Signs of life at the New 55 project

[jcc]

Okay, I may eat my own words sooner than expected. This new Kickstarter idea sounds brilliant!

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

About the holders...

Please realize the New55 project chose the CHEAP 545 holders for the new version rather than use the 550 (or Fuji equivalent) holders so that many could use it easily and cheaply get started.

So for $20 you can buy one on eBay...

OK, Stone. I've been meaning to do this after reading their site a while back...

I just now bought a NOS, unused, still-in-the-box-with-manual, 545 metal holder from that ugly auction site, for use next summer, or later, just in case it really, really does happen.

And if it doesn't, I suppose it'll make a pretty cool paperweight...



Ken

 

[Newt_on_Swings]

This is cool! I never had the chance to shoot type 55 as I just got into lf. I was actually on the fence debating if I should plop down the cash ($159ish used)for the fuji 145 holder that shoots the smaller film format. I'd much prefer shooting full 4x5 if I could. I must keep an eye out for a nos 545 holder now.

 

[adelorenzo]

Gentlemen-

How may I be of service?

-Sam
new55project.com

Take my money, please!

Seriously though thanks for dropping in and if you're willing to keep us updated on what's going on that would be awsome. I'll do everything I can to help spread the good word and drum up interest in the project.

Also: The idea of making a non-roller holder for shooting in the field is KILLER. A lightweight plastic or aluminum holder with a bunch of New 55 and a 4x5 camera would blow my mind.

 

[Wayne]

Sweet. 55 was the first film-thing I ever shot in my first 4x5 almost 30 years ago. I still have the print.

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

Will the 545 holder fit into a Crown Graphic?

If so, where's this Kickstarter thingy so I can send some money??

Ken

 

[Roger Cole]

If a decent version of 55 comes back for a price of, say, less than a couple bucks a shot, I'll use some of it, maybe a LOT of it. I'll chip in to the Kickstarter too.

What, if any, is the difference between the 545 and 545i holders? Both seem cheap on the 'bay. I have the...whatever number it is, for the 3.25x4.25 but with the FP3000b being discontinued I'll soon not be able to get B&W for that either.

 

[StoneNYC]

OK, Stone. I've been meaning to do this after reading their site a while back...

I just now bought a NOS, unused, still-in-the-box-with-manual, 545 metal holder from that ugly auction site, for use next summer, or later, just in case it really, really does happen.

And if it doesn't, I suppose it'll make a pretty cool paperweight...



Ken

Wait, YOU took MY advice?... Is the world ending?

Will the 545 holder fit into a Crown Graphic?

If so, where's this Kickstarter thingy so I can send some money??

Ken

Wait, I know something you don't?... Lol

The 545's are graflex type so you can either slide them into the slot behind the GG or you can remove the back and use the slider locks to lock it down.

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

What, if any, is the difference between the 545 and 545i holders? Both seem cheap on the 'bay.

I believe from my reading that the only difference is that the 545 is a metal earlier model, and the 545i is a plastic later model. Functionally they are said to be identical, if what I've read is correct.

If so, it would be another instance of the later models of something trying to hold on to the original price point, I think.

Oh, and I think they say on their FAQ that they are shooting for $6.00 per sheet at the beginning? I could do that, as I'm not real prolific. No motor buttons on a 4x5.

Ken

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

Wait, YOU took MY advice?... Is the world ending?

Wait, I know something you don't?... Lol

The 545's are graflex type so you can either slide them into the slot behind the GG or you can remove the back and use the slider locks to lock it down.

Shit, Stone. EVERYBODY knows LOTS more than I do. I have a pretty good idea where I fall on the bell curve. It ain't at the bottom. But it sure ain't near the top either. In any given room of 100 people I have a pretty good idea of how many can make me look like a fool. Remember what Dirty Harry said. I try hard not to forget that.

So the 545s are Graflok-capable backs? I've never used one. Or the original T55. Now that would be really cool. Street portraits with the Crown Graphic, handing over the print, after confirming you got what you wanted, as a thank you keepsake? Then walking away with an exposure-matched negative?

Strangers already love that camera. I usually don't even have to ask. They ask me first.

:w00t:

Do the negatives need to be immediately cleared? I read they're using fixer instead of sulfite. Something about sulfite being too hard to find? That sounded funny. The food processing industry uses oceans of that stuff, don't they?

