Polaroid: more than a glimmer of hope!

[PHOTOTONE]

I hope they can find a source of *color* emulsion material. At this point in the game, it probably comes down to Kodak, Ferrania, or Lucky. I don't know if Kodak's prior lawsuit loss to Polaroid will preclude them from this.

They don't tend to be cooperative with other manufacturers that much anyway.

Then both Ferrania and Lucky are probably not advanced enough. This may well be impossible when it comes to color materials, which are far more useful and a far bigger volume of consumption anyway.

There is no technical reason why Ilford could not coat a color emulsion, they just choose to stay with b/w only for their output. Ilfords coating equipment is state-of-the-art, and capable of coating ANY type of emulsion, as long as they want to do it.

But, you are forgetting one BIG manufacturer that still coats and offers color emulsions for their industrial/aerial film markets, and that is Agfa/Gevaert..in Belgium. They even offer custom coating on their state-of-the-art line.

 

[FilmIs4Ever]

There is no technical reason why Ilford could not coat a color emulsion, they just choose to stay with b/w only for their output. Ilfords coating equipment is state-of-the-art, and capable of coating ANY type of emulsion, as long as they want to do it.

But, you are forgetting one BIG manufacturer that still coats and offers color emulsions for their industrial/aerial film markets, and that is Agfa/Gevaert..in Belgium. They even offer custom coating on their state-of-the-art line.

No offense intended to Ilford, but I hardly think they could compete in what is, after all, still the most profitable segment of the market: color negative films.

There is nothing shameful in B&W, but I think they committed to that path long ago and there is no turning back at this point. There would be a huge ammount of catchup.

Also, let me point out that, essentially, with the exception of T-Max 400, everything we buy today in B&W is essentially 1987 film emulsion technology. There have been little to no changes in the properties of B&W film since then. I certainly hope this changes, and Ilford themselves have said they have new, improved products in the works, but until they do, that is the state of the B&W film industry. Kodak, surprisingly, is the only party that has made ANY actual resolution/grain improvement since then.

If Ilford, could, as you say, make color neg. films, then why did they sell rebranded C-41 stock circa 2000?

 

[Photo Engineer]

Karl, the current B&W film emulsions have been considerably updated since 1987. Most notably, thin t-grains are used by Kodak, and Ilford has their newer films as well. Kodak's recent introductions include 2 eletron sensitization. So, there have been improvements, albeit at a slower rate since the B&W division in research has been folded into the other divisions since about 1988.

Much of the future work may be as you say. Emulsions in the pipeline just being tweaked in a development cycle, but there is some new stuff out there.

PE

 

[AgX]

Impossible has stated to aim for the retail price of a filmpack at about 25 €.

 

[PHOTOTONE]

No offense intended to Ilford, but I hardly think they could compete in what is, after all, still the most profitable segment of the market: color negative films.

If Ilford, could, as you say, make color neg. films, then why did they sell rebranded C-41 stock circa 2000?

I mentioned nothing about "competing". Nothing. Obviously Ilford felt it more economical to just slap their name on another C-41 product.

What I am talking about is that Harman has the technical skill and manufacturing capabilities to coat multi-layer emulsions, regardless of whether they are b/w or color.

 

[Photo Engineer]

There is no big leap from B&W to color if you have multilayer coating capability. The leap is from that to integral podded instant materials. Given the equipment exists, then even this step becomes much easier. All that remains is getting a profit on it. Either the market exists or it does not.

PE

 

[Adrian Twiss]

Type 55 dated January 2009 - £140 ($199) per box from www.unsaleable.com no wonder they're called Unsaleable.

 

[FilmIs4Ever]

I mentioned nothing about "competing". Nothing. Obviously Ilford felt it more economical to just slap their name on another C-41 product.

What I am talking about is that Harman has the technical skill and manufacturing capabilities to coat multi-layer emulsions, regardless of whether they are b/w or color.

Forgive me, I thought you wanted to have a serious conversation about actual production possibilities, not hypothetical day-dreaming.

 

[FilmIs4Ever]

Impossible has stated to aim for the retail price of a filmpack at about 25 €.

This seems completely unrealistic. That is, what, $35/pack? $ 3 1/2 per sheet?

Unless they produce a truly superior product to what Fuji currently offers, Polaroid formerly did, there is no way that this business model is going to work. Why would people spend almost three times as much for an essentially identica product?

 

[Akki14]

This seems completely unrealistic. That is, what, $35/pack? $ 3 1/2 per sheet?

Unless they produce a truly superior product to what Fuji currently offers, Polaroid formerly did, there is no way that this business model is going to work. Why would people spend almost three times as much for an essentially identica product?

UK retail prices for (a twin pack - 20 pictures)600 film was £20.99 before the announcement of "the end" and now it's £21.99 (Available at most Boots chemist shops if anyone is looking). With the pound at near parity with the euro, £25 doesn't sound too bad to me. It's not like I go through it a pack a day.

