me). I dialed down the exposure to full dark and some useable images were made, but still with significant overexposure. In midday sun this camera is unusable.

This is with ISO 150 film not 600.

 

[cb1]

I had the same results in midday sun.
for indoors I had to hold carefully as the exposure was pretty long.

 

[GregW]

You need a neutral density filter or filters. Impossible makes them. Or you can use other methods. Do a google search for "using a neutral density filter with an SX70"

 

[RattyMouse]

You need a neutral density filter or filters. Impossible makes them. Or you can you other methods. Do a google search for "using a neutral density filter with an SX70"

Wow. Soft morning sun is too much for this film? Are you kidding me?

 

[Fixcinater]

Did you shield the film after ejection? The 2.0 says you can eject it directly into sunlight but it's another variable and easily taken care of with the box that the film pack was sold in.

Did you buy the camera from someone who tested it recently with film?

Since you burned through an entire pack already, you should be able to test the camera's response to light. Does it ever stop down the aperture?

 

[Fixcinater]

Wow. Soft morning sun is too much for this film? Are you kidding me?

If you were using the 600 speed film in the SX70, it could be necessary to use the ND filter. Otherwise, the full dark setting should be enough to get a decent exposure.

 

[RattyMouse]

If you were using the 600 speed film in the SX70, it could be necessary to use the ND filter. Otherwise, the full dark setting should be enough to get a decent exposure.

I was not using 600 speed film.

 

[Bill Burk]

Sounds like you are hitting the highest shutter speed at f/8.

Time for a new strategy... shoot the SX-70 later in the day, earlier in the day or in shade. Wait for a foggy/cloudy day.

Meter and if you have more than 50 candles per square foot average light in your scene... put the SX-70 away and shoot something else.

 

[RattyMouse]

Did you shield the film after ejection? The 2.0 says you can eject it directly into sunlight but it's another variable and easily taken care of with the box that the film pack was sold in.

Did you buy the camera from someone who tested it recently with film?

Since you burned through an entire pack already, you should be able to test the camera's response to light. Does it ever stop down the aperture?

Sort of. I turned the film face down for a few mins but did not put it in a box or anything like that.

 

[Bill Burk]

Does it ever stop down the aperture?

Oh, right... It does have a sort of aperture/shutter blade that looks like it may be capable of stopping down to f/22 or so...

 

[Fixcinater]

Sort of. I turned the film face down for a few mins but did not put it in a box or anything like that.

It's most sensitive immediately after ejection. On the early films, the Frog Tongue was a solution, or shooting it directly into the box.

The 2.0 version is much less susceptible, but it's still worth making sure this isn't your problem.

 

[Fixcinater]

Can you show us the results?

 

[Theo Sulphate]

I don't have my SX-70 loaded with film at the moment, but, at least on the Polaroid Image1200 (Spectra camera), if you kept the shutter release held down after making the photo, it wouldn't eject the film until you released your finger pressure. I would do this on very hot or cold days so that I could eject the film indoors under normal temperature.

You might be able to do that on the SX-70 so that you can eject the film into a box or a shaded area rather than direct sunlight.

 

[RattyMouse]

Oh, right... It does have a sort of aperture/shutter blade that looks like it may be capable of stopping down to f/22 or so...

I see no sign of any Aperture when I look into the lens. All I can see is the shutter. Is there documented proof there is an aperture?

 

[RattyMouse]

Can you show us the results?

I will later when I have time.

 

[RattyMouse]

I don't have my SX-70 loaded with film at the moment, but, at least on the Polaroid Image1200 (Spectra camera), if you kept the shutter release held down after making the photo, it wouldn't eject the film until you released your finger pressure. I would do this on very hot or cold days so that I could eject the film indoors under normal temperature.

You might be able to do that on the SX-70 so that you can eject the film into a box or a shaded area rather than direct sunlight.

I'll see if I can do this.

 

[RattyMouse]

Thanks for all the help everyone. The insane expense of this film really precludes experimentation.

 

[Bill Burk]

I see no sign of any Aperture when I look into the lens. All I can see is the shutter. Is there documented proof there is an aperture?