Ken

 

[adelorenzo]

If a decent version of 55 comes back for a price of, say, less than a couple bucks a shot, I'll use some of it, maybe a LOT of it. I'll chip in to the Kickstarter too.

They are saying the New 55 price will likely be between $6-12 a sheet when it is released. Pricey but less than what people are paying to roll the dice on eBay with expired Type 55.

 

[Roger Cole]

So the earlier ones are preferable if in comparable condition, at least for durability, and the later ones maybe for weight. Got it, thanks.

 

[StoneNYC]

Shit, Stone. EVERYBODY knows LOTS of things I don't. I have a pretty good idea where I fall on the bell curve. It ain't at the bottom. But it sure ain't at the top either. In any given room of 100 people I have a pretty good idea of how many can make me look like a fool. Remember what Dirty Harry said. I try hard not to forget that.

So the 545s are Graflok-capable backs? I've never used one. Or T55. Now that would be really cool. Street portraits with the Crown Graphic, handing over the print, after confirming you got what you wanted, as a thank you keepsake? Then walking away with an exposure-matched negative?

Strangers already love that camera. I usually don't even have to ask. They ask me first.

:w00t:

Do the negatives need to be immediately cleared? I read they're using fixer instead of sulfite. Something about sulfite being too hard to find? That sounded funny. The food processing industry uses oceans of that stuff, don't they?

Ken

One thing to note, you said T55 (which is the original pos/neg film by polaroid used the 505 (or some other designation ... I have the Fuji verskon PA-45 [or PA-145] I have both the 3ish x 4ish one and the 4x5 one and can never remember which is which) that took the pack film (like the kind that went in land cameras) but the NEW55 uses individual sheets (not a pack) that you load in the 545 back kinda like a QuickLoad holder works.

It took me a year to sort all of this out, and I bought every type of holder to see it in person to figure it out. The old guys just KNOW and assume things when speaking that just make it even more confusing for the rest of us.

Anyway the pack film backs are like $150 each on the bay, the new55 type 545 backs are $20 on the bay, which is why they were chosen, so people could afford them.

 

[Roger Cole]

I never used the old T55 either, but my understanding was that the correct exposure for the print and the negative were different, different enough that if you exposed for a proper, easy to print negative you got a print that would serve as a proof but was - too light, I believe. So unless that changes it may not be that great for giving away the print and keeping the negative, unless you shoot two sheets.

If this stuff works and is affordable I'd get the back even if it were $200. Might be worth it to load a whole pack but I suppose I can live with single sheets. Wouldn't this be awesome if the back fits in the Travelwide without too much trouble?!

I don't understand the thing about sulphite. You can buy big ol' jars of it from the Formulary. Almost certainly you can get it other places too but the point is that it's readily available and cheap. Fixer is available but may cost more, and can certainly be more problematical to handle. Not bad - we're not talking wet plate with ether and such here - but not as nice as sulphite. And anyone who knows enough to be shooting 4x5 New55 should know where to get sulphite. Odd choice if that's really the reason, but I can certainly live with it.

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

One thing to note...

Well, I sprang for $30, plus shipping, for a NOS 545. Just because it sounds like it might be fun. But I've never used large-format instant film, so I'm not up on all of the extinct varieties and ancient hardware. I just read '545' from your post and their FAQ, and it sounded like a decent bet.

Ken

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

I never used the old T55 either, but my understanding was that the correct exposure for the print and the negative were different, different enough that if you exposed for a proper, easy to print negative you got a print that would serve as a proof but was - too light, I believe. So unless that changes it may not be that great for giving away the print and keeping the negative, unless you shoot two sheets.

On their FAQ that's what they're claiming. Matched-exposure prints and negatives. It's their biggest claimed R&D improvement. I do remember that the original Polaroid stuff was an either/or proposition. I remember reading that in St. AA's Bible series.

Ken

 

[StoneNYC]

Well, I sprang for $30, plus shipping, for a NOS 545. Just because it sounds like it might be fun. But I've never used large-format instant film, so I'm not up on all of the extinct varieties and ancient hardware. I just read '545' from your post and their FAQ, and it sounded like a decent bet.

Ken

Ya' done good

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

 

[Roger Cole]

On their FAQ that's what they're claiming. Matched-exposure prints and negatives. It's their biggest claimed R&D improvement. I do remember that the original Polaroid stuff was an either/or proposition. I remember reading that in St. AA's Bible series.

