Impossible project's film saturation

[Ces1um]

so I'm new to instant photography. I have an instax mini 90 and frankly don't think much of the camera. I'm also not loving the size of the mini film. Opted to try my hand with a Polaroid sx70 one step and impossible film. While the camera reminds me of my childhood I'm finding it hard to get really saturated colours with it and the impossible film. The colours are there, but they don't pop. Blacks don't seem to be black, colours are fairly muted and whites are often bleached right out. Doesn't seem to matter if it's flash/natural light/exposure compensation played with. I know impossible film is capable of more-photos I've seen online seem to be brighter with more punch. anyone else find this? It's not unpleasant but coming from an instax background the photo just doesn't seem "finished". Like it always needs a few more minutes to develop. Anybody else find this? Is this normal for impossible colour film? If so, then so be it. I'll live with it. I would just like to know for sure.

 

[RattyMouse]

so I'm new to instant photography. I have an instax mini 90 and frankly don't think much of the camera. I'm also not loving the size of the mini film. Opted to try my hand with a Polaroid sx70 one step and impossible film. While the camera reminds me of my childhood I'm finding it hard to get really saturated colours with it and the impossible film. The colours are there, but they don't pop. Blacks don't seem to be black, colours are fairly muted and whites are often bleached right out. Doesn't seem to matter if it's flash/natural light/exposure compensation played with. I know impossible film is capable of more-photos I've seen online seem to be brighter with more punch. anyone else find this? It's not unpleasant but coming from an instax background the photo just doesn't seem "finished". Like it always needs a few more minutes to develop. Anybody else find this? Is this normal for impossible colour film? If so, then so be it. I'll live with it. I would just like to know for sure.

I bought an SX-70 and a four packs of Impossible film. Frankly, and sadly, the stuff is just trash. Image quality is simply awful. Every one of my shots has now faded at least 30% if not more. Nothing is stable at all. I just chucked the final few packs in the garbage. It's not worth my time or my money. A huge let down. I shoot INSTAX film and love it. Great stuff, 100% reliable.

 

[Ces1um]

I bought an SX-70 and a four packs of Impossible film. Frankly, and sadly, the stuff is just trash. Image quality is simply awful. Every one of my shots has now faded at least 30% if not more. Nothing is stable at all. I just chucked the final few packs in the garbage. It's not worth my time or my money. A huge let down. I shoot INSTAX film and love it. Great stuff, 100% reliable.

The stuff fades? Didn't know about that! How long ago did you try their film? I know they've gone through three generations of film which have improved each time. I agree, instax film provides a better photo but the mini,wide and even the square are just too small for my liking. I also can't understand why Fuji can't make an instax camera for grown ups. A glass lens, a magnesium body, how about a zoom or interchangeable lenses? A macro mode that actually compensates for parallax and not just says it compensates for parallax. An SLR might be nice Fuji.... apparently I'm a little bitter.

I really think instax could be so much more if an executive could just realize maybe people want more from a camera than different colours and hello kitty branding.

I'm disappointed to hear your results with impossible film. I was hoping someone would just have a quick tip for me, or suggest a better camera (like your sx-79, which If I'm reading things right is their folding slr model?) with a glass lens. Sigh. I have found that for a one step camera my one is remarkably finicky and I really need to watch when I use flash and when I have to use that lighten/darken wheel. Some of my issues were my own fault, but I don't see what I can do to help with colour saturation and accuracy.

 

[darkosaric]

Right now there is a kickstarter campaign for analogue camera for instax square film. I would go that way (right now Fuji sells only digital/hybrid camera for instax square),
Dead Link Removed

 

[Theo Sulphate]

Original Polaroid and Impossible film has never been known for saturated colors. Perhaps what you saw online was tweaked. The "pastel" look of old Polaroid SX-70 film is what I like.

Fuji FP-100C (now discontinued but available at high prices) may offer the look you want. You can use it in any camera that accepts Polaroid type 100 film.

Anyway, I'll have to say my experience with Impossible film, while inconvenient at times, has not been bad. Photos that I made over a year ago have faded just a slight bit (I've made digital copies for comparison). Even so, those photos have been exposed to ambient light during that entire time. The inconvenient aspect is having to place the photo in darkness immediately after it's ejected. I keep it dark for an hour. I don't know if that's still necessary with the newer versions of Impossible film.

