Topic: My first EVER Polaroid!

[Nigel]

Actually I suppose that should actually be my first ever Fujaroid, as I was using Fp-100 - but it just doesn't have the same ring!

So, recently from 'the bay' I bought myself what turned out to be a very dirty Polaroid 320. I followed the cleaning and battery conversion. Which all seemed to go OK.

Ever since I got it I've been like an eight year old at Christmas waiting to have a play! Today I persuaded the UK's least confident photographer's wife to pose for my first ever shot. There were two audible clicks from the shutter so I guessed it wasn't going to be the sharpest and .. it isn't. But that's OK, it all seems to work.

I have a couple of questions, first I think I've bought the wrong version of FP-100. (Until I just googled it I didn't realise there are two.) I have the FP-100 Silk. In the scan you can see all stippling on the surface. Is the other version gloss and does that scan better?

Secondly I'm going to a party next week, if I get some of the FP-3000 would I be OK shooting without a flash, if the lighting is typical party?

All I need now is a bit more sun and I'm going to be off with my new favourite toy!  

[gregor]

the standard fp-100c has a glossy surface and scans much cleaner than silk.  Nice shot for your first ever pola. I like the slight blur.  Does the 320 have a tripod mount?  My 250 does and my lower end 450 model doesn't.

I'll have to check that battery conversion link. Here in Seattle I can still get replacement batteries of the same size/voltage for pack film polaroids, but they cost 15 USD for a single battery....

[Diane Peterson]

Nigel...THAT shot  is beautiful;!your wife is gorgeous..
Gregor..I just got that battery for my 100 and 250 polaroid for $7.95....and I am only 6 hours from you...let me know if you want the link...BTW..I paid $2.00 for the 100 polaroid and it looks like it has never been used...

[gregor]

Diane - yes, please send the link.  My local supplier is infamous for selling at 20% above retail price....  In most cases I use freestyle and even with shipping costs I save money.  About the only thing I buy these days from the local supplier is paper which I don't like shipped....

[Nigel]

Gregor - thanks I'll make sure I get the standard film next time. Unfortunately my camera doesn't have a tripod socket, I guess I could see if I could rig something.

Diane - thanks, I think she's beautiful, but then I would wouldn't I!

[Diane Peterson]

Gregor...here you go...   http://www.batterymart.com/  and I think the shipping was less then $2.00 so anyway you look at it, its cheaper....I am also trying to do the work around that Nigel did but not sure if I can figure it out!

[gregor]

on the 3000b question. should be fine if the lighting is average interior lighting, but you'll likely get some movement blur if the lighting is low.  According to "The Polaroid Book" the stops on the 320 model are f/8.8 - f/42. If you have a handheld meter that will help!

[original_ann]

Wonderfully evocative capture!  I didn't even know Fp100 came in a silk! 

[Phil Bebbington]

Nicely done, Nigel. I have some of the silk in the fridge although I have never used it - perhaps  recovering the goop would yield a better scan?

[Ed Wenn]

Nicely done, Nigel. I have some of the silk in the fridge although I have never used it - perhaps  recovering the goop would yield a better scan?

You'd think so, but actually it doesn't really. For a start, the Fujifilm peel apart goop sides are cursed by a pretty strong white chemical residue which the 'Roid equivalents (on the whole) weren't. Secondly, the silk goop sides still show the 'pocking' so visible on the positive.



You can see this more clearly at a higher res: http://www.flickr.com/photos/edwenn/3126807488/lightbox/

I love the Silk finish for the physical print to hold in your hand, but the Gloss works way better if you want to scan.

[Francois]

Nice shot Nigel!

How come it's always the same lucky ones who get the nicest looking models 

[Ed Wenn]

Nigel! I'm very glad to see that you've joined the Land Cam Club (or that you would have joined if the club existed   ). I can't get enough of mine and I LOVE the combo of it + the Fuji peel apart film. Good luck for the future and let me know if you're ever about in London and fancy a bit of instant photo duelling.

First off: the use of "Polaroid".....it's a small point, but on such things does the world turn (at least here at Wenn Mansions). I've decided to use "instant" from now on as a generic term because I'm sick and tired of people trading off the Polaroid name and using it as a shortcut to hipness or whatever. I fully appreciate that Polaroid is as synonymous with instant photography as Hoover is to clean carpets, but the whole TIP marketing overload thing got my goat and when I found out that people on Fickle are referring to the reclaimed negs they get from Fuji instant film as "Polanegs" I decided that enough was enough and I resolved to stick with "Instant" from now on.

I do appreciate that your photo is one part camera (Polaroid) and one part film (Fujifilm), but until we put the ghost of Polaroid behind us and start giving Fujifilm credit for staying in business and selling film that actually bl**dy works, I fear we'll be plagued by the "Polaroid is a state of mind" Hypemeisters forever and a day.

Finally on the batteries issue, I'm not sure why those kits are needed. In all of my 3 Land Cams (340, 420 & 360) I've used a smaller battery of compatible output and just stuck some tinfoil at each end to make the contact. I then wedge the whole thing in with some cardboard from a film box and.....well, it just works. Here are some photos taken of my 360 as she currently looks (N.B. on some of the Land Cams the battery section is on the front, not the back, but it works the same no matter which model I've tried it in).

[Mojave]

I've never even heard of fp100 silk. Ed, that shot is fantastic, even with the white goop. They look like wings. And I love the soft focus on your shot Nigel. Its a beautiful image.

And I got my battery at Battery Mart too, for 7.95 a piece, but I sure wish I'd known about Eds adaptation first. Thats a real money saver there.

[Diane Peterson]

So Ed...I am a bit thick when it comes to this sort of thing...are you saying the aluminum foil is all you added here with the battery? what size is the battery you used..?

[Late Developer]

Nigel - gorgeous photo but having such subject matter immediately to hand clearly has its advantages 

Forgive my ignorance but does Fuji make any film that will work in an SX-70? I've sort of worked out which TIP film I'm going to use when my SX-70 arrives but I just wondered if Fuji (or anyone else) offers any alternatives?

[Ed Wenn]

Forgive my ignorance but does Fuji make any film that will work in an SX-70? I've sort of worked out which TIP film I'm going to use when my SX-70 arrives but I just wondered if Fuji (or anyone else) offers any alternatives?

Not that I know of. TIP make integral film which works with SX-70 and (I think) old Polas which took 600 series film. Fuji don't make any integral film that is compatible with old Polaroid cams. They do however make integral film for their own very lovely Instax cameras.

[Ed Wenn]

So Ed...I am a bit thick when it comes to this sort of thing...are you saying the aluminum foil is all you added here with the battery? what size is the battery you used..?

Diane, I use a Lithium 123 photo battery. Lots of companies make them. I added aluminium/aluminum foil at each end because the 123 is shorter than the original batteries which was required in all of the 3 cameras that I have owned. This being Polaroid, things are never straightforward however and so the original requirement varied according to the model of Land Camera that you had. My current Land Camera of choice is the 360, but I don't bother with the on-board timer and so only use the battery for the auto-exposure functionality; which is why there was a spare battery slot in my photos. To quote the Land List battery FAQ:

"The 100, 101, 102, 220, 225, 230, 240, 250, and 340 use one No. 531 (4.5 volt) alkaline battery.

The 103, 104, 125, 135, 210, 215, 315, 320, 330, 420, 430, 440, M60, and Countdown 70 all use one No. 532 (3 volt) alkaline battery. The 335, 350, 360, 450, M80, and Countdown 90 use two No. 532 batteries, one of which is used for the built-in electronic development timer (and which can be omitted if the development timer feature isn't needed or desired)."

I think I chose the 123 because it's the same voltage as the original No. 532 battery that the 360 model requires. I know nothing about this sort of thing and just took a guess that it would work based on the voltage. The results have been very reliable, so I'm sticking with it.

[Diane Peterson]

Ed, thank you very much for that...it makes things a lot clearer..I ordered the correct battery but hate waiting for things to arrive in the mail so I am going to try your remedy!

[Late Developer]

Thanks Ed. I'll have to research the Instax range. There seems to be 3 or 4 cameras showing up on Google but, if I do gravitate towards one of them, it'd have to be the one that gives me the most options - unless one stood head and shoulders above the others optically.

I'm still looking forward to the SX-70's arrival, though, as I fancied one for years when they were readily available and even moreso now that they're using experimental technology for film. With a bit of luck / hard work, TIP will produce something with a bit of controllable consistency; or am I just being a control freak, as usual....??

[Ed Wenn]

Francois will give you more info on the good/bad/ugly of the Instax range. I have one of the larger size Instax cams which I bought down in Cornwall for £2.50 from a chariddy shop. I think these days they're called "Instax wide" or somesuch. At the time they were the only Instax cameras so they didn't need the extra name.

Mine is great and really fun to use, but for some reason I've not fallen in love with it....maybe because I just don't really 'get' integral on lots of levels anyway (no excitement for some reason). Here are some examples from 2005 (which is probably the last time I used mine).







I will be buying Amy (aged 5) an Instax mini for her birthday next year though and I think she'll really enjoy it.

[Late Developer]

Thanks again, Ed.

Lovely family shots and it's pretty clear that the Instax is light years ahead of the TIP images - assuming that "traditional" image quality is what you're after (with me it usually is - although the unpredictability and fun factor that the SX-70 seems to provide will be a healthy distraction from my usual predisposition to getting the exposure, focus and composition as best I can....)

I'm sure your daughter will love the "Instax Mini" but soon progress to a Sinar or similar........

[Nigel]

First off: the use of "Polaroid".....it's a small point, but on such things does the world turn (at least here at Wenn Mansions). I've decided to use "instant" from now on as a generic term because I'm sick and tired of people trading off the Polaroid name and using it as a shortcut to hipness or whatever. I fully appreciate that Polaroid is as synonymous with instant photography as Hoover is to clean carpets, but the whole TIP marketing overload thing got my goat and when I found out that people on Fickle are referring to the reclaimed negs they get from Fuji instant film as "Polanegs" I decided that enough was enough and I resolved to stick with "Instant" from now on.

I do appreciate that your photo is one part camera (Polaroid) and one part film (Fujifilm), but until we put the ghost of Polaroid behind us and start giving Fujifilm credit for staying in business and selling film that actually bl**dy works, I fear we'll be plagued by the "Polaroid is a state of mind" Hypemeisters forever and a day.

ed - thanks, I can see you've spent some time thinking about this!  
Yes, a London 'Instant' dual would be good, maybe we can get a small instant meet-up together.

Gregor - thanks for the info about the FP-3000, I did wonder about shooting on the 75asa aperture if it was too dark but that's quite a gap between f42 & f8.8 - about 5.5 stops does that sound right?

Anyway it's great fun and for someone without a photo printer it's great to hold actual prints for a change.

[sapata]

Lovely shot Nigel !

My thre Land cameras (now down to 2...) are fitted with the Duracell 9v and never had any problems. The only issue was having to cut a bit of the plastic in order to fit the new battery which is bigger, and of course change the connectors. The battery will be a bit losen inside the compartment but some blu-tack solved this problem.

[Diane Peterson]

Sapata...so what about changing the connectors ..can you show a drawing or something so I can see what you have done?  and which polaroids do you have?

[Nigel]

Diane - the conversion on the Instant Options site is really much simpler than it looks. The battery holder and battery cost me about $5 online, you'll get one from ebay no problem.

You can take the plastic battery holder out by undoing three screws and you can just break of the existing battery clips with a pair of pliers. You can tidy it up with a craft knife if you want. It's explained well if you look here. http://www. blank.com/conversions/104/104.6.php

Then you just cut the existing battery terminals off, the only thing you need is a small soldering iron to solder the wires to the new battery holder. I then cut a small piece of foam to stop the battery holder rattling about. But you could use some blue tack or anything that stops it rattling about. Done!

[Diane Peterson]

Nigel..thank you for that..my issue..my polaroids take the 4.5 volt battery and not the 123A..so that means I need to use one of the 4 AAA holders and cut it down..no problem..but not sure if I can figure out the part where I solder things..but I think I will try..I saw the work around that Sapate did and thought that might work with my particulair polaroids since they both take the 4.5 volt rather than the 3.0 volt..which polaroid do you have?

[Nigel]

Nigel..thank you for that..my issue..my polaroids take the 4.5 volt battery and not the 123A..so that means I need to use one of the 4 AAA holders and cut it down..no problem..but not sure if I can figure out the part where I solder things..but I think I will try..I saw the work around that Sapate did and thought that might work with my particulair polaroids since they both take the 4.5 volt rather than the 3.0 volt..which polaroid do you have?

Sorry Diane I understand the problem now, yes that's a lot more to fit in there. I assume you've seen Mr Instant Options page on that model : http://www. blank.com/conversions/100/100.6.php.

Mine is the 320. Which is easy to convert but it does have the plastic lens, so it's a bit soft around the edges..

Good luck with your conversion! 

[Diane Peterson]

Nigel..thank you for that link! maybe that will solve my problem! I just got a polaroid "reporter" but luckily that only takes two AA batteries!

[Francois]

I'll have to research the Instax range. There seems to be 3 or 4 cameras showing up on Google but, if I do gravitate towards one of them, it'd have to be the one that gives me the most options - unless one stood head and shoulders above the others optically.

Looking at what's available in the Instax range, I think the cameras can be separated into just a few categories.

First, there's the Instax mini series. Smaller cameras, smaller film, cheaper film. I would be worried a bit by how much you can actually enlarge the images when you scan them.

Then, there's the regular Instax series that takes Instax Wide film. This is the one that I got (Instax 100). They have newer models which I think are pretty much all equal. They use zone focusing (2 zones) and give delightfully slightly soft pictures.

There's also the Instax AF which I think if probably superior. I've seen one only once on Tokyo Camera Style. I think they use infrared focusing so you don't have the same problems as with the Polaroid Sonar system.

Last, there's the Instax Macro which, like the name says, is for close-up shots. This the camera used by Araki for his flower shots. It doesn't shoot at infinity... it's a specialized camera.

So, that's pretty much a roundup of what I know about the range...

