Polaroid Backs for Hasselblad, what does the future hold?

[harlequin]

Working in fashion studios in the 80s and 90s going to Samy’s camera to stock up on 665/667And polacolor er
Was common practice every 2 weeks as it was a mainstay in our studio for testing lighting, dof, set design etc.

Fast forward to 2020, what are our alternatives.
Some dubiously stored Fuji FPC 100 at $50 or more per box?
Or Frankenstein adaptors with Fuji instant film? Instax?

Is there any other alternative currently? Or is that why I see hundreds of pol backs for sale online.
How about the folks at impossible? Could really use a hot coffee, bagel and fresh box of 665 right now...


Happy Holidays!

Harlequin

 

[Donald Qualls]

Sad to say, in most of the industry, the alternative for immediate light checking is digital.

There isn't enough market in film cameras in general to drive introduction of new design, new manufacture instant backs -- if Hasselblad were the only profession MF system, there might just about be, but the market is split between 'Blad, two or three differene Mamiya, Pentax, Bronica, etc. The only real chance is for something to come out that fits a 2x3 Graflok back -- and there's been an attempt on that, as I recall, but it went pretty much nowhere.

Whatever we might see in the future, it's either going to be Polaroid integral (600 or iType), or Instax (Square or Wide). I doubt either of those has the resolution to give the kind of satisfaction you'd get from a FP100C peel-apart, never mind waiting and waiting and wondering if it's really completely developed yet, or if your lighting color is that far off?

 

[BrianShaw]

Those were the days... and, unfortunately, they are long gone.

Happy holidays to you also!

 

[Pieter12]

1. Most pros who would have been shooting MF commercially use digital today.
2. Digital is way superior to Polaroid for checking exposure & lighting.
3. The only reason to bring back Polaroid is Type 55.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Working in fashion studios in the 80s and 90s going to Samy’s camera to stock up on 665/667And polacolor er
Was common practice every 2 weeks as it was a mainstay in our studio for testing lighting, dof, set design etc.

Fast forward to 2020, what are our alternatives.
Some dubiously stored Fuji FPC 100 at $50 or more per box?
Or Frankenstein adaptors with Fuji instant film? Instax?

Is there any other alternative currently? Or is that why I see hundreds of pol backs for sale online.
How about the folks at impossible? Could really use a hot coffee, bagel and fresh box of 665 right now...


Happy Holidays!

Harlequin

I do not have a burning desire to see instant results so there is not Polaroid backs in my future.

 

[BrianShaw]

3. The only reason to bring back Polaroid is Type 55.

For B&W... T-52 and T-54!

For color and transfer... T-59.

oh how I miss these!

 

[removedacct3]

Have a look at the upcoming Hasselblad Instax back ... https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/escura/hasselback-portrait-when-classic-meets-modern

 

[Sirius Glass]

Have a look at the upcoming Hasselblad Instax back ... https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/escura/hasselback-portrait-when-classic-meets-modern

For now that is vaporware.

 

[bdial]

Impossible is coming out with a Polaroid 100 pack film, apparently;
https://petapixel.com/2018/12/05/peel-apart-instant-film-is-back-and-its-called-one-instant/

So there is a way to continue using Polaroid backs, I think I'd rather use digital for light checking though.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Impossible is coming out with a Polaroid 100 pack film, apparently;
https://petapixel.com/2018/12/05/peel-apart-instant-film-is-back-and-its-called-one-instant/

Well, sorta. One Instant is single frames in cardboard cartridge shells, at a price that will make your ears bleed (last I looked, it was around 30 Euro for three such exposures, of which there was a strong likelihood at least one would have a problem with light leak, chemical spreading, or other development issue). Worse, they're recutting irreplaceable leftover materials from the 12x20 Polaroid project film -- when it's gone, it's gone.

That said, if anyone can pull off resurrecting pack film, it'll be the people who started the original Impossible Project -- but that project started with a complete manufacturing facility bought from Polaroid, and people who had worked in that facility in positions of expertise. Polaroid closed down pack film production years before their integral line, and Fuji apparently flatly refused to consider selling their pack film facility when it closed (IMO, likely because it shared a campus or building with other active facilities, like the Instax line) -- which makes recreating Type 100 film a ground-up operation for which the resources likely no longer exist.

Now, singles aren't that, uh, "impossible" -- I've seen pictures of experimental results using Fuji 120 color film as the negative and essentially packaging dye transfer and color developer as a gelled monobath in the pod, and of course there's New55 (when they have material) -- but there are only a couple color negative films still in production in sheet sizes, and getting such a "concept demonstrator" to full production isn't going to happen with the remaining market -- not when I can buy a Zink printer that makes perfect 4x5 prints from a phone or digital camera for the price of a couple dozen exposures of black and white New55.

 

[Peter Schrager]

Impossible is coming out with a Polaroid 100 pack film, apparently;
https://petapixel.com/2018/12/05/peel-apart-instant-film-is-back-and-its-called-one-instant/

So there is a way to continue using Polaroid backs, I think I'd rather use digital for light checking though.

I'll believe it when I see it!!
merry Xmas everyone!!
Peter

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Sad to say, in most of the industry, the alternative for immediate light checking is digital.

There isn't enough market in film cameras in general to drive introduction of new design, new manufacture instant backs -- if Hasselblad were the only profession MF system, there might just about be, but the market is split between 'Blad, two or three differene Mamiya, Pentax, Bronica, etc. The only real chance is for something to come out that fits a 2x3 Graflok back -- and there's been an attempt on that, as I recall, but it went pretty much nowhere.

Whatever we might see in the future, it's either going to be Polaroid integral (600 or iType), or Instax (Square or Wide). I doubt either of those has the resolution to give the kind of satisfaction you'd get from a FP100C peel-apart, never mind waiting and waiting and wondering if it's really completely developed yet, or if your lighting color is that far off?

