Happy New Year Mr. Instant-to clarify I had absoLUTELY no qualms with having this in our living room....again.....I just needed to know how camera ready to make the apartment 🤣
Happy new year Ben and thank you for continuing this amazing journey with us viewers into 2023. Fun fact I have a Minolta SLR XD11 that was also co-developed with Leica. Fabulous camera. When those two companies came together some amazing cameras came to life. Anyways. My question to you is for those of us thinking of making the plunge into Mamiya cameras with the integral film Lomo adapter, any tips on looking or buying from a good source? Their quite expensive but worth it if a nice piece can be found. What were you looking for when you bought yours? Thanks
Hey Franc, great to see you and happy new year! I don't think I've ever held a XD11, looks like a beauty. Per your Mamiya question, I have personally used Aaron Smith's backs the most (aaron7399 on eBay). There are also other sellers on eBay making comparable backs for Instax Square specifically, but Aaron offers a wider range of format options. The main thing to consider I think is the darkslide of it all - Aaron's backs do not have a darkslide, so the back has to remain mounted through the entire pack (or, lost a shot by removing it mid-pack). He does this to maintain quality control, as building darkslide slots into 3D printed material is a classic recipe for inevitable light leaks. I trust Aaron's work and I've never had a leak from one of his backs!
Ah, the Leica CL (film) camera... I've owned and loved using the CL three times in the past 40 some years. Its size and shape, and the excellent 40 and 90 mm lenses made for it, made it a near-perfect travel camera for 35mm use. But I always traded it, in the end, for an M because the M just fits my hands better and has a better viewfinder. :) I sold my last CL a decade or more back and replaced it almost immediately with an M4-2 body which I continue to use today. Everyone harps on the price of Leica cameras and lenses to the point of it being annoying. The bottom line is that they're expensive and it's not a big deal. I only think about the cost when I'm buying. Once I have one in my hands, I find that price tag angst disappears and what I have left is a really good camera and lens: simple, functional, and excellent quality. Something you can really use for the remainder of your life if you keep the "gotta have a new thing" meme at bay. I was interested in your thought about wanting a fast B&W integral Polaroid film. The problem of camera calibration for it is a big thing since the SX-70 idea was to automate everything that should be automated as much as possible. A solution is provided by the MiNT Camera SX-70 derivatives (SLR670m, SLR670s, and SLR670x) that allow manual exposure control, at the expense of no longer having an adjustable aperture setting (always f/8 in manual exposure mode). This works well ... for instance with the m and x cameras, I can swap between 150 and 600 speed film easily, 3000 speed would be doable as well ... but then the challenge is the film itself. I don't know how much engineering and development work it would be to swap in a 2.5 stop faster base emulsion with all the complexities of the integral film processing chemistry. Interesting idea ...
Very true about the cost Godfrey - it's all about cost-benefit and budget, if you can spring for a Leica, it's surely worth the squeeze! Maybe you'll see me grabbing a different body some day, but can't wait to put the CL through its paces. Regarding the high speed instant concept, but yeah Mint's manual options would be the best outlet or backs for medium format cameras for that matter, but of course Polaroid wouldn't introduce a product incompatible with their own camera creations (unfortunately). Would be so amazing, though!
I have the Minolta Leitz CL which is basically the camera (branding baby) It is so much easier to lad and play with than my old Leica IIIf ... but all cameras have their own personality so it's all cool!!!
Could you give an explanation as to why film photography can be more preferred over digital for those who just don’t get it? I’ve had family all the time say “You wanna shoot with film that changes green things to red? You can just do that in an editing program!” Or “Why spend all that money on film when shooting with digital is free?”
Well, first let me say that Digital isn't free. It's just cheaper. But it can cost you a fortune in equipment. Film is unique in the same way that a painting is. An oil painting is less accurate, much harder to do, and much more expensive than taking a picture. But it's also not comparable, since the oil painting is a different medium. Same goes for Film and digital. Film can be more organic and doesn't go for the same goals as digital photography. On top of that there is a lot of stuff people love to do, like developing the film, experimenting with developing methods. It's a whole different world that is as far away from sitting in front of a computer as can be. In the end it's a personal preference thing. I love both, I do both, I love to have the options. But to make it short, film is not preferable over digital. It is its own thing.
