Polaroid 20x24 Lives on...

[Photo Engineer]

The article states that the 20x24 product was largely made by hand without any large automated equipment. That is not entirely true. The film still had many layers that had to be coated, and the reciever sheet was also a machine coated multilayer. So the article, or the people preparing the article were not fully cognizant of the complexity of the product.

I'm sure it was assembled by hand and processed by hand, as that is clearly shown and described in articles about it. I think that the writers and contributors have confused the manufacturing process with the film processing.

PE

 

[AgX]

I'm sure it was assembled by hand and processed by hand, as that is clearly shown and described in articles about it. I think that the writers and contributors have confused the manufacturing process with the film processing.

Yes, that would take some of the contradiction out of that article.

 

[PHOTOTONE]

So, it's unclear to me from both articles whether the new entity is going to have new emulsion coated, or if they are just going to use existing raw product and "finish" it to the requirements of the 20x24 camera. If so, then the life-span would surely be limited. I am guessing there was some product still in master rolls when Polaroid/Petters group pulled the plug on the factory?

 

[Ian Grant]

It's quite clear they are going to be using existing coatings, there's no new emulsion. But if Fuji or a mysterious other third party make similar/compatible film then they will have bought time to switch if that's possible.

Ian

 

[Photo Engineer]

I was thinking that if Fuji were to finish their peel apart product in 20x24, then this could work. IDK for sure, but it is a thought.

PE

 

[Ian Grant]

thinking out loud that's what I think and what i've been saying for some time

It makes sense, it would also make sense to get hold of the cutting tools and packaging lines for Polaroid.

Let's be realistic, if no-one buys anything Polaroid get nothing, if they sell the tooling they get peanuts, if they can sell the technology . . . they would do very well.

But no-one wants to pay anything more than peanuts. If Polaroid do't leave behinf a contining legacy they wll come out very badly in the end.

Real Catch 22 situation.

Ian

 

[PHOTOTONE]

thinking out loud that's what I think and what i've been saying for some time


Let's be realistic, if no-one buys anything Polaroid get nothing, if they sell the tooling they get peanuts, if they can sell the technology . . . they would do very well.


Ian

Polaroid/Petters is selling the real estate..so they get "big" money, as they determined the real estate (of the former factories) was worth far more for redevelopment, than for manufacturing...due to dwindling market.

 

[removed account4]

Polaroid/Petters is selling the real estate..so they get "big" money, as they determined the real estate (of the former factories) was worth far more for redevelopment, than for manufacturing...due to dwindling market.

they'll probably have to sit on the RE for a few years.
the RE market in boston is not as hot as it was
this season of auctioning off foreclosed and bankrupt businesses
kind of like 1988-9 all over again ...

 

[AgX]

And now a morsel for the Fuji-faction thrown into the arena of speculation:

In february a Polaroid manager uttered in an interview that there were talks with Fuji.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Actually, all of the Polaroid instant patents have expired by now, so although Fuji had to get rights back when the originally started making Polaroid compatible products, they do not now. Also, the equipment is often more valuable as scrap than being sold as functional equipment, another point against this scenario.

After all, the entire Kentmere facility was sold after we were told it was being retained. The RE was more valuable than the plant and the equpment value as scrap was higher than the production value of the tanks and coaters.

PE

 

[Philip Jackson]

Probably only a single production run once a year would be sufficient to supply the six Polaroid 20 x 24 cameras there are in the world (if the figure on Elsa Dorfman's website is accurate).

If somebody bought the equipment from an old Polaroid plant in Boston or the Netherlands solely for 20 x 24 production they would have to warehouse the plant and then gear up to use it once a year. They might also have to keep retired ex-Polaroid engineers on retainer and then bring them in full time for a short period to do the run. This seems very unlikely.

It seems much more likely the investor or philanthropist behind this arrangement has done a deal with Fuji. Who else could keep or maintain the requisite equipment and expertise?