[Heather]

Mine is great and really fun to use, but for some reason I've not fallen in love with it....maybe because I just don't really 'get' integral on lots of levels anyway (no excitement for some reason).

I don't think it's an integral thing... I don't like my instax either... not because of the film or format because the camera is just so point and shoot crap.

Now I just use it's pathetic body to develop the cuckoo photos, instax film shot in sx-70. Much nicer and I love my sx-70 still despite it being integral film.

[sapata]

Sapata...so what about changing the connectors ..can you show a drawing or something so I can see what you have done?  and which polaroids do you have?

Hi Diane...
I changed the connectors... bought the one to fit the battery and replaced.

Here're  a couple of pics that might show better. The blue tape is where I cut the old connectors and replaced with the new one, (just keep a note which ones were the + and - before cutting) the white thing is the "blu-tack" to hold the battery itself steady.

I have to Land cameras: one is the 350 and the other is the 100 model. I sold the 3rd one but can't remember the model... it was a "Land" as well.

[Miller]

All aboard the instant train...

You can makeshift a tripod mount that is solid with drill, file and araldite...

Hey Ed.... I was one chuffed pops the other day... The lil one made up a list of stuff he wants for Xmas and on the list was 'reel kamrun'... I paused for a second and realised he wanted a 'real camera'... He will inherit my old Instax which I bought and pretty much photo documented his early life with i.e. first walk/crawl... I'm just so chuffed he wants to join in...  

[gregor]

Gregor - thanks for the info about the FP-3000, I did wonder about shooting on the 75asa aperture if it was too dark but that's quite a gap between f42 & f8.8 - about 5.5 stops does that sound right?

5.5 stops looks about right. If you want to bleach & scan the goop side underexposing by 2 stops will yield the best 'neg' and reduce the solarization it often has.

[Diane Peterson]

Sapata...thank you! that is a great help!  What would I do without all of you!:<}
Miller..those are the sweetest pictures!

[Diane Peterson]

with help from all of you I got my Polaroid land Camera 250 to work..this is the first image out of the shute.....

[sapata]

Brilliant stuff Diane! I'm glad you worked out...

[Diane Peterson]

Sapata..thank you!  I appreciate all the help you guys give me more than you know!

[Ed Wenn]

Sapata..thank you!  I appreciate all the help you guys give me more than you know!

Hey Diane, that's what we're here for. Glad it worked out in the end.

Miller!! Love those Instax shots and contgrats on Jnr wanting to join in the fun. Please post his first efforts. As I mentioned, Amy will be getting her Instax next April...although she's not exactly asked for it. I'll start dropping hints in Feb and hope that by April she'll have thought it was her idea all along. That's the plan anyway.

 

Francois: I may have to take a look at the high end and the macro Instax cams. Both sound interesting.

All round, this was great thread. If I ever run out of 123 Batteries I'll use the 9V mod. A truly great idea!

[Lino]

Hey guys, great stuff here. I've been looking for a polaroid land for a while, but its really hard to find one that works around these parts.

Do you guys know if there's a way to see if they are working without wasting film?

I'm talking about automatic land 100, 200, 300 and 400 series and stuff like that. Do they work without film?

Or at least could i use the same film pack to test multiple cameras?

[Francois]

The old Land cameras for peel apart will work as long as there's a battery in them. Just open the back and trigger away. If the shutter works, it should be still surprisingly reliable. No need to waste film simply for testing.

I usually point mine at different light intensities and check if there is some visible variation in the shutter speed.

[sapata]

I second Francois... pointing and firing the camera at different source of light it's the best way of testing.

[Lino]

I usually point mine at different light intensities and check if there is some visible variation in the shutter speed.

Ah! I'll try that. Thanks a bunch Francois and sapata!
It looks like they can be pretty cheap too. Now off to find one that works!

[Diane Peterson]

I will keep my eyes "peeled" for another of the Polaroid land Cameras..like I mentioned ..paid $2.00 for the one I have now..if I come across anything that good again I will let the filmwasters crowd know!

[Nigel]

That's a lovely shot Diane, is that this years snow? If so you've got A LOT already, we're just getting our first sprinkling of the season, which is early for the UK.

[Diane Peterson]

thank you Nigel! that snow fall was day before yesterday..since then we have about 8 more inches..and amazingly cold temperatures...this doesn't usually happen til january or February...hate to think whats still to come!  just trying to get use to using this camera!

[Francois]

Snow! Already!
Here, it's still yellow grass all over...

[sapata]

I found this real bargain...
http://shop.the-impossible-project.com/shop/cameras/type100/ca_250_kit

[Diane Peterson]

had to pick myself up off the floor after seeing those prices!

[Phil Bebbington]

Cough, splutter

[Francois]

Well... I'm speechless (jaw dropped)