Author Topic: Impossible Project first instant camera (Read 3516 times)

clagom · « **on:** April 11, 2016, 05:53:13 PM »

I think it looks cool, and I like the fact that can be all manual (via the mobile app, but still...):
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-04-11/the-impossible-project-debuts-its-i-1-camera

I will probably get one since the shutter of my Spectra decided to stop working

I think they nailed it, both design and functionality...

Adam Doe · « **Reply #1 on:** April 11, 2016, 07:24:53 PM »

From the front view I almost expect it to shriek "Exterminate!"

jharr · « **Reply #2 on:** April 11, 2016, 07:41:28 PM »

"At $299, the I-1 is comparable price-wise to a good quality vintage Polaroid camera"

What!??

Late Developer · « **Reply #3 on:** April 11, 2016, 08:07:05 PM »

It has all the charisma of a wheelie bin or, maybe, a shopping trolley, IMO.

At that price, it will stay on the shelf. I might get an(other) SX-70 but I really wouldn't want to be seen out in public with one of these.

Kai-san · « **Reply #4 on:** April 11, 2016, 08:53:22 PM »

Never mind the price and the looks, the fact that you have to use an app to get manual control sounds like an insult to me. No way!

Indofunk · « **Reply #5 on:** April 11, 2016, 09:44:32 PM »

Not to climb on board the hate train, but there's no way I'd consider that camera ... horrible looks, no manual control (I'm not on iOS), and not to mention the film is still expensive as hell!

I wouldn't mind buying a camera from IP if they fix those issues

Francois · « **Reply #6 on:** April 11, 2016, 10:13:10 PM »

For me, it's not the looks that detracts but the fact that they seem to have forgotten the legendary robustness and ingenuity in the originals.
That pop-up viewfinder for me is what kills it. I see it as fragile and prone to flare since there are lenses in it.
As for the rest, I think they simplified the mechanics a lot.
LED ringflash... maybe if it's bright enough but watch out for redeye (unless it stays on for a long time).

For some reason, from the front it reminds me of a Dalek... or some other sci-fi robot.

Kai-san · « **Reply #7 on:** April 11, 2016, 10:16:52 PM »

Quote from: Indofunk on April 11, 2016, 09:44:32 PM

Not to climb on board the hate train, but there's no way I'd consider that camera ... horrible looks, no manual control (I'm not on iOS), and not to mention the film is still expensive as hell! I wouldn't mind buying a camera from IP if they fix those issues

The price of the film is dependent on the production output so if you want cheaper film you have to buy more film.

I'm considering buying second hand one of those silly instant labs and cannibalize it to get hold of the FPU. Then I can build my own camera or use an M-adapter and slap it on the back of my Polaroid 600 SE.

Indofunk · « **Reply #8 on:** April 11, 2016, 10:28:52 PM »

Quote from: Kai-san on April 11, 2016, 10:16:52 PM

The price of the film is dependent on the production output so if you want cheaper film you have to buy more film.
I'm considering buying second hand one of those silly instant labs and cannibalize it to get hold of the FPU. Then I can build my own camera or use an M-adapter and slap it on the back of my Polaroid 600 SE.

Spend more to save more, makes sense

What's a FPU?

jharr · « **Reply #9 on:** April 11, 2016, 11:09:56 PM »

Film Processing Unit
or
Floating Point Unit
or
Fresno Pacific University
or
Fayetteville Public Utilities

not sure which one Kai was referring to.

Indofunk · « **Reply #10 on:** April 11, 2016, 11:20:53 PM »

So FPU in this case means "the thing that makes a Polaroid camera go 'chick-whirrrrrrr!'"

MJL · « **Reply #11 on:** April 12, 2016, 12:36:14 AM »

Is this a prank from Lomography? It has all the hallmarks of a Lomo camera - the toy look, the old/new hybrid design and a silly price.

clagom · « **Reply #12 on:** April 12, 2016, 10:16:43 AM »

To be honest this camera got too much hate

not only here. I think at least it's great that they exist and make a new film instant camera in 2016, while other companies stop the production. I know you know, but they saved a format that would not exist at all. Until today if you wanted to shoot Polaroid or Impossible film you had to buy an old camera, cool, but old. I think it's important if someone keeps making new cameras. They sell the 5% of what Fujifilm sells with the Instax brand, but I do see Impossible cares more about a certain type of users. We don't even have a BW film from Fuji...

Kai-san · « **Reply #13 on:** April 12, 2016, 10:58:12 AM »

Quote from: Indofunk on April 11, 2016, 11:20:53 PM

So FPU in this case means "the thing that makes a Polaroid camera go 'chick-whirrrrrrr!'"

That's spot on Satish. You put the film into it and when you push a button, in this case the shutter release, it squeezes the exposed film out between two steel rollers that spreads the developer paste over the surface of the film.
I have been supporting Impossible almost from day one and I have had a lot of fun with their films along the way. Today I must say I'm very pleased with their product and it would be a sad day if I could no longer buy these films. This camera has been in the pipeline for years and I guess my expextations has been to high and that the target for this product is somebody totally different from an old geezer like me. Despite this dissapointment I will continue to support Impossible and buy the products that I find relevant for my use.

Late Developer · « **Reply #14 on:** April 12, 2016, 12:50:06 PM »

Quote from: clagom on April 12, 2016, 10:16:43 AM

To be honest this camera got too much hate not only here. I think at least it's great that they exist and make a new film instant camera in 2016, while other companies stop the production. I know you know, but they saved a format that would not exist at all. Until today if you wanted to shoot Polaroid or Impossible film you had to buy an old camera, cool, but old. I think it's important if someone keeps making new cameras. They sell the 5% of what Fujifilm sells with the Instax brand, but I do see Impossible cares more about a certain type of users. We don't even have a BW film from Fuji...

Possibly over-criticised and I agree that it's good that someone is making "new" cameras. However, if you're going to make a new camera, make it look like something people would feel happy owning and using. Right or wrong, the comments on stylistic elements I've seen here and elsewhere seem consistent in that it not regarded as the prettiest.

Francois · « **Reply #15 on:** April 12, 2016, 02:07:17 PM »

Well, then you think About it, it does have the angular style that is somewhat reminiscent of the 80's
It does remind me of the later models of the pentacon 6

jharr · « **Reply #16 on:** April 12, 2016, 04:09:11 PM »

I have to say that I am just utterly confused by the pictures of it. The third picture on the Bloomberg site. What is it?? It says "Push". Is that the shutter?? On the Impossible site, the led lights are on, the user is holding it waist level and has his hand on some sort of dial, and the picture is ejected. What the heck is he doing? I don't mean to be unimaginitive, but I just can't get my head around it. If you look close, there also seems to be a gear of some sort in the lens. Are these just stylized photos representing the camera? How am I supposed to know if I want the thing if I can't intuit anything about how it works from the information they are releasing? Oh, and I am going to be generous and assume that they are going to release an equivalent Android app and possibly one for Windows phones, but honestly, I'm a film photographer because I appreciate the analog process. I like turning dials and hearing the 'click-click-click'. Now I have to have my phone in one hand and the camera in the other? I don't know, maybe I should applaud their effort to bring instant photography into the 21st century, but I think this might be a bit of a miss for their target audience.

Adam Doe · « **Reply #17 on:** April 12, 2016, 07:18:30 PM »

Quote from: jharr on April 12, 2016, 04:09:11 PM

...I'm a film photographer because I appreciate the analog process. I like turning dials and hearing the 'click-click-click'. Now I have to have my phone in one hand and the camera in the other? I

Yes, in order to set the device you will need another device. Strikes me, as well, as ridiculous.

Aksarben · « **Reply #18 on:** April 14, 2016, 01:07:16 AM »

I have a Polaroid Spectra and 2 Minolta Instant Pro cameras. All work as they should. Bought the one for 12.50 and that included the shipping. Works great! The top bid was $12.50 (me) and was free shipping. It had an old Polaroid film pack in it but wouldn't eject. Film was actually stuck to the magazine. So when he said " it turns on, flash goes off and whirs but nothing happens" probably spooked some lookers. So I am pretty sure I won't be buying a camera just because Impossible Project made it, for that money.

Interesting that they did not get some of the formulas that really worked well for color, but mostly, contrast right. Kodak was having Fujifilm make their film for them toward the end, and, if memory serves me from what I've read, Fujifilm was also making pack film for Polaroid toward the end of Polaroid, and continued on after Polaroid folded. What saved Fujifilm? Polaroid entered into an agreement not to sue them for their instant cameras and film if they exchanged info on their magnetic tape research, which they had and Polaroid was very interested in it. But, this is getting off topic of the camera.

It is an odd looking affair, and if it can't deliver crisp sharp photos, like some the Polaroid 180 or Fujifilm Fotorama FP-1 Professional cameras, then I don't think it will be a great success, especially at some $3.37 cost per picture of the instant film.

jojonas~ · « **Reply #19 on:** May 09, 2016, 01:40:41 PM »

anyone planning to feel one up at any of the coming impossible events around the world?
https://www.facebook.com/ImpossibleGlobal/events

KevinAllan · « **Reply #20 on:** May 09, 2016, 05:34:35 PM »

I know this may be un-FilmWaster-ish but I've never really seen the attraction of instant film (at least not in the digital era) and this certainly won't make me change my mind. Expensive camera, expensive film, very little control, and tiny prints - what exactly is the point ?

