Impossible Project

pbromaghin · Apr 27, 2012

Photo Engineer said:
If a defect only shows up in the field, it means that you yourself did not do adequate field testing. If prints go bad after one year due to failed seals, you did not have release specs and tests up to this task!

IMHO, from most of the results shown, it is not a product yet, and should not be sold yet.

PE

PE, with that kind of attitude, you obviously never worked for a software company.

Photo Engineer · Apr 27, 2012

I did a lot of software development at EK. I know what it is like to debug millions of lines of code. OTOH, if it does not work the first time it is tried in the field, you have not done much testing. I had hundreds of test case scenarios that I went through after I made a change to the software I was working on. Same for film development when I did it.

Yes,we were blindsided several times with film products and software, but to me this product seems pretty poor at this stage of release. Which gets me back to the original point. They had the formulas and still can't do it? That is how hard restarting any analog product will be, and that is why I have said before how expensive and lengthy of a process it will be.

PE

Peter de Groot · Apr 28, 2012

Photo Engineer said:
Microsoft gave out an early (Beta) version of Windows NT (4.0) to a number of large companies. Kodak was one of them and the other one was a large oil company.

The software crashed regularly and gave us headaches. It paralyzed the oil company. I remember at the time that PC Week had a feature article on this.

Anyhow, those of us that complained about Windows when the new version came out a while back, well, that was probably another case of Beta release.

Maybe new products cannot be tested the same lavish way they used to be, but we should still not be forced to peel apart a product that is supposed to be integral, nor should we have to shield the print from sun if it is supposed to develop in front of us anywhere.

I think that is part of my point and part of why the customer has to be "instructed" to work around product shortcomings.

Ok, I agree that they are bleeding money. Yes, they need cash. But why charge full price up front and face dissatisfied customers?

IDK. This whole thing makes me feel uneasy.

PE

They never said or claimed you can watch it develop in front of your eyes. The customer is used to it because of Polaroid and Fuji. But this is what I meant by they are making a new product. And therefor people need to know how to handle it. Instant means you will have a photo within minutes after taking it. With peel apart film you cannot watch it develop either. It sucks that it needs to be protected but it is not a bug perse. (I do question though why Fuji can do the same trick as Polaroid and TIP cannot shield the forming image against light)
But the thing with those crystals forming...the should have discovered it while testing for themselves.

Why are they charging premium prices? Well you can always go down with your price. The public will accept that no problem. But to go up is way more difficult. Especially with a luxury product as this. And if you charge 15 dollars for a faulty product why pay 20 for a good product if you have to take the produces word for it. Not gonna happen.

But I do understand how this practice would make you feel uneasy. On some points I agree and on some points I don't

SebastianKrauss · Apr 28, 2012

to be honest, the only reason for me to shoot instant film (an film in general) beside the fun, is to get a different look than 99% of the other photographers. Last thing i want are flawless pictures that I have to edit in Photoshop to make them look interesting. So for me, and a lot of other photograpgers this is a perfect product. As lomography is. But I understand, that this is a dangerous discussion. In any case it is great to have a choice!

E. von Hoegh · Apr 28, 2012

If they ever come up with a new version of type 55P/N that actually works, I'll use some. But it will have to be as good and as reliable as the Polaroid 55P/N, or there is no point in my using it.

SebastianKrauss · Apr 28, 2012

probably won't happen. As far as I know, the 4x5 machines were destroyed. But they own 8x10 machines and are working on 8x10 film. This won't be peel apart film, but integral film like the current small films. Check out these transfers by wonderful polaroid artist Galimberti: http://www.mauriziogalimberti.it/?p=576&lang=it samples:
and there is the new55 project, but there is a long way to go... http://new55project.blogspot.de/
cheers!

Photo Engineer · Apr 28, 2012

I count 15 out of 35 with bad ooo spread at the first reference above.

PE

darkosaric · Apr 28, 2012

Peter de Groot said:
TI do question though why Fuji can do the same trick as Polaroid and TIP cannot shield the forming image against light

In Fuji instax light hits image from behind and then it travels in front, and when paper is going out of the camera - back of the paper is filled with black ink that stays there. So there is no need for layer that is shielding picture and becoming transparent later in couple of minutes.

ImpossibleUSA · Apr 30, 2012

If anyone has had issue with the film that is not user error, you can of course contact us directly and we can troubleshoot and offer replacement film as necessary. Regardless of knowing what the formula is for Polaroid film, most of the chemical components Polaroid used are either no longer available or are banned by current environmental laws. Impossible film is comprised of entirely new chemistry and, outward appearances aside, is made from about 90% new materials in general. It took Polaroid 17 years to refine their integral film. Impossible has made huge strides in 2 years, considering it is from a whole new chemistry. Consider it like someone saying, "Make a cake that looks like a cake and tastes like a cake and feels like a cake, but you can't use any of the ingredients that are in cake."

