Signs of life at the New 55 project

mgb74 said:

At the risk of going off on a tangent, their marketing and branding may have been a jumbled mess, but what killed them is the 1 hour minilab. And they were effectively dead (finally bankrupt around 2000) before digital hit it's stride. Polavision was to be their next great innovation - which came out about the same time as consumer-grade camcorders. Their pro-level films just didn't have the volume to keep them going. I think their pro-level instant film could have lasted longer as a niche product under the umbrella of a Kodak, Ilford, or Fuji.

But they didn't ask for my advice.

Click to expand...

This. The pro stuff was indeed "a jumbled mess" but both pros and amateurs devoted enough to want a Polaroid back, or even know what one was, could and did figure it out. Their bread and butter was consumer cameras for instant gratification of vacation snapshots and such. The high cost compared to conventional materials limited their market all along and the mini lab killed it.

New55's not for everyone

Roger Cole said:

So I don't come across as critical let me be clear that I well understand why $6 may be the lowest practical price. This would be a huge project. I get that. But I can't pay six bucks a sheet for it, at least not very much or very often.

Click to expand...

Roger-

We're with you. Every project has a price-point. Every photographer has requirements relative to the media-selection.

Presently the project is looking at N55 boxes containing 5 sheets each. Therefore, a unit would be, minimum, $30; but the early price could be twice that and then you'd simply be off to find other alternatives ...

... perhaps alternatives like this: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Polaroid-Ty...55?pt=UK_Photography_Film&hash=item2ece083813

... which is a $150 (incl. ship.) starting bid on a pretty nice, STILL SEALED, box of 20 sheets of not too old (probably good) Type 55. At about $7.50 a sheet that's pretty nice on something functional that's certainly EXTINCT -- and has KNOWN working characteristics.

The realities of Polaroid's and Fuji's discontinuations simply means we're in new world (with old economic rules) where manufacturing at today's equilibrium quantities derives a higher natural price.

We know that price will exclude some folks. For you, it's a little tough to see you go because your stuff on Flickr looks pretty good.

Please also keep in mind that New55 FILM is not a duplication of old 55; it only shares some of its basic characteristics (P/N peel-apart monochrome 4x5 in a single-sheet packet with a clip used in the 500, 545 or 545i holders).

It certainly will not be for everyone,
-Sam

project CEO
new55project.com

I was a heavy user of both 55 and 665. Their rendering were unique.
I will definitely support your new 55.
Good luck.
G.

Ken Nadvornick said:

Watching this very closely. Can contribute some $$$ if you reach the fundraising point. And the best part is, I never even used the original T55. So I'm a brand new (potential) customer. No prior expectations. Only future anticipations.

Ken

Click to expand...

+1

swhiser said:

Roger-

We're with you. Every project has a price-point. Every photographer has requirements relative to the media-selection.

Presently the project is looking at N55 boxes containing 5 sheets each. Therefore, a unit would be, minimum, $30; but the early price could be twice that and then you'd simply be off to find other alternatives ...

... perhaps alternatives like this: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Polaroid-Ty...55?pt=UK_Photography_Film&hash=item2ece083813

... which is a $150 (incl. ship.) starting bid on a pretty nice, STILL SEALED, box of 20 sheets of not too old (probably good) Type 55. At about $7.50 a sheet that's pretty nice on something functional that's certainly EXTINCT -- and has KNOWN working characteristics.

The realities of Polaroid's and Fuji's discontinuations simply means we're in new world (with old economic rules) where manufacturing at today's equilibrium quantities derives a higher natural price.

We know that price will exclude some folks. For you, it's a little tough to see you go because your stuff on Flickr looks pretty good.

Please also keep in mind that New55 FILM is not a duplication of old 55; it only shares some of its basic characteristics (P/N peel-apart monochrome 4x5 in a single-sheet packet with a clip used in the 500, 545 or 545i holders).

It certainly will not be for everyone,
-Sam

project CEO
new55project.com

Click to expand...