 

[FilmIs4Ever]

UK retail prices for (a twin pack - 20 pictures)600 film was £20.99 before the announcement of "the end" and now it's £21.99 (Available at most Boots chemist shops if anyone is looking). With the pound at near parity with the euro, £25 doesn't sound too bad to me. It's not like I go through it a pack a day.

If those prices are for a 20-pack, then that is a different story.

I guess, with completely different systems of taxation and price expectations, it is harder to gauge than a simple conversion.

I know the dollar is far weaker against the Euro than it used to be. Did the Pound loose much of its value too, or has the Euro just gotten that much stronger?

I wish there were a standard benchmark to judge them all against. International Credits anyone? ;-)

Just in general, I tend to be used to paying $1.25 or less per sheet in 2 1/4 x 3 1/4". I guess maybe I am also overlooking the fact that people are talking about 4x5" sizes, although I seem to recall SX-70 being closer to 2 1/4" dimensions than 4x5, maybe even smaller (and that is what they said they are bringing back).

My whole perspective is that Polaroids should be cheap so that you can use them for quick scene evaluation or instant photos to give to people. Having an expensive price tag starts to seriously negate the ability to exercise that spontaneity unless the shooter is "well endowed"

 

[Akki14]

US has always been stupidly cheaper for polaroid film. But polaroid has never been "cheap" as in cheaper than plain film. It'd be pretty impossible given the complexity of the product. I know when I was a kid I wasn't allowed near the polaroid camera because the film was expensive.

And if it came down to it, I'd pay £25 for a single pack because, what's the alternative? Nothing. Instax cameras are crap and are not on par with my SX-70. My SX-70 will have no more "food". And nothing against Silverprint but they're selling a twin pack for £31.22 currently, so I expect the "market price" of real Polaroid 600 film is going to skyrocket as availability goes down so £25 at the moment isn't sounding too bad to me. Like I said before, I'm not blasting through the stuff.

And yes it's about 2 1/4 x 2 1/4 in inches.

 

[FilmIs4Ever]

US has always been stupidly cheaper for polaroid film. But polaroid has never been "cheap" as in cheaper than plain film. It'd be pretty impossible given the complexity of the product. I know when I was a kid I wasn't allowed near the polaroid camera because the film was expensive.

Isn't Fuji available there for MF annd LF backs? Actually, thinking back on it, I think it was cheaper than true Polaroids, but only marginally and I think only from local stores; B&H in NYC there wasn't any difference if I'm remembering correctly.

What about in the UK? Is it £25 for 2 1/4 x 3 1/4" 20 packs there too?

And if it came down to it, I'd pay £25 for a single pack because, what's the alternative? Nothing. Instax cameras are crap and are not on par with my SX-70. My SX-70 will have no more "food". And nothing against Silverprint but they're selling a twin pack for £31.22 currently, so I expect the "market price" of real Polaroid 600 film is going to skyrocket as availability goes down so £25 at the moment isn't sounding too bad to me. Like I said before, I'm not blasting through the stuff.

And yes it's about 2 1/4 x 2 1/4 in inches.

I agree that Instax is junk. But isn't SX-70 point and shoot too? I know my parents' old one is. . . Only reason it was still made was due to emulsion transfer characteristics. Unless you're doing emulsion tranfers, why not switch to Spectra law enforcement cameras (manual) or get a Polaroid back?

The money spent sticking with SX-70 will be mitigated if you're spending an extra 5 quid a purchase. Thats 5 shillings per sheet! Very quickly, the new camera or back will pay for itself. . .

 

[PHOTOTONE]

Fuji pack film in 4x5 is about $3.00 per sheet, in the smaller pack-film size it is about 80 cents per sheet.

 

[JBrunner]

To clarify a bit about Fuji/Polaroid compatibility. The Fuji 3.25x4.25 pack film will work quite happily in any 3.25x4.25 polaroid camera pack film camera or daylab, these being the kind where the pack of ten is inserted in the holder, you make an exposure, pull the tab, then pull the film our through the rollers, wait for development, and peel apart. Polaroid 669 for example was a popular type for pola tranfer and in the US the Fuji is available as in a 100 color emulsion or 3000 B&W. I have successfully transfered the Fuji 100 product, but there are some tricks. The Fuji color emulsion is currently available in the US in 4x5 and the B&W is said to be soon available. As the 4x5 Fuji are pack film as well, you need the Fuji PA-45 Film Holder to be able to use them in a view camera. They won't work in a 545 holder. Hope that clears some things up.

 

[PHOTOTONE]

Forgive me, I thought you wanted to have a serious conversation about actual production possibilities, not hypothetical day-dreaming.

Well, yes, Ilford does have the ability to do actual production on coating a color emulsion.