You cannot think of Impossible film as Polaroid film. As a result of Polaroid's decision to pull the plug, Polaroid film is long gone. Impossible is the ONLY company making film for Polaroid cameras now. You have to unlearn everything you know about Polaroid film. This is not Polaroid film. So Photo Engineer's statement, "You should not have to be "taught" how to use a commercial product that has antecedents" just doesn't apply at all. Impossible film doesn't have antecedents.

All of us at Impossible have a passion about the product, and we shoot it ourselves, so we understand the frustration when your shots don't turn out. Like I said, please don't hesitate to contact us if you're having film trouble at service@theimpossibleproject.com for Europe, usa@theimpossibleproject.com for the US and asia@theimpossibleproject.com for Asia.

Ian Grant · Apr 30, 2012

ImpossibleUSA said:
If anyone has had issue with the film that is not user error, you can of course contact us directly and we can troubleshoot and offer replacement film as necessary. Regardless of knowing what the formula is for Polaroid film, most of the chemical components Polaroid used are either no longer available or are banned by current environmental laws. Impossible film is comprised of entirely new chemistry and, outward appearances aside, is made from about 90% new materials in general. It took Polaroid 17 years to refine their integral film. Impossible has made huge strides in 2 years, considering it is from a whole new chemistry. Consider it like someone saying, "Make a cake that looks like a cake and tastes like a cake and feels like a cake, but you can't use any of the ingredients that are in cake."

You cannot think of Impossible film as Polaroid film. As a result of Polaroid's decision to pull the plug, Polaroid film is long gone. Impossible is the ONLY company making film for Polaroid cameras now. You have to unlearn everything you know about Polaroid film. This is not Polaroid film. So Photo Engineer's statement, "You should not have to be "taught" how to use a commercial product that has antecedents" just doesn't apply at all. Impossible film doesn't have antecedents.

All of us at Impossible have a passion about the product, and we shoot it ourselves, so we understand the frustration when your shots don't turn out. Like I said, please don't hesitate to contact us if you're having film trouble at service@theimpossibleproject.com for Europe, usa@theimpossibleproject.com for the US and asia@theimpossibleproject.com for Asia.

Well put.

I remember the first Polaroid images I saw I'd guess in the 1960's and there were still big teething problems. (similar to some reported today).

The problem here on APUG is some people climb onto their shaky high horse and try to dictate what happened in the past and what the futire may bring as if their word is Gospel.

Kodak learnt through it's mistakes, although more recently they ignored them, Polaroid improved their products dramatically over the years, hopefully the Impossible Project will as well.

Ian

Photo Engineer · Apr 30, 2012

TIP;

I can both agree and disagree with your statement.

I don't have to be "taught" how to use Ilford MGIV paper once I have used a similar product. I don't have to be "taught" how to use Fuji Crystal Archive paper after using Kodak Endura. They use totally different chemistry BTW in these two color products. And, I should not have to be cautioned to shade your instant product when it stands alone as the only instant product that needs such protection.

When 2 naphthyl amine was determined to be a serious carcinogen, many substitutes were found by organic chemists. That is the nature of organic and inorganic chemistry. I have done that very thing many times either to avoid prior art or to avoid bans on certain chemicals.

Remember that I am making Azo and Kodabromide type papers in my home darkroom and using benign chemicals. I do not use the toxic ones such as Cadmium and Mercury salts. I use work around chemistry.

There is more than one way to skin a cat.

PE

Ian Grant · Apr 30, 2012

ImpossibleUSA said:
If anyone has had issue with the film that is not user error, you can of course contact us directly and we can troubleshoot and offer replacement film as necessary. Regardless of knowing what the formula is for Polaroid film, most of the chemical components Polaroid used are either no longer available or are banned by current environmental laws. Impossible film is comprised of entirely new chemistry and, outward appearances aside, is made from about 90% new materials in general. It took Polaroid 17 years to refine their integral film. Impossible has made huge strides in 2 years, considering it is from a whole new chemistry. Consider it like someone saying, "Make a cake that looks like a cake and tastes like a cake and feels like a cake, but you can't use any of the ingredients that are in cake."

You cannot think of Impossible film as Polaroid film. As a result of Polaroid's decision to pull the plug, Polaroid film is long gone. Impossible is the ONLY company making film for Polaroid cameras now. You have to unlearn everything you know about Polaroid film. This is not Polaroid film. So Photo Engineer's statement, "You should not have to be "taught" how to use a commercial product that has antecedents" just doesn't apply at all. Impossible film doesn't have antecedents.