For 90% or more of people "taking pictures" digital photography IS the best solution. Digital photographs beat the snapshots I took on film as a kid by a long margin. But for those who want to do more than "takes pictures" shooting with film provides an experience and result that can't be had with digital. Many people trying out film for the first time are realizing its uniqueness.
Because you like it. As long as you're not mortgaging the house to buy film and cameras, that should be all the explanation you need to give someone. If that isn't enough for someone, no amount of reasoned argument is going to make them "get it."
Skylar, definitely refer to to BentBilliard's comment who put it perfectly. It's like telling a painter they should just draw because pencils are cheaper. And his point about the process is critical - shooting film has an end-to-end manual and tactile craft that is not represented whatsoever with digital. Digital shooters who have shunned film as silly fail to realize image making isn't just one thing to everybody. For some, it's about the moment the shutter is pressed. For others, it's the experience of printing, film selection, format exploration, developing, scanning and all the other unique intricacies of the analog process. Also, this may extend beyond your family's interest in the conversation, but the format thing is critical for me 😂. There is no equivalent of shooting 4x5 on digital, or even most medium formats for that matter. What you can do with lensing, angle of view, and composition far exceeds the smaller size of digital sensors. Anyway, this might be a great topic for the next Q&A!
I dunno. I've read the other responses to your question and none of them seem to touch on the basic issue that I see. The basic reason to shoot photos with film is simply that it is an entirely different recording medium from a digital capture. Film sees light differently, the end result of that difference is that your photographs look different. How you use film cameras is different too, because with a digital capture you can see what you did almost instantly where with film there is always some delay before you see what you have done-this means that different thinking processes and stratagems are at work. The rest of it ... the film workflow vs the digital workflow, the chemistry choices, the darkroom and the 'not being in front of a computer all day' things ... are just a good bit of romanticizing the tedium/annoyances of film photographic necessities, and disparaging of things digital that are often not well understood, in my opinion. Digital capture and digital image processing brought new capabilities and new options to Photography that wowed everyone for a couple of decades, and have become, in the past twenty years, the new standard of photographic work. Film photographic process itself has been enhanced and developed further because of it as well. But at the core, photographs recorded with film medium are simply different from recording them with digital devices, and those differences can prove to be appealing once you get the hang of what the medium does and how to treat it compared to a digital capture. Not always, of course, but enough to pursue the endeavor for many. I never stopped making photographs with film. In part of my career, I worked for NASA where I was helping to develop digital imaging systems and rendering techniques for spaceborne reconnaisance of the planets. When affordable quality digital cameras came out that I could use with my personal photogaphy, I was overjoyed and started using them, learning them ... and still I kept shooting film. And nowadays, when I know what I can get from both pretty well and know how to render both pretty well, I pick and choose what to shoot with film and what to shoot with digital, and I get equally satisfying results from both. The results remain different one from the other, neither better nor worse, and therein lies the joy: I have more choices in photographic pursuits than just a single capture medium can afford.
If you want to compare your Leica CL to its much cheaper, more automatic, paired-down Minolta cousin, the Minolta Hi-Matic FP, let me know. I have one and love it.
I’ve heard you say at least once that you think Fuji will be pulling out of the film market. What makes you say that? I’ve got a Fuji camera so if I need to stock up because there’s something g going on I’d like to know! Thanks and keep up the great work :)
can't help thinking tho....we don't need new films or new cameras we need more labs, more dark rooms and the people that know what they're doing. That's what we really lost during the digital invasion. It wasn't the hardware it was the knowhow to make it all work.
The “making it all work” of it all is truly where these developments help the ecosystem of film photography. It’s critical that new engineers, chemists, and professionals who work on the backend of the industry continue to enter this industry.