+1

 

[Oren Grad]

Whatever we might see in the future, it's either going to be Polaroid integral (600 or iType), or Instax (Square or Wide). I doubt either of those has the resolution to give the kind of satisfaction you'd get from a FP100C peel-apart, never mind waiting and waiting and wondering if it's really completely developed yet, or if your lighting color is that far off?

Fuji specifies a resolution of 10 lines/mm for Instax and 15 lines/mm for FP-100C. Having used both, my subjective view is that neither is sufficient to stand up to enlargement, while either is sufficient to make a lovely small print to hold in hand. I wouldn't use either for judging lighting color in a studio setting, though Instax should serve almost as well as FP-100C for judging lighting configuration - it's maybe a bit contrastier. You don't have to "wait and wonder" about Instax development - unlike current Polaroid materials, it's completely done by 5 minutes. Yes, that's a bit longer than FP-100C took.

There isn't enough market in film cameras in general to drive introduction of new design, new manufacture instant backs -- if Hasselblad were the only profession MF system, there might just about be, but the market is split between 'Blad, two or three differene Mamiya, Pentax, Bronica, etc. The only real chance is for something to come out that fits a 2x3 Graflok back -- and there's been an attempt on that, as I recall, but it went pretty much nowhere.

You can buy an Instax back today to fit either 4x5 or 2x3 Graflok, from Mercury Camera, though the Mercury backs are necessarily expensive because of the way they are made.

If you are willing to wait a few months for delivery, you can preorder the forthcoming LomoGraflok back for using Instax Wide on 4x5 Graflok. The price is a fraction of the cost of the Mercury backs, because Lomo is having a contractor tool up to do a large run of their own new-design, new-manufacture device rather than cobbling together the back in small quantities from cannibalized parts and 3D printed shells. Full disclosure: I've ordered the Lomo back and eagerly look forward to having it.

 

[Oren Grad]

Impossible is coming out with a Polaroid 100 pack film, apparently;
https://petapixel.com/2018/12/05/peel-apart-instant-film-is-back-and-its-called-one-instant/

So there is a way to continue using Polaroid backs, I think I'd rather use digital for light checking though.

It's not Impossible-now-Polaroid that's doing it, it's Florian Kaps, who is no longer associated with Impossible-now-Polaroid. He's basically packaging leftover Polaroid 20x24 material into single-shot packets that he's selling for 10 euro each. Despite the hype, so far there's no evidence that his team has developed anything that will enable them to continue to offer this product or any other version after the current stock of old materials runs out.

 

[jeffreyg]

I found my old Hasselblad Polaroid back in the refrigerator and it had film in it (probably why it was in there) I didn't know which film or how old. Just for fun I decided to take a photo. I guessed 400 ISO and let it develop for 3 minutes. It lacks contrast so maybe developing longer would have helped. The light was not contrasty and the plants were mostly midtone but the bottom strip of wood deck showing is very close in tonality. I was surprised I got anything to begin with. The film is quite old though. There are a few frames left to try under different light conditions and maybe 4 or 5 minutes developing time. Here is the picture straight scan.

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/

http://www.sculptureandphotography.com/

 

[Donald Qualls]

You can buy an Instax back today to fit either 4x5 or 2x3 Graflok, from Mercury Camera, though the Mercury backs are necessarily expensive because of the way they are made.

If you are willing to wait a few months for delivery, you can preorder the forthcoming LomoGraflok back for using Instax Wide on 4x5 Graflok. The price is a fraction of the cost of the Mercury backs, because Lomo is having a contractor tool up to do a large run of their own new-design, new-manufacture device rather than cobbling together the back in small quantities from cannibalized parts and 3D printed shells. Full disclosure: I've ordered the Lomo back and eagerly look forward to having it.

If I had a Graflok 4x5 in anything other than a pinhole camera, I'd probably have already preordered the LomoGraflok. I very much like instant film, even with all awareness of its limitations (got my first Polaroid, a Swinger, in 1970).

I had presumed that hand crank processing (instead of electric) also contributed to keeping the cost of the Lomography unit down, but I agree, everything is cheaper by the dozen (or ten thousand). And in a global market, ten thousand pieces of "instant" gratification is hardly any -- just a bit over one per million people...

 

[Deleted member 88956]

It's a bit insane to think of instant film ever going back to pro or serious studio work for so many reasons, especially since compared to digital, there is zero instantaneity. Results are never any good for comparison purposes as they barely give much clue except for lighting effect, and quality of that left a lot to be desired even in good old Polaroid days.

Impossible project is now "Polaroid" with hardly having anything to do with what was used to be known under same name. Just like Fuji Instax this is feeding a market of trends that will continue to change (evolve) into all kinds of ever chanigng "cool" looks that some will continue to call art.

I find it almost disturbing to see Polaroid back offered today at $100 (or more for a "rare" one).

As for instant's future? Use of it is no different than going digital and then using store bought pre-sets for instant thoughtless editing. Same as getting instant film, then storing one box in a freezer, another in the attic, third in the oven, fourth in the toilet, each for instant use in camera for different instant results, or no results at all which would have had to be recognized as art anyways.

 

[ic-racer]

Instax fits in "Peel Apart" Polaroid film backs that have rollers. If one attaches a piece of paper to the film, you can pull it through to process it.
It is as useful for checking lighting as any other instant film. Here I'm looking at flash coverage with a fisheye lens on a 35mm camera.

I'd like to see the doom and gloom folks bad mouth instant film a little more on social media to get these Polaroid backs to come down in price. Right now the Polaroid backs for Rolleiflex cost more than an 8x10 film holder. If the price could come down, I'd have a few of them, each loaded for a single shot.