I'd certainly like it to be for me. It was only after the initial "I can't pay six bucks a sheet" that I realized it would work for that project that I had in mind. But I am a hobbyist, not a commercial photographer. I sold a print recently and hope I can sell a few more but it will never be more than a hobby for me, I think, even if the project I have in mind is a sort of "commercial hobby" endeavor.

It's a complex product. I'll actually be quite impressed if you can do it for six bucks a sheet. But when it comes to laying out three times as much per shot as regular Ilford film, I'll still be using more regular film by a long shot.

Best of luck with it. It would be an awesome product to have available.

Roger Cole said:

Their bread and butter was consumer cameras for instant gratification of vacation snapshots and such. The high cost compared to conventional materials limited their market all along and the mini lab killed it.

Click to expand...

Roger,

I did a lot of market research when I worked on the Kodak Instant System (late '70s) and a major consumer use of instant photography was for events where immediacy was important (like birthday parties); one of the top uses was 'adult photography'. Vacation photos weren't very important.

Prof_Pixel said:

Roger,

I did a lot of market research when I worked on the Kodak Instant System (late '70s) and a major consumer use of instant photography was for events where immediacy was important (like birthday parties); one of the top uses was 'adult photography'. Vacation photos weren't very important.

Click to expand...

Well ok. Probably because it was too expensive for vacation photos. I can see the "adult" stuff too, because no one at a processing lab had to see your photos. This market was just waiting for digital.

Roger Cole said:

Well ok. Probably because it was too expensive for vacation photos. I can see the "adult" stuff too, because no one at a processing lab had to see your photos. This market was just waiting for digital.

Click to expand...

The world hasn't changed much, I'm still trying to figure out how I can send out some of my color to be processed and have it returned without offending someone..

Sam,

What is the rough time line you are looking at?

I want to be able to contribute to the crowd funding and I know that I am going to have to budget for it. So some idea, so that I know how to prioritize my spending, of when you are looking to try the crowd funding would be appreciated. I know how much I want to budget for the funding but it is just that I want to know when I need it by.

I had the privilege of playing with the Polaroid product and it really did save some photographs. Although $6.- is expensive I know that I want it again. I believe that Polaroid had gone out of their way with their film to mimic the look of TRI-X, which then gave the photographer and viewer a good idea of what the final image would look like. Are you, with the New55Project going to try to emulate a certain look as well or is it going to be the "New55Project" look that you are creating? Also how closely will the negative, when printed out, and the positive resemble each other?

Thanks and good luck.

Richard

rdg said:

Sam,

What is the rough time line you are looking at?

I want to be able to contribute to the crowd funding and I know that I am going to have to budget for it. So some idea, so that I know how to prioritize my spending, of when you are looking to try the crowd funding would be appreciated. I know how much I want to budget for the funding but it is just that I want to know when I need it by.

I had the privilege of playing with the Polaroid product and it really did save some photographs. Although $6.- is expensive I know that I want it again. I believe that Polaroid had gone out of their way with their film to mimic the look of TRI-X, which then gave the photographer and viewer a good idea of what the final image would look like. Are you, with the New55Project going to try to emulate a certain look as well or is it going to be the "New55Project" look that you are creating? Also how closely will the negative, when printed out, and the positive resemble each other?

Thanks and good luck.

Richard

Click to expand...

Kickstarter timing: "Early Spring 2014" is the best I can say today, rdg. It'll be no more than 30 days long.

The product development will continue as we identify source materials all year, so it's hard to be specific about look. We have our own taste and judgement to go by, and the samples on new55project.com are not up there because we <em>dislike</em> their tonal representations.

It would not be bad if New55 FILM eventually hits or even improves on the tonal quality and range of a Tri-X. The DTR process gives a very nice negative and also plays in solarization to a degree we can't predict until the final product stabilizes.

So far, in testing with the good reagent, the negative and positive have exposed right on. This is a significant achievement for the Crowley skunkworks since the old55 pos-neg were two stops apart, forcing the photographer to optimize for one or the other. This was a significant compromise, what we see now as an unnecessary sacrifice.