 

[RattyMouse]

The stuff fades? Didn't know about that! How long ago did you try their film? I know they've gone through three generations of film which have improved each time. I agree, instax film provides a better photo but the mini,wide and even the square are just too small for my liking. I also can't understand why Fuji can't make an instax camera for grown ups. A glass lens, a magnesium body, how about a zoom or interchangeable lenses? A macro mode that actually compensates for parallax and not just says it compensates for parallax. An SLR might be nice Fuji.... apparently I'm a little bitter.

I really think instax could be so much more if an executive could just realize maybe people want more from a camera than different colours and hello kitty branding.

I'm disappointed to hear your results with impossible film. I was hoping someone would just have a quick tip for me, or suggest a better camera (like your sx-79, which If I'm reading things right is their folding slr model?) with a glass lens. Sigh. I have found that for a one step camera my one is remarkably finicky and I really need to watch when I use flash and when I have to use that lighten/darken wheel. Some of my issues were my own fault, but I don't see what I can do to help with colour saturation and accuracy.

My experience was from last year. The film faded in under 3 months. All the images were so horrible looking then that I just pitched them into the garbage and gave away my SX-70 to a charity. I was so gung ho with that new camera that I didnt mind paying $25 for EIGHT shots of film, but when I saw how utterly awful it looked, I was beyond disappointed.

I agree, Fuji really is stupid for not making a decent INSTAX camera. I'd buy it in a heartbeat. The wide film is just as large as Impossible, just in a different aspect ratio. I enjoy shooting the INSTAX mini film with my young daughter. While small, it's still great fun. I wish Fuji made a half decent square camera. Again, idiots run their design department.

 

[RattyMouse]

Right now there is a kickstarter campaign for analogue camera for instax square film. I would go that way (right now Fuji sells only digital/hybrid camera for instax square),
Dead Link Removed

LOL...their goal was $100,000 and now they have over $430,000 pledged. HELLO FUJIFILM!!!! See what you are missing?????

 

[bvy]

I bought an SX-70 and a four packs of Impossible film. Frankly, and sadly, the stuff is just trash. Image quality is simply awful. Every one of my shots has now faded at least 30% if not more. Nothing is stable at all. I just chucked the final few packs in the garbage. It's not worth my time or my money. A huge let down. I shoot INSTAX film and love it. Great stuff, 100% reliable.

If you were buying Impossible with the expectation that it would look like Fuji or original Polaroid, then you didn't do your homework. Impossible never made the film look like it could do anything that it couldn't. The new stuff is good and it's constantly improving. Images don't fade like they used to. The colors aren't accurate, but I think it's a nice palette -- neither too muted nor too saturated. I shoot 8x10 at $20 a sheet and it's worth every penny to me. I can transfer the images to wood or paper to produce something special. (This improves image stability too.)

I will say I get better pictures shooting 8x10, where I have a good lens and can control focus and exposure. The automatic cameras with auto exposure and fixed focus aren't really a good match for this film.

 

[RattyMouse]

If you were buying Impossible with the expectation that it would look like Fuji or original Polaroid, then you didn't do your homework.

I did my homework. That was not my expectation.

Impossible never made the film look like it could do anything that it couldn't. The new stuff is good and it's constantly improving. Images don't fade like they used to.

I shot some of the first packs of V. 3 of color and it was beyond awful. I wouldnt shoot the stuff at half price. None of my images survived 6 months. The monochrome film looked absolutely horrible, with splotches all over the bottom of the images.

The colors aren't accurate, but I think it's a nice palette -- neither too muted nor too saturated. I shoot 8x10 at $20 a sheet and it's worth every penny to me. I can transfer the images to wood or paper to produce something special. (This improves image stability too.)

I will say I get better pictures shooting 8x10, where I have a good lens and can control focus and exposure. The automatic cameras with auto exposure and fixed focus aren't really a good match for this film.

I'm glad it works for you. It didn't for me and I pitched 2 packs into the garbage and gave away my Polaroid.

 

[bvy]

I'm glad it works for you. It didn't for me and I pitched 2 packs into the garbage and gave away my Polaroid.

You threw it in the garbage. We get it.

 

[Ces1um]

LOL...their goal was $100,000 and now they have over $430,000 pledged. HELLO FUJIFILM!!!! See what you are missing?????

That camera lomography is using seems to have a lot going for it, except that it looks fugly. Glass lens though, small(ish) body, zone focused (which isn't a bad thing imo), 45mm focal length (35mm equivalent), built in flash. Still, I think if I was buying an instant camera I'd get the I-1 even with its major battery issue. Pretty decent to have full manual control.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

... Still, I think if I was buying an instant camera I'd get the I-1 even with its major battery issue. Pretty decent to have full manual control.