 

[Photo Engineer]

Phillip;

Due to the nature of the equipment, one run a year would supply the world's needs for several years and by that time, the film would be spoiled. Just threading the machine with paper may cost several thousand dollars, as you have to buy about 8 rolls of 40" x 5000 feet of paper per order and then go from there.

PE

 

[PHOTOTONE]

Phillip;

Due to the nature of the equipment, one run a year would supply the world's needs for several years and by that time, the film would be spoiled. Just threading the machine with paper may cost several thousand dollars, as you have to buy about 8 rolls of 40" x 5000 feet of paper per order and then go from there.

PE

So, if ANYONE were going to do this (new emulsion run), it would be foolish to just convert it for 24x24 use, rather to even break-even on the emulsion run, it would have to be made available in the other sizes that Polaroid once made.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Yes, I think I said it earlier or agreed with someone else who said that.

They would have to make 8x10 and pack materials as well to make this viable, IMHO.

PE

 

[HerrBremerhaven]

My understanding on this was Polaroid 20x24 was a hand process, and not a large machine process. An order was easily in the ten's of thousands (US Dollar), though I don't recall how many images that allowed one to make. Storage capability would be good for about three years, though might be usable for slightly longer. The negative and print receptor are separate, while the chemical pod was in a separate container, only combining in the processor. However, it would seem to be more practical to get some of the materials or production through another company. There is so little information on who is doing this that the aspects of operation are unknown. If a wealthy individual/corporation was behind it, and simply wanted a write-off, or considered it an advertising expense, then maybe it would make more sense . . . In other words, I doubt it is a small company intent on high profits.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat Photography

 

[Photo Engineer]

Gordon;

This has been the misunderstanding mentioned earlier in this thread. The process to produce a print is done by hand, but the manufacturing process to make the film and reciever sheet is a very large scale, cost and labor intensive process requiring lots of $$. It will produce too much material to support the market unless 8x10 and pack films are made.

PE

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

If it involves Fuji, is there any reason they couldn't use the film and receiver sheet for existing Fuji instant films, manufacture the pods for 20x24" using Polaroid's equipment, and the hand assembly of the packet would happen as it did before? The only question would be whether they could get the quantity of Fuji goop that would fit into a Polaroid 20x24" pod to flow evenly over that size of a sheet, I'd think.

 

[PHOTOTONE]

My understanding on this was Polaroid 20x24 was a hand process, and not a large machine process.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat Photography

The "hand" aspect of the process would be in the making up of the final sizes of the components. Film coating is film coating, for consistent quality results, particulary with a product as complicated as the Polaroid color was, requires a very large complicated coating line....regardless of the final size of the product. The 20x24 film (component) of the 20x24 Polaroid process was the SAME as some of the smaller size films 8x10 and 4x5. It was just cut to different final dimensions. Maybe the 20x24 film size was cut by hand,
but I can guarantee you it wasn't coated by hand, and would require a large building size coating line to replicate. The only company that could produce the raw products to make new batches of instant film from freshly coated master rolls would be Fuji.

 

[AgX]

The only company that could produce the raw products to make new batches of instant film from freshly coated master rolls would be Fuji.

That’s not true. As I pointed out before, André Rott and Edith Weyde were not only (re-)inventors of diffusion transfer reversal processes in the 30ties and employees of Gevaert and Agfa, but moreover Agfa is now a major player in the field of pictorial diffusion transfer.

 

[Photo Engineer]

David is right. Once the 20x24 is being made, andy other size can be made and vice versa. Also as to AgX and Phototone, making a B&W material is a far cry from making color. I would leave Agfa out of the picture!

PE

 

[AgX]

Agfa is doing continuous tone BW and Colour diffusion transfer processes.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Well, thanks, that is news to me.

Sorry. But, I don't know their product lineup so I cannot comment on how well they could enter into this type of market.

PE

 

[AgX]

I guess its rather the question whether they want to. They are busy with their security products.
They don't publicize anything more than what I posted so far.
Well, they stated in 2006 they made of over 100million small DTR peel-apart prints.