If Fuji can sell 2 pack of square film (20 film sheets in total) for 17-19$ why can't Polaroid do the same? Especially with only giving 8 films per pack. It's ridiculous, especially with people saying how unreliable the polaroid film can be
Apologies for copying and pasting an answer, but this came up earlier today: The cost is surely a barrier for many choosing between Polaroid and Instax. I know this seems like an oversimplification, but they are just completely different products and companies and there's no way for Polaroid to price match Fuji. Polaroid is a relatively small company operating out of a single factory. Their product is also materially massively different than Fuji's and their manufacturing capabilities are incomparable - Fuji is a 20 billion dollar company with 75,000 employees - Polaroid has less than 500 employees (just to give you an idea in the difference of scale). It kind of just "is what it is" and although Fuji and Polaroid are competitors, Polaroid will always be most successful when they are marketed toward passionate artists who prefer their format for its unique qualities.
I would honestly like to try shooting polaroid, but it just costs far too much compared to instax. I disagree with you that the cost isn't too different. You can buy instax film in bulk for about 75 cents a frame where as polaroid is more like 2-2.5 dollars a frame. I know I type is cheaper, but the vintage polaroid cameras are so much cooler and fun to use. polaroid needs to lower their prices if it ever wants to be anything other than super niche. Instax is so much more popular with casual users because it is more accessible and a lot cheaper.
Hey Mike! You're not wrong, the cost is surely a barrier for many choosing between Polaroid and Instax. I know this seems like an oversimplification, but they are just completely different products and companies and there's no way for Polaroid to price match Fuji. Polaroid is a relatively small company operating out of a single factory. Their product is also materially massively different than Fuji's and their manufacturing capabilities are incomparable - Fuji is a 20 billion dollar company with 75,000 employees - Polaroid has less than 500 employees (just to give you an idea in the difference of scale). It kind of just "is what it is" and although Fuji and Polaroid are competitors, Polaroid will always be most successful when they are marketed toward passionate artists who prefer their format for its unique qualities.
Why stop at the CL? I think a fun video would be an overview of all the "shunned" Leicas and if they're really "that bad." Also, selfishly, still waiting on a video about the Yashica 44 with sprockets. Or something subminiature. Y'know, something just real WACKY.
Well, technically, Polaroid is not a cheaper because out of eight shots you might get one useful shot thanks to terrible quality of Polaroid, originals chemicals 🤷♂️ I mean 10 year expired FP100C Polaroid I shoot 10 and I get at least 8 usable shots from it … they should just shut down Polaroid labs , go do more R&D and come out with a formula that doesn’t generate random quality shots and stop telling their marketing team to tell us oh that’s the beauty of Polaroid 😂 no no no ! We shoot FP100C , we have seen what Polaroid can do if it’s chemicals are right .
They are on the brink of introducing the 5th generation color formula. Lots of R&D cracking at Polaroid. And as for the current formula, it’s great if you shoot it right 😉- if you’re getting one useful shot out of 8, frankly that is just user error.
As someone who's been shooting Polaroid since 2019, they've had a significant boost in quality, and whilst instant film is more likely to be inconsistent than other formats due to its nature, I feel like there's an exaggeration of this about Polaroids. Polaroids aren't super inconsistent anymore, hell I've not had the infamous blue streaks even in a long while! Still, they're pricey, but with the way things are in the industry, the Polaroid format was never really cheap in the first place.
3000 speed B&W integral film is certainly an interesting idea. I've thought of a single shot 4x5 integral photos using the old 545 backs. Up until the lomograflok release it seemed like 4x5 was just out of luck since Polaroid only produced 8x10. I think it would be interesting to bring back another LF instant film especially now that 4x5 is more popular than ever. Of course there's always the issues of R&D, no actual machinery to produce them, and would probably have to be hand made like 8x10 which could hinder production for that. it just makes me wonder what kind of results we would get if we combined new55 with modern Polaroid technology.
Very much looking forward to The Reel World reality TV show where 10 photographers live together in a loft in Brooklyn while their daily lives are streamed for our viewing enjoyment.
@@InAnInstant Who will be the first to be kicked out of “The Lab” (which is what I’m assuming the loft will be referred to as). Confessionals are recorded in a literal dark room lovingly called, The Dark Room. Hopefully there is also a clever tagline associated with cast dismissals: “I’m sorry, Ben, but You’re Overexposed!”
![Packfilm's future, the ultimate instant camera, favorite Polaroid picture, 2 Yr Q&A [Instant Lounge]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/1XGHUmMTSfg/mqdefault.jpg)
![Packfilm's future, the ultimate instant camera, favorite Polaroid picture, 2 Yr Q&A [Instant Lounge]](/img/tr.png)
![Shooting the Weirdest Film Cameras: 110, Polaroid Macro 5, and the Star Wars 35mm [Instant Shoots]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/PVZDxaKx8VY/mqdefault.jpg)
Happy New Year Mr. Instant-to clarify I had absoLUTELY no qualms with having this in our living room....again.....I just needed to know how camera ready to make the apartment 🤣
Mrs. Instant I will make sure to give proper notice in 2023
Whatever this TV concept is, I will watch it Ben. Keep cooking up good content
Thanks so much Al!
A CL video sounds great, especially since you feel passionately about the camera. Happy New Year!
Happy New Year Pete!
that packfilm rumor dodge hurt me
Loved your comments about inspiration!! Portraits of interesting people forever (also very honoured to have you take my portrait in NY!)
Jesse! The man! Miss you bud!
Happy new year Ben and thank you for continuing this amazing journey with us viewers into 2023.
Fun fact I have a Minolta SLR XD11 that was also co-developed with Leica. Fabulous camera. When those two companies came together some amazing cameras came to life.
Anyways. My question to you is for those of us thinking of making the plunge into Mamiya cameras with the integral film Lomo adapter, any tips on looking or buying from a good source? Their quite expensive but worth it if a nice piece can be found. What were you looking for when you bought yours? Thanks
Hey Franc, great to see you and happy new year! I don't think I've ever held a XD11, looks like a beauty. Per your Mamiya question, I have personally used Aaron Smith's backs the most (aaron7399 on eBay). There are also other sellers on eBay making comparable backs for Instax Square specifically, but Aaron offers a wider range of format options. The main thing to consider I think is the darkslide of it all - Aaron's backs do not have a darkslide, so the back has to remain mounted through the entire pack (or, lost a shot by removing it mid-pack). He does this to maintain quality control, as building darkslide slots into 3D printed material is a classic recipe for inevitable light leaks. I trust Aaron's work and I've never had a leak from one of his backs!
the TV show-like thing sounds rad!
Definitely do a CL video at some point!
😍😍😍
Please tell us about the Leica CL. Always love hearing about any film camera from you, instant or not.
Thank you Noah, happy New Year!
Happy New Year Ben!
Happy New Year Sir Cunningham!
Have a happy new year Ben!! And regards to Lauren 🎉❤
Happy New Year Joany!!
Look out for Orwo next week, They're sending the NC500 color film to the US
Ah, the Leica CL (film) camera... I've owned and loved using the CL three times in the past 40 some years. Its size and shape, and the excellent 40 and 90 mm lenses made for it, made it a near-perfect travel camera for 35mm use. But I always traded it, in the end, for an M because the M just fits my hands better and has a better viewfinder. :) I sold my last CL a decade or more back and replaced it almost immediately with an M4-2 body which I continue to use today.
Everyone harps on the price of Leica cameras and lenses to the point of it being annoying. The bottom line is that they're expensive and it's not a big deal. I only think about the cost when I'm buying. Once I have one in my hands, I find that price tag angst disappears and what I have left is a really good camera and lens: simple, functional, and excellent quality. Something you can really use for the remainder of your life if you keep the "gotta have a new thing" meme at bay.
I was interested in your thought about wanting a fast B&W integral Polaroid film. The problem of camera calibration for it is a big thing since the SX-70 idea was to automate everything that should be automated as much as possible. A solution is provided by the MiNT Camera SX-70 derivatives (SLR670m, SLR670s, and SLR670x) that allow manual exposure control, at the expense of no longer having an adjustable aperture setting (always f/8 in manual exposure mode). This works well ... for instance with the m and x cameras, I can swap between 150 and 600 speed film easily, 3000 speed would be doable as well ... but then the challenge is the film itself. I don't know how much engineering and development work it would be to swap in a 2.5 stop faster base emulsion with all the complexities of the integral film processing chemistry. Interesting idea ...
Very true about the cost Godfrey - it's all about cost-benefit and budget, if you can spring for a Leica, it's surely worth the squeeze! Maybe you'll see me grabbing a different body some day, but can't wait to put the CL through its paces. Regarding the high speed instant concept, but yeah Mint's manual options would be the best outlet or backs for medium format cameras for that matter, but of course Polaroid wouldn't introduce a product incompatible with their own camera creations (unfortunately). Would be so amazing, though!
Weird question but when glasses are those Ben? They look good!
I love red
I’m legit glad
I have the Minolta Leitz CL which is basically the camera (branding baby) It is so much easier to lad and play with than my old Leica IIIf ... but all cameras have their own personality so it's all cool!!!
So true, can’t wait to burn through some rolls on it
Could you give an explanation as to why film photography can be more preferred over digital for those who just don’t get it? I’ve had family all the time say “You wanna shoot with film that changes green things to red? You can just do that in an editing program!” Or “Why spend all that money on film when shooting with digital is free?”
Well, first let me say that Digital isn't free. It's just cheaper. But it can cost you a fortune in equipment. Film is unique in the same way that a painting is. An oil painting is less accurate, much harder to do, and much more expensive than taking a picture. But it's also not comparable, since the oil painting is a different medium. Same goes for Film and digital. Film can be more organic and doesn't go for the same goals as digital photography. On top of that there is a lot of stuff people love to do, like developing the film, experimenting with developing methods. It's a whole different world that is as far away from sitting in front of a computer as can be. In the end it's a personal preference thing. I love both, I do both, I love to have the options. But to make it short, film is not preferable over digital. It is its own thing.
For 90% or more of people "taking pictures" digital photography IS the best solution. Digital photographs beat the snapshots I took on film as a kid by a long margin. But for those who want to do more than "takes pictures" shooting with film provides an experience and result that can't be had with digital. Many people trying out film for the first time are realizing its uniqueness.
Because you like it. As long as you're not mortgaging the house to buy film and cameras, that should be all the explanation you need to give someone. If that isn't enough for someone, no amount of reasoned argument is going to make them "get it."
Skylar, definitely refer to to BentBilliard's comment who put it perfectly. It's like telling a painter they should just draw because pencils are cheaper. And his point about the process is critical - shooting film has an end-to-end manual and tactile craft that is not represented whatsoever with digital. Digital shooters who have shunned film as silly fail to realize image making isn't just one thing to everybody. For some, it's about the moment the shutter is pressed. For others, it's the experience of printing, film selection, format exploration, developing, scanning and all the other unique intricacies of the analog process. Also, this may extend beyond your family's interest in the conversation, but the format thing is critical for me 😂. There is no equivalent of shooting 4x5 on digital, or even most medium formats for that matter. What you can do with lensing, angle of view, and composition far exceeds the smaller size of digital sensors. Anyway, this might be a great topic for the next Q&A!
I dunno. I've read the other responses to your question and none of them seem to touch on the basic issue that I see.
The basic reason to shoot photos with film is simply that it is an entirely different recording medium from a digital capture. Film sees light differently, the end result of that difference is that your photographs look different. How you use film cameras is different too, because with a digital capture you can see what you did almost instantly where with film there is always some delay before you see what you have done-this means that different thinking processes and stratagems are at work. The rest of it ... the film workflow vs the digital workflow, the chemistry choices, the darkroom and the 'not being in front of a computer all day' things ... are just a good bit of romanticizing the tedium/annoyances of film photographic necessities, and disparaging of things digital that are often not well understood, in my opinion.
Digital capture and digital image processing brought new capabilities and new options to Photography that wowed everyone for a couple of decades, and have become, in the past twenty years, the new standard of photographic work. Film photographic process itself has been enhanced and developed further because of it as well. But at the core, photographs recorded with film medium are simply different from recording them with digital devices, and those differences can prove to be appealing once you get the hang of what the medium does and how to treat it compared to a digital capture. Not always, of course, but enough to pursue the endeavor for many.
I never stopped making photographs with film. In part of my career, I worked for NASA where I was helping to develop digital imaging systems and rendering techniques for spaceborne reconnaisance of the planets. When affordable quality digital cameras came out that I could use with my personal photogaphy, I was overjoyed and started using them, learning them ... and still I kept shooting film. And nowadays, when I know what I can get from both pretty well and know how to render both pretty well, I pick and choose what to shoot with film and what to shoot with digital, and I get equally satisfying results from both. The results remain different one from the other, neither better nor worse, and therein lies the joy: I have more choices in photographic pursuits than just a single capture medium can afford.
If you want to compare your Leica CL to its much cheaper, more automatic, paired-down Minolta cousin, the Minolta Hi-Matic FP, let me know. I have one and love it.
That might rip 🫣
I’ve heard you say at least once that you think Fuji will be pulling out of the film market. What makes you say that? I’ve got a Fuji camera so if I need to stock up because there’s something g going on I’d like to know! Thanks and keep up the great work :)
Do you have two red stools of different heights or is one of them on a secret apple box
DIFFERENT. HEIGHTS.
can't help thinking tho....we don't need new films or new cameras we need more labs, more dark rooms and the people that know what they're doing. That's what we really lost during the digital invasion. It wasn't the hardware it was the knowhow to make it all work.
The “making it all work” of it all is truly where these developments help the ecosystem of film photography. It’s critical that new engineers, chemists, and professionals who work on the backend of the industry continue to enter this industry.
Leica CL video please! Also want to see a ridiculous set up where you put a Lomo Atoll 17mm lens on it too 🤪
Ohhhh yeah I got that Voigt 15 so we be goin wiiiiiidee
@@InAnInstant omg yes!!! I just got the 17mm Lomo from visser and I’m having a blast with it ☺️🤘🏽
Oh hellll yes baby
I would like a signed my Polaroid portrait for a price. Can be with Polaroid Lab
Any news on Polaroid’s new instant slr in 2023 ?
If you’re gonna crowdsource anything, it’d better be a source on this Kodak packfilm rumor 😂
🫡🫡🫡
If Fuji can sell 2 pack of square film (20 film sheets in total) for 17-19$ why can't Polaroid do the same? Especially with only giving 8 films per pack. It's ridiculous, especially with people saying how unreliable the polaroid film can be
Apologies for copying and pasting an answer, but this came up earlier today: The cost is surely a barrier for many choosing between Polaroid and Instax. I know this seems like an oversimplification, but they are just completely different products and companies and there's no way for Polaroid to price match Fuji. Polaroid is a relatively small company operating out of a single factory. Their product is also materially massively different than Fuji's and their manufacturing capabilities are incomparable - Fuji is a 20 billion dollar company with 75,000 employees - Polaroid has less than 500 employees (just to give you an idea in the difference of scale). It kind of just "is what it is" and although Fuji and Polaroid are competitors, Polaroid will always be most successful when they are marketed toward passionate artists who prefer their format for its unique qualities.
Leica CL vídeo per favore 🙌🏼 … the little brother to my M5
The perfect rage pair!!
I would honestly like to try shooting polaroid, but it just costs far too much compared to instax. I disagree with you that the cost isn't too different. You can buy instax film in bulk for about 75 cents a frame where as polaroid is more like 2-2.5 dollars a frame. I know I type is cheaper, but the vintage polaroid cameras are so much cooler and fun to use. polaroid needs to lower their prices if it ever wants to be anything other than super niche. Instax is so much more popular with casual users because it is more accessible and a lot cheaper.
Have you considered the Polaroid Go? You can get it for ~$1.25 per frame, and if you utilize reward programs or sales, it can be had for even less.
Hey Mike! You're not wrong, the cost is surely a barrier for many choosing between Polaroid and Instax. I know this seems like an oversimplification, but they are just completely different products and companies and there's no way for Polaroid to price match Fuji. Polaroid is a relatively small company operating out of a single factory. Their product is also materially massively different than Fuji's and their manufacturing capabilities are incomparable - Fuji is a 20 billion dollar company with 75,000 employees - Polaroid has less than 500 employees (just to give you an idea in the difference of scale). It kind of just "is what it is" and although Fuji and Polaroid are competitors, Polaroid will always be most successful when they are marketed toward passionate artists who prefer their format for its unique qualities.
"... involving travel...." Does that mean you are finally coming over and open up the Enschede factory to the public???
👀👀👀
I'm dropping the comment... C'mon man
Why stop at the CL? I think a fun video would be an overview of all the "shunned" Leicas and if they're really "that bad."
Also, selfishly, still waiting on a video about the Yashica 44 with sprockets. Or something subminiature. Y'know, something just real WACKY.
As an M5 owner, I love any Leica that will make both Leica M6 fanboys and Leica haters mad.
Love the shunned Leicas video concept, might have to shoot some APS on the Leica C11 to really get everyone going 😂
@@InAnInstant in America, first you get da rage clicks, then you get da comments, then you get da money
I started following this channel when it was all about instant photography. Now most of the videos are about analog photography :-(
We all grow with time!
Well, technically, Polaroid is not a cheaper because out of eight shots you might get one useful shot thanks to terrible quality of Polaroid, originals chemicals 🤷♂️ I mean 10 year expired FP100C Polaroid I shoot 10 and I get at least 8 usable shots from it … they should just shut down Polaroid labs , go do more R&D and come out with a formula that doesn’t generate random quality shots and stop telling their marketing team to tell us oh that’s the beauty of Polaroid 😂 no no no ! We shoot FP100C , we have seen what Polaroid can do if it’s chemicals are right .
They are on the brink of introducing the 5th generation color formula. Lots of R&D cracking at Polaroid. And as for the current formula, it’s great if you shoot it right 😉- if you’re getting one useful shot out of 8, frankly that is just user error.
As someone who's been shooting Polaroid since 2019, they've had a significant boost in quality, and whilst instant film is more likely to be inconsistent than other formats due to its nature, I feel like there's an exaggeration of this about Polaroids. Polaroids aren't super inconsistent anymore, hell I've not had the infamous blue streaks even in a long while! Still, they're pricey, but with the way things are in the industry, the Polaroid format was never really cheap in the first place.
I would murder a child for 3000 speed integral film. Does that make me a monster??
It makes you ONE OF US 😈
Happy New Year Ben!
Happy New Year Hop!!
3000 speed B&W integral film is certainly an interesting idea. I've thought of a single shot 4x5 integral photos using the old 545 backs. Up until the lomograflok release it seemed like 4x5 was just out of luck since Polaroid only produced 8x10. I think it would be interesting to bring back another LF instant film especially now that 4x5 is more popular than ever.
Of course there's always the issues of R&D, no actual machinery to produce them, and would probably have to be hand made like 8x10 which could hinder production for that. it just makes me wonder what kind of results we would get if we combined new55 with modern Polaroid technology.
Integral 4x5 would be SPECTACULAR
What about the Kodak packfilm though 😡
Very much looking forward to The Reel World reality TV show where 10 photographers live together in a loft in Brooklyn while their daily lives are streamed for our viewing enjoyment.
😂😂 good idea
I can’t wait to have a massive outburst and then sob on camera 😍
@@InAnInstant Who will be the first to be kicked out of “The Lab” (which is what I’m assuming the loft will be referred to as). Confessionals are recorded in a literal dark room lovingly called, The Dark Room. Hopefully there is also a clever tagline associated with cast dismissals: “I’m sorry, Ben, but You’re Overexposed!”
Oh my god. Instead of putting out a torch like on Survivor, they dump color developer down a slop sink 😂
Hey Ben it's Dash thanks for answering my question. Cant wait to see how the film industry will evolve as time goes on.
NEED that Leica CL video!
Good to see you again. Dungus equipified.
FULLY LOCKED AND LOADED
I just wish polaroid would give us 10 instead 8 in a pack.
They would if they could!
Happy New Years, Buddy!!! Drop that paid subscription, and I’ll be the first one to join!
Means the world to be G3, thank you bud and happy new year!
Polaroid is just not available for everyone. It is not available in many Asian markets so instax is only choice
This is true in physical stores, but I imagine you can order it online, right?
@@InAnInstant not really with freight rates and customs you are basically priced out of even considering the option.
Damn that’s quite unfort!