Polaroid Discontinued--Boston Globe 02/08/08

JBrunner

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Dec 14, 2005
Messages
7,429
Location
PNdub
Format
Medium Format

Very true Ron,

The ID of 55's neg is only a guess, but whatever it is, there isn't anything else like it, except Panatomic X, if that isn't what it is.
 

Photo Engineer

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
29,018
Location
Rochester, NY
Format
Multi Format
I know of no case of Kodak giving or selling an emulsion formula to a competitor. Take that any way you wish.

PE
 

donbga

Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2003
Messages
3,053
Format
Large Format Pan
jnanian said:
its too bad someone can't just sell the FILM that is inside P/N55 film.
it is known to be panatomic x, and can be processed without the pod,
in regular developer.


john
Click to expand...
Exactly my sentiments! I never used PN 55 for instant prints, only for the film. It was great to travel with.
 

Photo Engineer

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
29,018
Location
Rochester, NY
Format
Multi Format
donbga said:
Well who made the film for PN 55? Polaroid?
Click to expand...

The first batches of PN 55 to roll off the line, rolled off a Kodak line AFAIK. All early Polaroid was made at Kodak until Land had built the facilities to make them. Kodak supplied "A" formula. They never served up "The" formula for any specific product.

PE
 

removed account4

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Messages
29,832
Format
Hybrid
JBrunner said:
Very true Ron,

The ID of 55's neg is only a guess, but whatever it is, there isn't anything else like it, except Panatomic X, if that isn't what it is.
Click to expand...

exactly my thoughts ...
whatever the 55 film might be ... it is good-stuff,
and i know i am going to miss it, whatever it might happen to be.

so buy it up, and store it whatever way you want ... take the film out
and hand processes it in your favorite soup, no pod needed!
 

David A. Goldfarb

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Sep 7, 2002
Messages
19,974
Location
Honolulu, HI
Format
Large Format
Whatever it is, it certainly resembles Pan-X in tonality and speed. I suspect it must have been tweaked in some way to work well with the Polaroid chemistry and film base, which is different from standard sheet film base, but maybe the same as pack film or rollfilm base.
 

David A. Goldfarb

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Sep 7, 2002
Messages
19,974
Location
Honolulu, HI
Format
Large Format

Now that I'm looking at Haist's _Monobath Manual_, he mentions a 1965 Polaroid patent, which seems to describe Type 55, using "a fine grain, silver iodobromide film, said to be substantially similar to Kodak Panatomic-X Film but with an emulsion thickness of about 0.002 inch."

Another interesting fact for amidol fans about the patent is that the developing agents in the formula are amidol and ascorbic acid.

The book also makes a number of references to Keelan's monobath of 1956, which was designed around Panatomic-X, and Keelan was at Boston University, not too far from Polaroid.
 

Alex Hawley

Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2003
Messages
2,892
Location
Kansas, USA
Format
Large Format
Photo Engineer said:
- no one has explicit confirmation that Polaroid Type 55 is Panatomic X.
Click to expand...

Here's my screwball theory on the Type 55/Panatomic-X relationship. When reading a book that described the SR-71 camera systems, I keenly noticed that the film that was used in those cameras had a striking similarity to T55/pan-x. The surveillance cameras needed to carry several thousand feet of film. The film's base material had to be stronger than normal to withstand the motorized transport and severe operating environment. Note that the base material for T55/pan-x was both thinner and much stronger than conventional film bases. The surveillance film also had the same speed, asa 25, very high resolution, and could produce very large enlargements, as did T55/pan-x.

Land designed the surveillance camera system; that is a known fact. Kodak produced the film and the processing facilities; that is a known fact. The surveillance system was used on both the U2 and SR-71 aircraft; known fact. What I believe happened was that both companies were able to market a commercial version of the film; Kodak's version being Panatomic-X, Polaroid's version being Type 55/665.

I have no proof nor information to substantiate that theory other than what I have stated. Just connecting some dots from different sources that seem to line up together.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Photo Engineer

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
29,018
Location
Rochester, NY
Format
Multi Format
Kodak coated on 5 mil support for 35mm as was normal. Sheet films went on 7 mil support. IIRC, all or most of Land's film products were on 5 mil support. This was probably to allow it to turn the sharp corners in the packs as Kodak film packs (remember them) were also on 5 mil support, not 7.

The aerial film was on 5 mil or 2 mil support depending and the reason was to allow more film to be packed into an aerial camera. None of this proves one way or another what the emulsion was though.

PE
 

qwfqz

Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2008
Messages
2
Format
Medium Format
reflections on the demise of Polaroid film

Along with the rest of you, I am very saddened by the demise of Polaroid film. Having read all the posts in this thread, here are a few observations:

-whatever Type 55 (and the late-lamented type 665) were made of, it was a very high-quality material. Last fall I took some seriously outdated 665 out of my refrigerator and got fabulous results with it. It went out of date in the year 2000! But it worked fine. The important thing to keep in mind is that the negative is rated at ISO 50. Anyone considering stockpiling
Type 55 doesn't need to worry that the material will deteriorate quickly, at least not based on my experience with 665. The best way to prolong its life is to refrigerator (not freeze) it, and keep it flat (do not store vertically).

