The Impossible Project: 22 March 2010

[photomem]

Has anyone actually received their film? I ordered mine on Thursday, paid their 11.00 in shipping. For that, it should have been delivered a few minutes later by ninja.

 

[guyjr]

I read on their Flickr group that some folks who ordered on the 25th received notifications yesterday that their orders shipped (this is for U.S. orders only). Apparently the warehouse in MA didn't actually receive the film until Monday, and they've been frantically trying to fill all the orders.

 

[Brian Legge]

I ordered film the day after their announcement. I received it on Monday.

 

[Ektagraphic]

I recieved the film. Be prepared to waste a few at first making sure that you know how to use it. If you don't follow the instuctions on their website your photos won't come out. The film is actually not very easy to use right away. I was not happy with the fact that the images were not easy to make like Polaroid so I gave Impossible a call and they were awesome. I talked with a woman for about a half hour. She basically explained to me that this film that is currently listed on their website as "First Flush" is really a first run at their first sucessful product. While it is not easy to work with, she explained that they have already improved upon it and the next batch to come along with the 600 film should be much better than this. So please, if you don't get the perfect prints this time, don't give up on the film and don't call them and blast them. They seem to be working really hard to please us and they are still perfecting their product to make it the best it can be. With that aside, I have taken some very lovely shots with it so far! It is very unpredictable and I really like it! I will try to post some scans soon.

 

[Ektagraphic]

Here are some of the shots I took today.

 

[photomem]

Honestly, I ordered it to make sure the sx-70 I have is fully functional after I went through it. I am quite happy with my Polaroid folders.

 

[Ektagraphic]

In my experience, unless my SX-70 is not working right, I had to turn the dial all the way to the dark side as if I wanted to underexpose the print....Impossible reccomends the standard exposure setting of the middle.

 

[nickandre]

In my experience, unless my SX-70 is not working right, I had to turn the dial all the way to the dark side as if I wanted to underexpose the print....Impossible reccomends the standard exposure setting of the middle.

This has been the trend.

 

[Ektagraphic]

Then it is kind of puzzling that their website says to make sure that it is perfectly in the middle......I think the one complaint that I have about this film is that you cannot watch it develop totally like you could with the Polaroid....

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

Growing pains to be expected, I would think. This had to be an amazingly difficult undertaking. Hats off to both Impossible and Ilford (whose contributions have been muted, but no less critical and impressive it appears) for not listening to the "nattering nabobs of negativity."

A little patience by the market will be required for final success, I imagine...

Ken

 

[clayne]

Check out the prices of SX-70s on eBay for a laugh.

 

[Ektagraphic]

I was going to buy a couple of SX-70s back in November just to have them before the price jumped....It is still not that bad.....

 

[Akki14]

Then it is kind of puzzling that their website says to make sure that it is perfectly in the middle......I think the one complaint that I have about this film is that you cannot watch it develop totally like you could with the Polaroid....

All SX-70s come with an ND filter over the electronic eye. It's just held on by a clip-on silver plastic circle. Pop it off, take the filter out, put the ring back on, keep the ND filter safe somewhere just in case you ever need it.

It'll work a hell of a lot better then. Honestly.

 

[Ektagraphic]

Why is it put there in the first place?.....Poalroid did not seem like a dumb company back when Polaroid was really Polaroid not just a name slapped on cheap Chinese electronics that are low quality....

 

[Moopheus]

Check out the prices of SX-70s on eBay for a laugh.

Well, it's hardly surprising there might be more demand for the cameras if people can actually use them. This means that people are interested enough in the new product to buy the camera and try it; this is a good thing.

 

[kraker]

Btw, I actually attended the event, it was a lot of fun.

Was the event invitation-only? Beforehand, I did see that it would take place in NYC, and I knew I would be visiting NYC in the week of the 22nd. I had really expected that a location for the event would be revealed prior to the event, but I didn't see anything . Not for the general public??? Or did I miss something?

Such a shame. Would have been fun to be there.

(Where was the event held?)

 

[Akki14]

Why is it put there in the first place?.....Poalroid did not seem like a dumb company back when Polaroid was really Polaroid not just a name slapped on cheap Chinese electronics that are low quality....

Probably to compensate and get the electronic eye to meter correctly for the original sx-70 film which was around ISO100. I still maintain that PX 100 is definitely not anywhere near as slow as ISO100 from my tests.

 

[arealitystudios]

I just picked up my first two packs this morning from the post office. Of course its raining today and terribly dark outside so I won't be able to shoot with it right away. major bummer.

Not to be overly critical but I can't help but wonder a little if the film could be a bit cheaper if they didn't spend so much money on the fancy packaging. The raised lettering on the outside box for example is expensive to print.

Just a thought, and I'm certainly no packaging expert. As it stands I don't think the cost is completely unreasonable. SX-70 film was always on the expensive side.

 

[Ektagraphic]

Another tip* Keep in mind that part of the development is triggered by light. Right when the photo comes out of the camera you must protect it from light but after between 60-90 seconds ( I find 75 is good) you must flip over the photo to allow light to get to it so it can finish its process. If you leave the print out of the light for more than 90 it will come out overexposed.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Another tip* Keep in mind that part of the development is triggered by light. Right when the photo comes out of the camera you must protect it from light but after between 60-90 seconds ( I find 75 is good) you must flip over the photo to allow light to get to it so it can finish its process. If you leave the print out of the light for more than 90 it will come out overexposed.

This is, IMHO, bizarre and was not needed for any previous Polaroid product.

PE

 

[Ektagraphic]

According to their literature it says that the one of the processes is started by reaction with light.....And from taking some test shots it certainly seems true.....

 

[sperera]

i just bought one for $4

Check out the prices of SX-70s on eBay for a laugh.

 

[Photo Engineer]

According to their literature it says that the one of the processes is started by reaction with light.....And from taking some test shots it certainly seems true.....

Both Kodak PR-10 and all Polaroid processes were heavily protected from light.

Polaroid used carbon black in the coating and dyes in the goo and Kodak used carbon black in the coating and the goo. Edge rails were present to prevent light piping into the coating from the separators.

So, no light was needed after the exposure and was excluded. IDK what these guys are doing.

PE

 

[photomem]

I think the light is needed because of the opaque layer on the top of the film. Supposedly, it is completely blue opaque when the shot is ejected, then after development, it fades when exposed to light.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Polaroids SX-70 was blue-green when ejected and gradually turned white as the image appeared. The blue-green was a mixture of indicator dyes in the goo which turned colorless when neutralized by the shut down chemistry.

PE