The
Impossible Project's new Polaroid-licensed film is
going on sale in the UK this week, and the folks over at 1854 just got a nice little press packet in the mail which included some of the surely sought after film. The black and white only (color's been promised for a later date) film, coupled with a Polaroid camera should obviously lead to some seriously ancient looking snapshots and... surprise, surprise -- it does! Now, there are only a very few test shots (taken with a Polaroid SX-70) included for review here, so it's hard to gauge overall quality of the output, but we have to say the snaps we're seeing look so antiquey that it's actually hard to tell what we're even looking at in the photo -- is it the ghost of John Wayne? Is that Charlotte Bronte or
Lady Gaga hanging tough in the foreground? Still, we have to say we're intrigued with the whole idea of producing photos this sepia-toned and grainy, especially at our next in-house competitive rave off. Hit the source link for more test shots.
posted March 23rd 2010 4:49PM
Love it! I think I'm gonna guy into the the impossible project and experiment a bit. I think I'll get some cool results.
@Brent1700 holy typos batman!
@Brent1700
John Wayne, not Bruce ;)
@Brent1700
E P I C ...
that made me laugh out loud. Love the ambiguity. Cool results indeed. o.O haha
A heaven-sent stuff for ugly people who are shy of being photographed!
I honestly see no point in this. Why not just take a digital picture and 'shop it to look oldish?
@Drago
Because this isn't faked? If what you want is the look of a camera from the 60's, no amount of Photoshop will amount to anything more than a close replica.
By your logic, why do anything authentic? You can just put a BMW body kit on your Ford Pinto frame, or paint "Fender" on your $50 import guitar.
The real deal is called the real deal because, well, it's the real deal.
@Drago
yea. Most of the time, especially if you're doing print work, photoshop is better. But, if you're just having fun, experimenting, and don't feel like spending hours in photoshop, film & polaroid are awesome.
@Brent1700 Don't forget... lensbabies too! :)
@iamjared So let me get this straight, you say that taking a picture today, using a film that will make it look 60 years old is the real deal?
In my point of view, unless you travel back in time, take a picture and let it age for 60 years, there is no way you can call any of this authentic.
@Drago
Actually this film looks worse than the original polaroid B+W or it's just a badly taken pic.
The cool thing about polaroids is that you get it right then and there. And the looks is more of a stylized / nostalgic thing. If you like the look why waste time photoshopping it to hell?
BTW the shooter themselves mentioned how dissapointed they were with the results and it acted more like an expired pack of film.
@Drago
This took a few seconds and a little bit of cash. Your photoshop technique might take a lot longer to get nice looking results.
With the picture method, the chemicals mix non-uniformly, creating their own randomized interesting results. Your photoshop methods would require a great deal of adjustments to get similarly variegated results.
I don't mind the idea of photoshop, but I don't see it as a necessary alternate. Think Sepia print photographs... yeah you can tweak an image, and massage a printer to try to get out a print that's satisfactory, or you could work with film and the print shop to get the sepia print.
Just preference, and options are good. By the way, I understand that this was not the result that the photographer intended.
@Drago
can you read? Pictures not 60 years old, but "new" pictures from a vintage camera "from the 60s"
Its not that bad quality considering they were taken in 1854
Looks about as crisp and clear as I remember Polaroid film looking.
@Hazdaz
Not hardly. Polaroid pictures were nothing to shout about but they were much better than these.
Wow, this is like a flashback from the 70's. Good God, man. My mind is now remembering all the groovy stuff from back then. The knee high socks. Head bands. Firebirds. Afro's. Disco. And land lines.
I'll be honest, I'm unimpressed considering these things cost $3/shot. That being said, whoever took the pictures seems to be lacking in some photographic prowess.
Andre 3000 would have shaken that thing into HD clarity.
i don't remember polaroid film looking *that* bad. i'm guessing bad film or has it been so long i forgot how they looked?
@aphxtwn
Looks to me like the film sucks. I only use color polaroids (what little of them I have left), but they generally look a bit more defined, like this:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/paul-io/4175976799/in/set-72157622855186375/
Still, the guys at the impossible project deserve kudos for having so much heart. I think many people thought the project was going to do its name honor.
Looks like they just found a way to sell a bad batch of film to a bunch of suckers.
@timmy2000 ha. i have to agree.
So, is the pack battery the same as the original? The old polapulse batteries were great fun to experiment with once the film was exhausted... ;^)
@brittonx
Explain...
@WalnutSoap
The Polaroid film packs contained a large flat battery which was capable of putting out a fair bit of current. It was that battery that powers the camera. That way people did not need to buy batteries for the camera.
The battery was called PolaPulse.
Here is some info...
http://www.photobattery.com/P100.pdf
@brittonx
For example:
High Discharge Current: 15 amps
instantaneous, 8.5 amps after 30
sec., 4.5 amps after 60 sec.
yes, that's correct. 15 AMPS!
Umm... I was excited.. But this looks like complete crap. I have a polaroid... though it's color i didn't know the B+W looked this bad
Guys, dont crap your pants. Those pictures shown are mostly manips. Neither correctly exposed nor developed under ideal conditions. Polaroid film is very sensitive in those matters, thats why people like to screw around with it so much. Its just easy to get really trashy pictures.
The PX film is quite potent to produce really stunning and vintage looking pictures. Just check out the gallery on their webpage : http://www.the-impossible-project.com/projects/collection#px100
1. Ghost of John Wayne
2. Lady Gaga
3. ???
4. Profit!
Actually I think 3 involves sale of brain bleach.
Far from worth the 2-3 dollars a sheet. While I do appreciate what they're trying to do, I don't see it selling much once consumers hear about the price point.
Wow... this is pretty lame... This is manufactured artsy right here...
so why not just take a picture with an old 60's camera??
What am I missing
@focalfury
the film
@Drago
Not everyone has a computer let alone Photoshop.
Make it dirt-cheap and this will be the next rage, replacing point-and-shoot cameras :)