Ken

Awesome! Gotta get me one o'dem holders then, because if this stuff becomes real they'll suddenly be in demand and the price will jump, and if it never does I'll only be out ten or twenty bucks and add it to the collection of now-useless crap. ;-)

So which will I get first, my New55 film or my Travelwide? I'm reasonably sure the Travelwide will arrive in due time, though. Have to hope a bit for the film.

 

[winger]

Well, my holder that works with Polaroid T55 calls itself a Polaroid Land Film Holder #500. It does work with T55 (and I still have a few sheets I'd better use quick).
Correct, the old stuff needs different speeds for each piece, though I'd bet that shooting for in between would give you something ok for the print and something somewhat usable for the neg (possibly with non-analog methods). But just having a negative in a few minutes is what I love about T55. Well, also the cool edges and the end where it connects. I've cleared mine with water, btw, and they seem to be fine so far.
The most I've paid for the T55 was $60 for 10 sheets and that's pretty much my limit for something that I didn't know if it would work. I'm watching for the new55, though, and would possibly pay slightly more if I knew I'd get a result.

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

Awesome! Gotta get me one o'dem holders then, because if this stuff becomes real they'll suddenly be in demand and the price will jump...

Here is the FAQ I was reading. Don't know how hold it is, but it refers to the $6 price point and the sulfite issue. It also discusses product development cooperation by Harman/Ilford, Impossible Project, and others.

And here is a slideshow of New55 photo test examples. Presumably these were made using the early hand-assembled prototypes. They are claiming the process is almost ready for commercialization and all they need is the startup funding to scale it up.

Balanced pos/neg exposures and a Graflok mount sounds like happy portrait days for a Crown Graphic. There were 3 or 4 unused NOS 545 holders on the ugly auction site just last evening. And over a hundred nice used ones, many for about the $20 each quoted by Stone.

[Edit: Click here for an interesting description by Zoe Wiseman of trying out five prototype sheets of New55, and how it compares to the original Polaroid Type 55 film. Side-by-side examples of both are included. This appears to have been published on September 2, 2012.]

Ken

 

[EdSawyer]

No, the real reason the 545 was chosen is it's much easier to (hand) assemble single sheet packets of film/paper than to engineer and build film packs to hold 10 sheets at a time, and the complex packaging and assembly that requires. The pack-film version of any instant film is significantly better/easier to use/more compact than the single-sheet versions. There's a reason Polaroid (and Fuji) went to pack film instead of individual sheet film - it's a better solution. But the 545 was chosen primarily to make it simpler (read: cheaper) for the engineering end of things for New55 folks.


"Anyway the pack film backs are like $150 each on the bay, the new55 type 545 backs are $20 on the bay, which is why they were chosen, so people could afford them. "

 

[JW PHOTO]

No, the real reason the 545 was chosen is it's much easier to (hand) assemble single sheet packets of film/paper than to engineer and build film packs to hold 10 sheets at a time, and the complex packaging and assembly that requires. The pack-film version of any instant film is significantly better/easier to use/more compact than the single-sheet versions. There's a reason Polaroid (and Fuji) went to pack film instead of individual sheet film - it's a better solution. But the 545 was chosen primarily to make it simpler (read: cheaper) for the engineering end of things for New55 folks.


"Anyway the pack film backs are like $150 each on the bay, the new55 type 545 backs are $20 on the bay, which is why they were chosen, so people could afford them. "

Smart move!

 

[Roger Cole]

Six bucks a sheet will kill it for me. Not worth that, sorry.

 

[Dr Croubie]

Six bucks a sheet will kill it for me. Not worth that, sorry.

Almost the same price as Velvia, probably the same as Ektar or Portra, a lot cheaper once the film is processed (although, if you still count polaroids as cheap shot-wasting insurance, it could save you a few sheets of real film).
But still, some people are buying expired FP100C (not the 45 version) on fleabay for $4 a shot (even when it's only $2 a shot at B+H), so $6 doesn't sound unreasonable.

I just checked my records, I got my 545 for a whopping €5 (plus €20 shipping) to use with quickloads. I should've taken the second one for the same shipping at the time. Oh well.

Gentlemen-
How may I be of service?
-Sam
new55project.com

Or at least, I'm presuming the Kickstarter isn't up yet? I've searched and found nothing yet, I'll have to see what the price/rewards are when it's up...