Polaroid Originals announced today they will no longer manufacture Spectra film.
https://magazine.polaroidoriginals.com/spectra_announcement/
https://magazine.polaroidoriginals.com/spectra_announcement/
Spectra is Dead
-
A
- Thread starter bvy
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
Sold SOLD!
- Started by B.S.Kumar
-
For Sale Very nice 300mm f/6.3 Komura Commercial in Copal 3S
- Started by Steve Goldstein
-
For Sale Very clean 90mm f/5.6 Super-Angulon in Copal 0
- Started by Steve Goldstein
-
Want to Buy Folding Pocket Kodak Plate Holders, Cut Film Sheaths, and Ground Glass
- Started by trichrome
Forum statistics
Read with a heavy heart.
Thanks for posting this notice.
Thanks for posting this notice.
Honestly, such a terrible response on their part. We can't manufacture Spectra because cameras are old. Well, that's up to the owner to check if their camera works? There's clearly something here, either it wasn't selling well or there were production problems. But to blame cameras is silly IMO.
I don't know enough about Polaroid and the Spectra film but I suspect that the popularity of the Fuji Instax could have a lot to do with it.
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2008
- Messages
- 2,816
- Format
- 35mm
I have an acquintance who has recorded several exotic holiday trips using just a hand-written note-book with Instax prints stuck in. And, to be honest, I sometimes think that they have a better and easier record than I get carrying around my two SLR's with lenses and gadgets and even a tripod sometimes (not to mention the resulting rolls of negatives that never get sorted or printed.....).
I have an SX-70, but I mostly use Instax. It is superior film - in quality and price. I worry whether Polaroid Originals can last at their prices and low quality. I think the only thing that drives their sales is nostalgia. That is the only reason I buy it. But how long can that last?
People say they love the "imperfect" look of the Polaroids, but that gets old.
In a perfect world, Fuji and Polaroid would get together to license the Fuji technology for Polaroid cameras.
People say they love the "imperfect" look of the Polaroids, but that gets old.
In a perfect world, Fuji and Polaroid would get together to license the Fuji technology for Polaroid cameras.
Cameras are getting old? Hopefully, regular films manufacturers think differently.
Never wondered why the Polaroid cameras have a mirror and Fuji ones do not?
The chemistry is by far different.
The chemistry is what I am talking about licensing. The packs are different, too. But if Polaroid could take the Fuji film and chemistry and put it in their packs, I can't think of anything that wouldn't work - except maybe there are different tensions on the bars that spread the chemicals.
Light is light.
Light is light.
I was not speaking of chemicals, but chemistry, which even is different.
The whole system of the integral pack is different. By no means one could just convert the Instax system to the Polaroid system by only adapting to the different formats.
This all had a reason, namely for Kodak to evade Polaroid patents. And to yield more simple cameras.
(It did not quite work out that way for Kodak, but this is another story.)
The whole system of the integral pack is different. By no means one could just convert the Instax system to the Polaroid system by only adapting to the different formats.
This all had a reason, namely for Kodak to evade Polaroid patents. And to yield more simple cameras.
(It did not quite work out that way for Kodak, but this is another story.)
Light is light, but you cannot use blue for red! The same is true for chemicals. You cannot use the two chemistries interchangeably!
PE
I often wonder why Fuji didn't buy the Polaroid name (I know it's a little more complicated) back in 2008.
I get customers (who own an Instax mini 9 camera) ask for a Polaroid film !!!
The Polaroid name is synonymous with instant photos and instant print film. It has become a generic term for an instant photo.
Maybe by 2059, Instax will have achieved the same brand-product recognition.
I get customers (who own an Instax mini 9 camera) ask for a Polaroid film !!!
The Polaroid name is synonymous with instant photos and instant print film. It has become a generic term for an instant photo.
Maybe by 2059, Instax will have achieved the same brand-product recognition.
I did at check a the internet some years ago and the name from the photographic world most prevalent (especially at young people) in the most diverse circumstances was Polaroid.
But who knows the future? The brand Agfa for instance has fallen at broad public to zero within 15years.