-Sam
new55project.com

rdg said:

I believe that Polaroid had gone out of their way with their film to mimic the look of TRI-X, which then gave the photographer and viewer a good idea of what the final image would look like. Are you, with the New55Project going to try to emulate a certain look as well or is it going to be the "New55Project" look that you are creating?

Richard

Click to expand...

The Polaroid Type 55 (and 665, too, for that matter) used the Kodak film internally called "SO139" -- this is the old Panatomic-X!!

New55 FILM has some latitude to use a short list of off-the-shelf sheet films -- subject to availability and price. The cubic-grain emulsions work best with the DTR process. This is all covered in depth on the New55 FILM blog (search "DTR"). Thus far, Efke 25, Shanghai, and 320TXP have qualified as candidates for the negative component of New55 FILM. We are testing films from Ilford, Foma and Adox and will have to decide which sheet film we like the best.

These are all beloved emulsions. I like the LOOK of ALL of them, but it won't be my decision. Offering more than one cannot be ruled out.

-Sam
new55project.com

swhiser said:

The Polaroid Type 55 (and 665, too, for that matter) used the Kodak film internally called "SO139" -- this is the old Panatomic-X!!

New55 FILM has some latitude to use a short list of off-the-shelf sheet films -- subject to availability and price. The cubic-grain emulsions work best with the DTR process. This is all covered in depth on the New55 FILM blog (search "DTR"). Thus far, Efke 25, Shanghai, and 320TXP have qualified as candidates for the negative component of New55 FILM. We are testing films from Ilford, Foma and Adox and will have to decide which sheet film we like the best.

These are all beloved emulsions. I like the LOOK of ALL of them, but it won't be my decision. Offering more than one cannot be ruled out.

-Sam
new55project.com

Click to expand...

Well the Efke is already gone (and too slow IMHO, if it wound up still being a 25 speed product.) I've no idea about the stability of the source of Shanghai or, for that matter and I hate to say it, TXP post-Alaris era. TXP would be great, but it's also pricier, at least at retail. I don't know if that would matter though. The price difference in the film will probably be a small enough part of the total price of New55 that it wouldn't matter that much.

Kickstarter New55

I thought I post an update on the New55 Project. As of yesterday the Kickstarter project has gone live:
Dead Link Removed

Help us make it possible to get this awesome product into production. So yes buy the Speedgraphic and defenitely yes buy a Polaroid 545 holder before the prices sore towards the heavens

Peter de Groot said:

I thought I post an update on the New55 Project. As of yesterday the Kickstarter project has gone live:
Dead Link Removed

Help us make it possible to get this awesome product into production. So yes buy the Speedgraphic and defenitely yes buy a Polaroid 545 holder before the prices sore towards the heavens

Click to expand...

Awesomeness!!

I wish the offered 1 film pack and 1 pouch

Such is life, guess I'll have to pledge one of each...

StoneNYC said:

Awesomeness!!

I wish the offered 1 film pack and 1 pouch

Such is life, guess I'll have to pledge one of each...

Click to expand...

Sounds like a god plan to me

Pledged! Hope they are successful! Would love to try this film, and let my lonely 545 Polaroid back have a little fun again!

I just pledged, though after reading the whole (very long) text, it seems like they need 400K (and for some reason are not counting the 9-12% KS and amazon cut off that) only to get the R&D off the ground, and not to actually go into production.
"This Kickstarter project is not a pre-order initiative. It is an attempt to fund the manufacturing capacity and product design effort for a new photographic film."

I hate to be a naysayer - but there is no commercial paper working machinary imaginable at the cost basis they are talking about, let alone machines that can do the complex things they want it to (edge taping, folding, splice adhesive etc.,).

Seems like they are so very early in the R&D stage, this is yet another kickstarter that will get funded with mega bucks only to find after the fact it cannot possibly deliver the promised product for even twice the raised amount.

*** EDIT: Reading the risks and challenges gives all of the above concerens that this product is far from being ready for production anytime soon, let alone in 8 months.

I hope i am wrong - and my pledge is on good faith!

Good luck!

Good that you realize this is hard, and risky. That's what we want.

As far as the machines you refer to, in-house there is to be an edge taper of our own design. There are no steps in this product that require folding or splicing - these have been eliminated. The coating of the receiver is the concern, and the substrate, as mentioned. Making a new receiver sheet isn't easy since Polaroid kept the process a secret even from their own people, so we do have to nearly start from scratch. Also there is a lot of information, not in our intentionally conservative description, that has been published on http://new55project.blogspot.com. We put in what we needed to, and even that, as you say, is quite long.

Much of what we make today is via contract. Paper will be converted and die cut and metal parts obtained from the vendors. There isn't much reason to purchase and install roll to roll machinery that only has to run for a week to make the yardage needed for the product. There are several toll coating operations looking for contracts who can do that, for a price. We plan to do assembly, and packaging, here, and have developed handy dark work chambers that have been successful, and can be duplicated.

Thank you for your pledge - the comments you make are right on but you missed one thing - the per sheet price - that is also a common and valid objection. We are trying this on Kickstarter because so many of the interested supporters have insisted on it. The reaction we get from this is very valuable and tells us about the viability, or not, of new large format materials.

Thanks for your support and obviously you know about edge tapers and commercial paper working machinery, I'd welcome your advice on specific aspect of them.

Bob

Bob,

Good luck to you!

BTW - i have no objection to the per sheet cost, though i guess that might have also not been in the calculation.

Your overall expense seem to count an extra 40-50K$ that will not be there when finding is complete (the KS and AMAZON fees).

I've purchased a Polaroid 545 holder. I've pledged. I've mentioned it to a few others. And thus far my expectations have been thoroughly managed. At this point that's all I can do...

Ken

CatLABS said:

Bob, Good luck to you! ... Your overall expense seem to count an extra 40-50K$ that will not be there when finding is complete (the KS and AMAZON fees).

Click to expand...

Not to worry, CatLABS; we've factored the project financing fees (along with the substantial shipping costs associated with fulfillment).

Thank you for sharing your concerns; and above all thank you for supporting New55 FILM with your pledge.

-Sam

project CEO
new55project.com

They've hit the 10% mark...

Ken

It's $400,000 usd.
Projected price of $15 a shot for 4x5 (I originally thought it would be 8x10).

I know times and nostalgia have changed since the fast rushing tide of digital conversion wiped out Polaroid.
My thought (and that is all they are from this armchair economist that predicted Oldsmobile and Mercury needed to go and "Real Estate is disposable" about 10 years before it happened). ... I don't see many people actually stepping up and buying $150 boxes of 10 exposures. I see a bunch of "yes bring it on people" saying just that, but when the stuff hits the shelves, they will be hard pressed to buy this product even at fire sale prices of $60 for 10 a year past "expiration". I used 55, my reason for not using more is how flimsey the negative was, I ended up preferring a "meaty" standard base negative from Iflord and Kodak, That being said, I have been messing with MONOBATH and my large format cameras. Cheers, my opinion, I can buy a lot of HC110 and Adox for $30 or $150... and have a similar experience, because clearing and drying the 55 negative takes time too.

StoneNYC said:

The world hasn't changed much, I'm still trying to figure out how I can send out some of my color to be processed and have it returned without offending someone..

Click to expand...

It is the laws, I understand art... and have processed other people's BW film... but I have to be VERY clear about nudity etc, because I HAVE A LOT TO LOOSE. And I don't think asking for birth certificates of the models is a line anyone really want's to cross, but in the end, I set my limits because I have a nice life, kids, house, etc...

Ken Nadvornick said:

That alone would make a $6 cost worth it to me. I would just be careful not to expose 50 sheets a day.

Ken

Click to expand...

I read last they are projecting $15 a sheet... I thought that would be 8x10" but no it's 4x5"...