When it's closed you can see the "Pac-Man" shape of the shutter blade. In leaf-shutter cameras, this kind of mechanism is common. It opens partway to reveal a diamond-shaped aperture that varies anywhere from a tiny hole to a full opening.

I know, instant film has always been expensive.

 

[Bill Burk]

Here you can see the "closed" SX-70 shutter blade with half of the "cats eye" iris showing.

 

[RattyMouse]

Here you can see the "closed" SX-70 shutter blade with half of the "cats eye" iris showing.

View attachment 158346

Bill, can you tell if your camera is shooting wide open or stopped down?

 

[Prest_400]

I've read a bit about being cautious with individual cameras and different meter sensitivity due to the age. That might cause them to under/overexpose (more the latter). Mine seems to expose find at the recommended notch to dark but it has age related hiccups.

Seems not a good day for SX70. Today I was a bit wild and shot indoors during an overcast day. First frame, perfect. Second, camera locks into a long exposure. Third... Long exposure. Well, I got a couple abstract frames.

My SX70 did have a lock up problem, triggering maximum time despite having abundant light. It seemed spurious that under almost identical lighting it triggered an obnoxiously long time. Electronic hiccup methinks. After two consecutive losses... Removed the pack in darkness and replaced the darkslide. Will try the camera tomorrow with an empty pack and see if it locks up every now and then and under well lighted conditions.

 

[Fixcinater]

I just shot one off in broad afternoon (5:00PM) daylight in San Diego sun. Chrome and black subject. Here are a couple iPhone snaps of the mostly developed image. Should get a bit darker than this. Full dark setting on SX70 shown.

Also, I brought it out and pointed the camera to the sun. I can see it closing the aperture/shutter blades then opening them a bit and then closing again. If you plug in a flash it automatically sets it to stop down, so it definitely has an aperture.

 

[Fixcinater]

Few more that I just took to show the darkening as it continues to develop.

 

[mooseontheloose]

Ratty, the film is expensive, but you may have to bite the bullet and spend some money on film to experiment with different lighting conditions if you want to use the camera/film properly and not get frustrated all the time.

On the Impossible site they do mention that the 2.0 film does seem to be faster. Also, even though 2.0 does not need to be shielded in most lighting conditions, I think it's still recommended in full sun. I used to use a small black plastic bag (from B&W paper) taped to the camera to shield the film when it first came out (v 1.0) but then I got a frog tongue which made it easier. I still use it for the 2.0 version. You could do two photos in the same light - one with your normal procedure, one with immediate coverage, see if it makes a difference. If not, then you know that that's not the issue.

This Flickr discussion has some good information about aperture and shutter speeds. The image below is from that same discussion (I'm adding it here as photos often disappear over there, making it useless for future reference). This is for folding SX-70 cameras:

 

[Prest_400]

Ratty, the film is expensive, but you may have to bite the bullet and spend some money on film to experiment with different lighting conditions if you want to use the camera/film properly and not get frustrated all the time.

On the Impossible site they do mention that the 2.0 film does seem to be faster. Also, even though 2.0 does not need to be shielded in most lighting conditions, I think it's still recommended in full sun. I used to use a small black plastic bag (from B&W paper) taped to the camera to shield the film when it first came out (v 1.0) but then I got a frog tongue which made it easier. I still use it for the 2.0 version. You could do two photos in the same light - one with your normal procedure, one with immediate coverage, see if it makes a difference. If not, then you know that that's not the issue.

I second the need for shielding in full sun. Shade without shielding is ok and gets very nice results, perhaps with a very slight contrast loss. Full sun? Obliteration.
I don't have a frog tongue for my SX70 (12€ plus it has to stay out and underneath the eject door) but I try my best with hands and tucking away frames in seconds.
There's a technique of putting the darkslide acting as a shielding flap. I rarely use it as it takes a bit of the convenience (unfold, take darkslide, open door, place it...) but people report it as rather effective. Also, I used it once on the beach and while ejecting it got pushed away and carried by the wind. Hah! I should practice the placement more!

Edit: I once took a Color 2.0 frame down at the beach, back in March. But Mediterranean sun does its thing anyways. The design of the SX70 covers up a part (about 1/4) of the upper frame so acts as a shield. Let the photo unshielded for a few seconds and there was a slighlty noticeable loss of contrast and saturation at the bottom.