All of us at Impossible have a passion about the product, and we shoot it ourselves, so we understand the frustration when your shots don't turn out. Like I said, please don't hesitate to contact us if you're having film trouble at service@theimpossibleproject.com for Europe, usa@theimpossibleproject.com for the US and asia@theimpossibleproject.com for Asia.

Well put.

I remember the first Polaroid images I saw I'd guess in the 1960's and there were still big teething problems. (similar to some reported today).

The problem here on APUG is some people climb onto their shaky high horse and try to dictate what happened in the past and what the future may bring as if their word is Gospel.

Kodak learnt through it's mistakes, although more recently they ignored them, Polaroid improved their products dramatically over the years, hopefully the Impossible Project will as well.

Ian

derwent · Apr 30, 2012

The problem I have at the moment with it is the cost.
If I buy locally I'm up for $5 a shot and I don't have a huge budget.
I will be buying some shortly though because I now have a folding SX-70 that I'm itching to try...

Mark Crabtree · Apr 30, 2012

It's good to see you having a presence here; there are a lot of members who will be interested in your input. It is great to have people working so hard to keep these older processes alive.

Mark

ImpossibleUSA said:
If anyone has had issue with the film that is not user error, you can of course contact us directly and we can troubleshoot and offer replacement film as necessary. Regardless of knowing what the formula is for Polaroid film, most of the chemical components Polaroid used are either no longer available or are banned by current environmental laws. Impossible film is comprised of entirely new chemistry and, outward appearances aside, is made from about 90% new materials in general. It took Polaroid 17 years to refine their integral film. Impossible has made huge strides in 2 years, considering it is from a whole new chemistry. Consider it like someone saying, "Make a cake that looks like a cake and tastes like a cake and feels like a cake, but you can't use any of the ingredients that are in cake."

You cannot think of Impossible film as Polaroid film. As a result of Polaroid's decision to pull the plug, Polaroid film is long gone. Impossible is the ONLY company making film for Polaroid cameras now. You have to unlearn everything you know about Polaroid film. This is not Polaroid film. So Photo Engineer's statement, "You should not have to be "taught" how to use a commercial product that has antecedents" just doesn't apply at all. Impossible film doesn't have antecedents.

All of us at Impossible have a passion about the product, and we shoot it ourselves, so we understand the frustration when your shots don't turn out. Like I said, please don't hesitate to contact us if you're having film trouble at service@theimpossibleproject.com for Europe, usa@theimpossibleproject.com for the US and asia@theimpossibleproject.com for Asia.

Klainmeister · Apr 30, 2012

Real bummer about the 4x5 production. I know lots of 4x5 shooters (including myself) that have 545 backs but no films, while Fuji expects one to pay 200 for a new back when they could have just have easily made their film compatible. Blah!

SebastianKrauss · May 1, 2012

But the Fuji FP 45 works perfectly in a 550 back? Or am I completely mistaken? The 545 back is for single sheet stuff like type 55, so no need to aquire the fuji back. But the bigger problem is, that Fuji already stopped making the 45 size of FP films(?).

ImpossibleUSA · May 1, 2012

There are numerous factors that contribute to the price point of our film. As an example, Polaroid was a huge corporation that has been in business for a decade or so before getting into film production, so they had more capital to work with. Impossible started from nothing with the high costs of producing and sourcing materials, distributing, etc. Polaroid had numerous factories, we have one. We only have 80 or so employees worldwide. Also, it's not a perfect product yet. The hopes are that eventually, we can sell more film and make more film, and costs will come down. We might still be a couple of years away from that, though. As for 4x5 film, Polaroid's Mexico factory was responsible for all peel-apart pack film. That factory was closed and the machinery was destroyed before Impossible had a chance or the financial ability to save it. Also, the machines are huge and very specifically calibrated, shipping them alone would have cost millions of dollars. We at Impossible are equally bummed about the fate of pack film.

xya · May 1, 2012

SebastianKrauss said:
But the Fuji FP 45 works perfectly in a 550 back? Or am I completely mistaken? The 545 back is for single sheet stuff like type 55, so no need to aquire the fuji back. But the bigger problem is, that Fuji already stopped making the 45 size of FP films(?).

yes, it works perfectly in a 550 holder. there is a project for 55 film which is quite advanced at http://new55project.blogspot.fr/. and no, they didn't stop 45 size completely, there is still fp-100c45 in production.

M.A.Longmore · May 1, 2012

ImpossibleUSA said:
We at Impossible are equally bummed about the fate of pack film.

.
Thanks For Joining Us !

Ron
.

ImpossibleUSA · May 1, 2012

Thanks for having us! If anyone has any Impossible-related questions, feel free to ask. I'd be happy to answer them to the best of my abilities. I work in the US office, in the Marketing/Promo/Online Sales department.

Impossible Project

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency