Topic: F*cking 4x5 di$aster

[hookstrapped]

To recap, I bought a Fuji Instax Wide and almost a dozen 4x5 film holders in order to expose the film in my 4x5, which I'd then run through the Instax wide camera rollers.

I don't understand what happened, but despite technical problems in getting the film to run through the camera after I exposed it and much sweating in the changing bag, I finally got it to work and still the film basically looked totally unexposed. And yes, I'm sure the film was facing out properly when taped to the film holder. Tried different exposures, really going up to really long ones and nothing.  Then just to see, took a film and exposed it to daylight and ran that through and that came out how you'd expect, totally white. So, in my own way, I re-created Fuji black & white instant film -- some pics are black and some are white.

(And since I had it set up, I tried that old Polaroid 55. Just the bottom corners developed in artsy parabolas of molasses like spread developer. That first pic I took of Satish is apparently the only good one in the $200 box of 20.)

Then I discovered what I should've fucking did to begin with.  Fuji FP100C pack film and a Fuji PA-145 pack film holders for a 4x5

http://www.adorama.com/fjfp100cn.html

http://www.ebay.com/itm/161867922323?_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT

Which I have to wait til next pay to buy because I spent my money on a craptastic Instax camera and 11 4x5 film holder (they're actually in great shape -- will use some day).

The only saving grace is I didn't buy a $100 ND filter for the 800 speed Instax film, and that the flowers I bought this morning to shoot are quite lovely (wish I had pics to show).

[Chalky]

Ouch , I know your pain in expensive Polaroid 4x5 not working.

Look out for the Polaroid 405 back too, same thing as fuji 145.

[Francois]

That's got to hurt...
The instax exposes the film through the back of the print (the black side)...
If you want a source of good low priced ND filters, eBay is the place. I got one that is definitely made in China and I'm pretty happy with it considering how much it costs. For what it's worth, I don't think expensive filters are that much better than cheap ones. Sure they are better built but are they 8x better? I have my doubts.

[hookstrapped]

That's got to hurt...
The instax exposes the film through the back of the print (the black side)...

That would explain it!  When I was loading the 4x5 holders from the cartridge, I would feel the surface of the film and it seemed the surfaces were reversed from what I expected.  I should have stopped right there and did some research instead of simply flipping them over

But... the camera spits it out with the black side facing away from the lens.  I'm confused

[Jack Johnson]

So, in my own way, I re-created Fuji black & white instant film -- some pics are black and some are white.

I think that's black or white film. Black and white film is different. Gotta read the label.

I use Instax Mini in my 2x3 holders. It's a tight squeeze, and I don't have rollers that work very well, but it works and I like handholding using ISO 800. I learned the process on YouTube:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2fxkUpnMfGk

[Ed Wenn]

Oh dear, sounds like you had a time of it! Bummer.

I have quite a few sheets of 5x4 instant sheet film lying in a drawer not 1 metre away from me. I've been 'meaning to' shoot them for about 5 years now, but haven't been able to get past the whole "when these are gone, there won't be any more!!" mind set....added to which I've just not been doing a lot of photographering recently anyway. I really need to get my LF camera out and take some photos. I do however, have a version of every instant film back that I need for all of my eligible cameras....it's a god place to be 

[Francois]

That's got to hurt...
The instax exposes the film through the back of the print (the black side)...

That would explain it!  When I was loading the 4x5 holders from the cartridge, I would feel the surface of the film and it seemed the surfaces were reversed from what I expected.  I should have stopped right there and did some research instead of simply flipping them over

But... the camera spits it out with the black side facing away from the lens.  I'm confused

The black side goes towards the subject.

[jojonas~]

That's got to hurt...
The instax exposes the film through the back of the print (the black side)...

That would explain it!  When I was loading the 4x5 holders from the cartridge, I would feel the surface of the film and it seemed the surfaces were reversed from what I expected.  I should have stopped right there and did some research instead of simply flipping them over

But... the camera spits it out with the black side facing away from the lens.  I'm confused

The black side goes towards the subject.

wasn't exposing through the "back" to avoid patent infringement with polaroid? (the mistake kodak made)

[Francois]

Possibly. Though I think the Kodak film was a back exposure thing too.
The thing is it makes the engineering a lot simpler since you can use a black reagent that does double duty and not have to worry about finding a way to let the dyes go through the opacifying layer.

[JoeV]

Backside exposure also implies that, unlike the Polaroid SX70 and 600 cameras, the Fujifilm's doesn't require a front-surfaced mirror to bounce the lens image down to the front of the print, reducing cost and complexity.

If I understand it correctly, when the Instax print is ejected the chemical pod spreads a black opaque layer on the side of the print facing the lens, to prevent fogging while it develops (which then becomes the backside of the print).

~Joe

[Francois]

Exactly.
And to get proof of that, you just need to cut open the pod on a used print... Black gunk all over your fingers guaranteed.

[Indofunk]

Well this has been a very informative thread re: how Fuji film works as opposed to Polaroid. That explains why SX70s are huge SLRs and the Fuji thing is a little box camera.

[jharr]

Informative or not....

Suggesting opening a developer pod on instant film is too nerdly to not draw a flower foul.

[Francois]

That's only because you haven't seen all I did to that test print