Francois · « **Reply #21 on:** May 09, 2016, 09:17:58 PM »

The impossible to duplicate rendering of those tiny prints (especially when enlarged)

Ed Wenn · « **Reply #22 on:** May 10, 2016, 01:08:41 AM »

KevinAllan: The attractions of instant film to me are myriad and wonderful and go way beyond the fact that I get a print pretty quickly after pressing the shutter. Comparing instant photography to digital in terms of the speed at which you arrive at your end product is to miss pretty much the whole point of why I love instant film and I would never compare instant to digital in that way; in fact I had to read your post a couple of times to work out what you were driving at.

Can I use crazy, old fashioned, clunky cameras with instant film? Yes?
Does my choice of setup (camera+film+lens) force me to think about what I'm shooting - and why I'm shooting - instead of allowing me to press the Go button and rack up an almost limitless snaps of the moment to sort through and select later? Yes.
Can I get creative with instant film and experiment with different dev/print/deconstruct processes? Yes
Can I use expired film and not know what type of results I'm going to get until I peel apart that first shot from the roll? Yes.

All of the above are great reasons to use instant film, but the other enduring attraction for me is that as a crazily busy father of 2 young kids, with a job and too many hobbies for my own sanity, I can maintain some sort of involvement with creative photography without needing to shoot a whole roll before I see the results (could take me a year), or take a day off work to process my back log of exposed 35mm and MF film (happens once every 2 years if I'm lucky), or spend a lot of money sending film off to a lab. I can't tell you how much I love instant peel apart film; how excited I am by it and how inspired I feel when I use it.

Having said all of that, I also love other 'normal' film and I wouldn't really differentiate between the two in the way that you seem to. This new Lomo camera may or may not be pointless, but what has that got to do with instant film as a whole? And how has me using (for instance) some 5x4 instant sheet film in an old Graflex (or a pinhole camera) with a Polaroid back been made any less creative, fun or valid by the arrival of the digital era?

Jack Johnson · « **Reply #23 on:** May 10, 2016, 05:53:06 AM »

Go get 'em, Ed!

jojonas~ · « **Reply #24 on:** May 10, 2016, 06:29:52 AM »

Amen, Ed. Well said. Nice to see you come in and spark up with that passion of yours

Lee Rust · « **Reply #25 on:** May 10, 2016, 02:05:34 PM »

No doubt a great deal of consideration went into the design and manufacture of this camera, so we must assume that Impossible is trying to engage a very particular type of potential buyer. Perhaps it is not people like us!

The smartphone connection is essential for the newest generation of digital picture-takers because most of their daily activities are enabled or modulated by that core device. The instant print is appreciated because it can be shared momentarily with physical companions then instantly copied with the phone and uploaded to the social network.

If Impossible is to have a long term business model, the old Polaroid cameras must eventually be left behind. The Lab was the first step, this is the second, and eventually there will be others. It's very clear that Impossible wants to get out of the battery business as soon as they can, hence the price reduction on the new film package.

lharby · « **Reply #26 on:** May 10, 2016, 03:28:50 PM »

I actually really like the design of this camera.

I think they obviously didn't want to simply launch a rebadged Polatronic 1000, it kind of looks like it is a bit from the past and a bit from the future. Also like a hybrid. Like one of the Ripley/Alien babies.

I think Impossible have done a really good job on their branding. They poached the Polaroid designer, but great job. Something Fuji seem to be pretty clueless about. https://uk.impossible-project.com/collections/film

I also think they are trying to think about appeasing older and younger audiences. It has all the features of a bog standard SX70, but if you wish to plug your phone into it, you can do can access some more whistles and bells. I guess they could have added a copal lens with 8 apertures and a shutter with 20 different speeds, but maybe that would bump the price up, and/or maybe that is a future project.

jojonas~ · « **Reply #27 on:** May 10, 2016, 09:57:34 PM »

Anyone heard of revolver focusing? No? Well I just made it up so you're excused

I saw on the tip spec page for the i-1 that these seems to be a cogged wheel with lenses behind the front lens. So it's a bit like early af cameras with about half a dozen distances to focus on it seems.
Makes for a compact design, that's for sure

jharr · « **Reply #28 on:** May 11, 2016, 04:42:21 AM »

Little Bill: You just shot an unarmed man!
Will Munny: Well, he should've armed himself.