-If Type 55 has some relation to Panatomic-X (doubtful) it's important to know that one reason Panatomic-X was phased out was that in developing it created a chemical by-product that was highly toxic. I complained bitterly when it was discontinued and this was the explanation I got. So I don't think Panatomic-X stands much chance of a resurgence.

-Polaroid may have made some terrible management blunders, but they did take an interest in the artistic application of their materials, unlike Kodak. SX70 manipulations, emulsion transfers, etc., were all embraced by Polaroid and presumably gave Polaroid a longer life than they may have otherwise had. In some respects, Polaroid was an enlightened company.

-Having an unbelieveable number of Polaroid backs and cameras of every size and description, I'm now left with a lot of paperweights and a few items that may live on, depending on Fuji, or whoever may buy Polaroid's interests. But I'm thinking of this as the end of an era. Polaroid was magic and nothing will ever be quite the same. Think how bummed we'll all be if film goes the way of Polaroid.

Carpe diem! Everything in this digital world of ours is changing very fast, and we can't take anything for granted.
 

Alessandro Machi

Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
35
Location
California
Format
Sub 35mm
How come film doesn't get the benefit of a digital world when it comes to the obvious? First off, before announcing that Polaroid is quitting the game, why doesn't Polaroid first put out a call for film orders? Why not just announce the minimum yearly order Polaroid needs to keep making Polaroid film, then see if the internet community will order enough?

One guess on my part is that Polaroid has a spin off company that is developing a portable digital printer that will work with any digital device to create on location prints.

It is still bad business to piss off one's core customer base just so a company can force those loyal supporters to use a new technology. I'll probably buy the competition's product just to spite Polaroid for not using a more forward thinking model to appease their loyal customer base even as they move into the digital age.
 

David A. Goldfarb

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Sep 7, 2002
Messages
19,974
Location
Honolulu, HI
Format
Large Format

It sounds like it's about the real estate, as it often is. It's more profitable to sell the land the factory is on to build a shopping center than to use it to continue producing photographic materials. Given the decline in sales, even if there are dedicated users, they probably don't see it as profitable enough to justify moving the equipment to a new factory on less valuable land.

I gather the same was true for Forte.
 

qwfqz

Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2008
Messages
2
Format
Medium Format
real estate vs. film manufacturing

It is my understanding that Ilford survived by being bought by its upper-level managers, and that they sold off some of the large parcel of real estate Ilford owned, which happens to be very valuable. I was told by someone at Freestyle, who does business with them, that their real estate is more valuable even than property in London. So in that case, it helped them to survive. What I see, living in Los Angeles, is that lots of businesses that are doing OK go out of business because it's more profitable to sell the real estate to housing developers. Who knows what the case is with Polaroid, but it certainly would have been nice to get a heads-up and an opportunity to buy a supply of Polaroid before they shut down.

Meantime, and entirely coincidentally, I've rigged a Toyo 4x5 field with a small digital camera in the (non) "hot shoe" mount which previews the angle of coverage of a 90mm lens, shows exposure, and is even switchable between black and white and color. That will be my new "Polaroid" for that camera and lens.
 

AgX

Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2007
Messages
29,973
Location
Germany
Format
Multi Format
Polaroid Europe in Enschede has sold some of their inner-city real estate in the last two years as they intend to leave the city for another place in the province for their new distribution centre.

But I assume real estate would be just one part of any story within the industry. And the larger the site the more complex such an issue would be. And closing just one department inside a site will probably have no real estate involvements at all.
 

Michel Hardy-Vallée

Membership Council
Subscriber
Joined
Apr 2, 2005
Messages
4,793
Location
Montréal, QC
Format
Multi Format
Obligatory quote:

Dead Link Removed
 

terri

Subscriber
Joined
Feb 27, 2006
Messages
345
Location
SE USA
Format
Multi Format
I'm more than happy to do this. I've signed every petition and will complete every survey that I come across. At least I will know I didn't sit by and do nothing, however unrealistic the chances of continuing production may be.

It took me all of 30 seconds and will cost me a stamp. So why not?
 

imazursky

Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2006
Messages
148
Location
New Rochelle
Format
ULarge Format
With my fingers and toes crossed, I have sent mine out today. I have also forwarded it on to clients and colleagues.
I hope they will cave to public pressure like fuji with velvia 50.

Or the other way round. Sell it off to Fuji or Ilford and make us all happy.
 

CGross

I have been looking at different online shops and Type 55 seems to be consistantly out of stock. Freestyle says on it's site that they will have some by April 18th.

Anyone know if there is any shops with 55 in stock? Wonder if it's safe to make an order even if it's back ordered?

I echo everyone elses setiments. Argh
 

JBrunner

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Dec 14, 2005
Messages
7,429
Location
PNdub
Format
Medium Format

There is supposed to be stock still in the pipeline, but who knows how big the run has been.

I would imagine little risk from ordering from a reputable company like Freestyle. If they can't fill it, you'll get a refund or credit. Check with them for their exact policy.
 
OP
OP

tjaded

Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2006
Messages
1,020
Location
San Francisc
Format
Multi Format
Just Film has a little bit left...he orders directly from Polaroid (as far as I know.) He said that what he has is all there is for him--so distributor or direct, he is at the end. Feel free to call him to ask about it, he will ship. 415-864-0665 (his name is Volker...SUPER nice guy!)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…