The I-1, to me, is a big disappointment: you need a smartphone to use the manual controls and it has autofocus. If the exposure and focus were simple external controls, I think it would more fun to use, more convenient, and more reliable.

 

[Ces1um]

The I-1, to me, is a big disappointment: you need a smartphone to use the manual controls and it has autofocus. If the exposure and focus were simple external controls, I think it would more fun to use, more convenient, and more reliable.

I agree external controls would be better. Autofocus has its pros and cons. That being said, for integral size film there is nothing else out there that even offers manual control (well, mint does but with only a single aperture size on the original sx70 what good does it do you really other than provide what the lighten/darken wheel already offers). There's really nothing else close to it. Instax certainly doesn't have an offering either that's manual.

 

[RattyMouse]

That camera lomography is using seems to have a lot going for it, except that it looks fugly. Glass lens though, small(ish) body, zone focused (which isn't a bad thing imo), 45mm focal length (35mm equivalent), built in flash. Still, I think if I was buying an instant camera I'd get the I-1 even with its major battery issue. Pretty decent to have full manual control.

Impossible film is simply awful, so the I-1 is not even an option for me.

 

[Ces1um]

Impossible film is simply awful, so the I-1 is not even an option for me.

Yeah, instant film photography is in a weird place right now. Fuji is making mediocre cameras and good film. Impossible is making an okay camera but mediocre film. At the end of the day you're gonna end up with a mediocre experience no matter what u do.

 

[David T T]

Ok RattyMouse, you don't like IP film, we get it. You are not going to bulldoze over everyone else's opinions by posting 4 times r/t IP in every thread about instant film. Your vote has been counted.

 

[Ces1um]

So after shooting a few more packs I'm noticing that film colour saturation is much better when there is a very significant amount of light but it's colour specific. Blues, reds and yellows pop considerably more. Greens seem to be muted no matter what. Considerable light should be qualified as out in the open outdoors, on a very bright sunny summer day, early in the afternoon. Colours that do well in poor light are brown and orange. The browns look particularly rich in low light. Overall I'm getting better results from the film, especially if you follow Polaroid's original recommendations for shooting instant film. One issue I've come across (and posted in a separate thread) is I'm seeing a yellow stain develop along the very top edge of most of my photographs, particularly in their black and white film. Not sure if anyone else has seen that or not? I'm bringing my camera into the repair centre to have the light meter recalibrated for 600 iso and to give it a once over. I've heard their light meters can become "gunked up" which affects shutter speed obviously, which could be part of the problem. I'm wondering how many issues reported with impossible film is due to their film or due to 40 year old cameras not being 100% on point. I'm sure there's a decent mix of both in there.

 

[RattyMouse]

Ok RattyMouse, you don't like IP film, we get it. You are not going to bulldoze over everyone else's opinions by posting 4 times r/t IP in every thread about instant film. Your vote has been counted.

Exaggerate much? Looking at this forum's page, I see that in the last 4 months I have posted in exactly ONE thread, this one.

At least I dont purposely mis-characterize other people's actions.

 

[Prof_Pixel]

Yeah, instant film photography is in a weird place right now. Fuji is making mediocre cameras and good film. Impossible is making an okay camera but mediocre film. ....

Sort of like the old days: Kodak's Instant Film (now Fuji Instax) was far superior to the Polaroid integral picture unit product, but Polaroid had some really innovative cameras.

 

[Ces1um]

Sort of like the old days: Kodak's Instant Film (now Fuji Instax) was far superior to the Polaroid integral picture unit product, but Polaroid had some really innovative cameras.

Well, I'm hoping this new announcement from impossible (see their website) is going to be about either a new camera or gen 4 film. It's probably just they're rebranding to Polaroid but you never know. Personally my thoughts are they're currently revamping their website to rebrand to polaroid. I'm hoping they're launching a new camera as a polaroid camera at that time. IF they've improved their film quality then they could escape all the negative press about "impossible film" as they rebrand. Would be a smart move but that's a tall order for any company. Can't see it happening. Given the major price drop on their i-1 camera though both on their website and especially at third party retailers I'm thinking they're blowing them out because a new model is on the horizon. MSRP was $299 US. You can buy them off of amazon for $188 right now. That's gotta tell you something. 10% off film isn't going to blow out stock but certainly clears out their older stuff. Everything I ordered though was manufactured in may of this year so none of it is really that old. Fingers crossed. Maybe something good might be in the works.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

Bringing back the 600SE?