The fact that they chose to not coat a C-41 emulsion does not mean anything. The C-41 market a few years ago was glutted with brands, Kodak, Fuji, Lucky, Ferrania, Konica, Agfa. Not much chance of financial return entering that market circa year 2000. Ilford "does" coat a C-41 process b/w emulsion..right now. The fact that they might design and coat a light-sensitive emulsion for Impossible, B.V. is a unique situation, and Harman "can" do it, if Impossible, B.V. can afford it. Historically, Ilford in England has manufactured and marketed several color films prior to the C-41 process, and that was with coating lines much less capable than they have now.

 

[FilmIs4Ever]

Fuji pack film in 4x5 is about $3.00 per sheet, in the smaller pack-film size it is about 80 cents per sheet.

Your 4x5" figures sound too high (at least when we still had Polaroids). Your 2 1/4 x 3 1/4" figures sound too low. Even when I was buying from B&H I didn't get it below a dollar a Polaroid. $1 even is the cheapest I remember in recent years. . .

 

[PHOTOTONE]

Your 4x5" figures sound too high (at least when we still had Polaroids). Your 2 1/4 x 3 1/4" figures sound too low. Even when I was buying from B&H I didn't get it below a dollar a Polaroid. $1 even is the cheapest I remember in recent years. . .

I use Fuji PF100c45 all the time. It varies from $29.95 to $39.95 per 10 sheet pack. $3 to $4 per sheet. Polaroid single-sheet films such as type 79 were last being sold (before announcement of discontinuance) at about $89.00 for 20 sheets, or over $4. per sheet. The 2 1/4 x 3 1/4 Fuji color pack film 10 sheet pack is about $8.00, so 80 cents per sheet, it is cheaper than the polaroid was before discontinuance.

 

[Mick Fagan]

Remember the Kodak Polaroid sort of camera? Well when Kodak lost their court case and their camera went off the market, you could still purchase film for it in Japan.

You then had to purchase Fuji manufactured Polaroid film in Japan if you wished to purchase it at a realistic price. I had a friend who travelled to Japan about 5 times a year, every time he came back he would bring about 10 packs of film for our Kodak instant camera and about 40 packs for his Polaroid camera.

The Polaroid film was called Polaroid and in quite small writing on the underside (if I remember correctly) was the Fuji name and made in Japan.

I would suggest that Fuji knows, or at least knew, how to manufacture an instant film with either of the three processes that were available to the public. That is; Polaroid, Kodak and Fuji instant products.

I don't think too many people knew of this as Fuji have generally never been one to have huge saturation marketing campaigns for products like this.

I would also suspect that both Agfa and Ilford, amongst others, also know or knew how to do this, but because of aggressive protection of their product, Polaroid prevented virtually anybody else from manufacturing a similar product.

Mick.

 

[FilmIs4Ever]

I use Fuji PF100c45 all the time. It varies from $29.95 to $39.95 per 10 sheet pack. $3 to $4 per sheet. Polaroid single-sheet films such as type 79 were last being sold (before announcement of discontinuance) at about $89.00 for 20 sheets, or over $4. per sheet. The 2 1/4 x 3 1/4 Fuji color pack film 10 sheet pack is about $8.00, so 80 cents per sheet, it is cheaper than the polaroid was before discontinuance.

Well, the price after Polaroid was discontinued is kind of irrelevant. Let's just say $3/sheet was the going rate. That's not really what I'm arguing either, I'm talking more about the price differentials between comparable products.

What's surprising is that, looking on B&H's website, the pack film is actually 3 1/4 x 4 1/4" size, more than half the size of the 4x5" film. That is what I don't get. Even if the backing paper cost significantly more, which it doesn't (it is, after all, just paper), I don't understand why it would sell for any more than $2 per sheet other than the fact that they CAN sell it for more because there aren't any alternatives.

However, a new Polaroid can't really get away with this business model of charging whatever they feel like because Fuji IS making comparable products. I am more inclined to go with Polaroid than knock-offs from Fuji if the prices are in the ball-park, but what I've read here indicate there's something like a 60% or greater increase in price over what Fuji already offers.

I would only be willing to pay that if the product were truly improved, like Pos/Neg. in color, or a 3,000 speed color that develops in 30 sec. instead of 2 min., something like that.

Merely having a product that does better emulsion transfers than Fuji is probably not going to generate sufficient revenue. And I don't think brand loyalty will do it either.

But I am not trying to rain on this company's parade. I wish them all the best and hopefully they really are going to knock our socks off with some great new products with real, valuable improvements in the technology.

 

[Ektagraphic]

This is wonderful news! I always thought that there was a market for it and that it was silly to stop production

 

[Peter de Groot]

Polaroid ressurrection

Hi,

Good news for the polaroid fans:
Dead Link Removed

Just saw in on the dutch tv. Don't know what it will be but it does look hopefull. I hope they will start to make the medium and large formats as well.

Spread the word hehe.

Greets,

Peter

 

[Ian Grant]

That's old news here, there have been a few threads about it already.

Ian

 

[Peter de Groot]

ok well then this one can be closed hehe.

 

[JBrunner]

I think this is merge #4....