But who knows the future? The brand Agfa for instance has fallen at broad public to zero within 15years.
Sad to see spectra film go as I a perfect specimen camera
I use the Polaroid film and love it for what it is
I use the Polaroid film and love it for what it is
I must not be making myself clear. All of the chemistry is in the film packs. Why would you need to swap any chemistry out? The actual cameras do not change any of the chemistry, they just transmit light to the film. They are just machines. Why could fuji not make their film to fit a Polaroid camera? Are you saying they put colored filters behind their lenses?
One works with a reversed (mirror) image and the other does not. The entire structure of the film pack would have to be redesigned. One example is that the goo used for one is white with a color changing material on the front of the image and through which the final image is viewed and the other is a black goo that goes on the back of the image.
They were designed that way to avoid patent issues, but in the final run the courts did not agree.
PE
They were designed that way to avoid patent issues, but in the final run the courts did not agree.
PE
Ah, so they reverse the image. Maybe you know, is it very difficult for one of these companies to engineer the film the other way around, if they agreed on patent sharing? It seems to me the most difficult part is developing the actual film and chemistry, not the final package. In other words, is it matter of simply changing which side the emulsion is on?
I don't know if it would be worth it for them. Fuji deals in much higher volumes than Polaroid Originals, and it seems that they are not very interested in small-scale production. But I think a lot of people would buy new Polaroid Cameras if it had that Fujifilm magic, which could be a big boon for them in the long run.
You still do not understand. You are talking to guys involved in making such materials. This is not the place to give a lecture in the structure of these materials It is not a matter of just coating the layers the other way round. The systems are completely different.
Do you think I am lecturing you? I am asking for information. This is your opportunity to educate me. There is no need to berate me.
If you do not wish to help me understand, just skip this thread. My feelings won't be hurt, either way. I am genuinely curious, and I know there are people here who are professionals in this arena - that is the exact reason I ask the questions here. Usually people are kind enough to oblige.
Ariston, it is not possible to make one work as if it were the other. It would take such a huge re-design that would be dubious, it would not be worth the effort.
To give you a simple answer, with chemicals it is possible to add a to b and get c but if you add b to a you get d. To be specific, if you add Concentrated Sulfuric Acid to water you get dilute acid. If you add water to Concentrated Sulfuric Acid, you get an explosion! It is possible to engineer the latter, but is very dangerous and takes a lot of work.
It this present case, it is similar to removing an appendix by way of the mouth!
PE
To give you a simple answer, with chemicals it is possible to add a to b and get c but if you add b to a you get d. To be specific, if you add Concentrated Sulfuric Acid to water you get dilute acid. If you add water to Concentrated Sulfuric Acid, you get an explosion! It is possible to engineer the latter, but is very dangerous and takes a lot of work.
It this present case, it is similar to removing an appendix by way of the mouth!
PE
I said I am not doing a lecture on this, as this thread is not the place for this complicated matter. I rather refrain from "this opportunity" as you put it, and in the midst of night prefer to go to bed.
Thank you PE. Indulge me one last question - if one were okay with the mirrored image, does the film function about the same?... I mean, as far as exposing the film, then spreading the chemicals across it with tensioned rollers. It always seemed to me that these cameras worked about the same in that regard.Ariston, it is not possible to make one work as if it were the other. It would take such a huge re-design that would be dubious, it would not be worth the effort.
To give you a simple answer, with chemicals it is possible to add a to b and get c but if you add b to a you get d. To be specific, if you add Concentrated Sulfuric Acid to water you get dilute acid. If you add water to Concentrated Sulfuric Acid, you get an explosion! It is possible to engineer the latter, but is very dangerous and takes a lot of work.
It this present case, it is similar to removing an appendix by way of the mouth!
PE
I never thought about them being exposed on different sides, so I have learned something.
It would not function exactly the same due to thickness problems, pod fill, tensioning and other things like that. This might be worked out, but the Fuji/Kodak pack is thicker than the Polaroid pack, and also is a different shape and size of course.
PE
PE
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |