Just thinking Digital back vs. Polaroid film

[johnschlicher]

I'm strictly an amateur, would it be easy to get shot preview with a digital camera back, rather then spending 125.00 for a box of Polaroid film?

Could I still use my field camera, and old lenses, or would I be cheating myself doing this

Maybe I'm looking for a reason to buy another camera

[cjackson]

I'm strictly an amateur, would it be easy to get shot preview with a digital camera back, rather then spending 125.00 for a box of Polaroid film?

Could I still use my field camera, and old lenses, or would I be cheating myself doing this

Maybe I'm looking for a reason to buy another camera

Well, couple of problems I see. First, Polaroid has canceled the production of their Polaroid sheet film products, so if you can find any film, it won't last long.

The issue of using a digital back on a large format is cost, IE very expensive!. You could perhaps adapt a digital SLR, but as digital SLR's chip size is drastically smaller than the 4x5 image area, you are not going to get much of a preview.

Fujifilm might have some offerings, but I haven't looked into it myself.

Chris

[Gordon Moat]

The real preview of your shot is the ground glass. The image is right there for you to see. The reason to use instant film (Fuji Instant now the Polaroid is going away) is to check exposure settings, and not for a preview. Also, Fujifilm Instant is so much better quality than Polaroid was that I don't feel anyone should be too sad about Polaroid going away.

You could take a photo of the image on the ground glass. Just poke a small digicam under the dark cloth, and snap away. Unfortunately it will be upside down and backwards, but you get use to that. Far simpler is just to use a light meter, and learn to trust your readings, and check the settings on the aperture and shutter speed.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat Photography (http://www.gordonmoat.com)

[Frank Petronio]

Just get a consumer DSLR w a zoom and call it close enough.... I can't imagine doing an important set-up shot w shooting some digis first.

[Bruce Barlow]

I think digital backs require about an 8 minute "exposure," not exactly convenient.

And the cost is way beyond my budget.

[Steve M Hostetter]

thats a scanning back

[cobalt]

Just get a consumer DSLR w a zoom and call it close enough.... I can't imagine doing an important set-up shot w shooting some digis first.

Do you mean point and shoot? I ask because I would imagine the p/s to be pretty close. I hate spending a lot on digicams...

[Frank Petronio]

Well I think a larger digital SLR, like a Nikon D40-50-60-70, would be more pleasant to use. You can find used ones in the $300 range these days.

Personally I just as well rather use my cell phone than a tiny digital camera -- the buttons on the phone are larger ;-)

But the dslr gives you exposure information as a default, the tiny ones require several whirls and clicks to access what f-stop and speed it shot at, which is a huge pain.

[Kirk Gittings]

Many of the great old school teachers, Picker, Minor White, Adams etc. advocated some use of Polaroid in the early LF learning process. It is expensive these days, but still with some merit IMO. It is simply not the same thing to duplicate the view in DSLR. It has no mojo. Since Polaroid is still around mkae use of it.


I'm strictly an amateur, would it be easy to get shot preview with a digital camera back, rather then spending 125.00 for a box of Polaroid film?

Could I still use my field camera, and old lenses, or would I be cheating myself doing this

Maybe I'm looking for a reason to buy another camera

[Gene McCluney]

You don't need a Digital Back, which could cost over $10,000. All you need is an Instant film back and one of the Instant films made by Fuji. They do not cost 125. a box. I use Fuji 4x5 sized color Instant film for testing all the time. It is a great product. I wouldn't shoot a color transparency without first testing with an Instant print. All the major internet film and supply vendors sell the Fuji films, and most offer the film backs suitable to use the film in...or you can find a used back. The Fuji films work in the older Polaroid film-pack backs just fine.

[Gene McCluney]

. Since Polaroid is still around mkae use of it.

Kirk...

Hate to tell you but Polaroid (as a company making instant film) is not still around. But Fuji is still making excellent instant film products.

[Aahx]

Yes Fuji does make a good product. But it does have a longer instant developing time than the poloroids, and a bit more of a pain to work with in sub zero tempatures (such as what we currently have here in most of Alaska). I got less chemical smear from the poloroid single sheets, than i do the fuji pack film. So when I put the film in my jacket to stay warm enough to develop I now use a plastic bag around it so it will not ruin the fabric of my clothes. The poloroid sheets contaned the chemicals a bit better. That and getting Fuji black and white is more of a challenge to aquire.

[Kirk Gittings]

Kirk...

Hate to tell you but Polaroid (as a company making instant film) is not still around. But Fuji is still making excellent instant film products.

Right I knew that, I was thinking more like......as long as there is still some Polaroid film left around.

What about the point though? Did anyone else learn LF shooting Polaroid? Don't you think there is some value in it?

[Sevo]

thats a scanning back

And you know of a non-scanning back that covers anything even remotely approaching a 4x5" area? Non-scanning digital is just about to enter the area of small medium format - even non-crop 6x4.5cm has not quite left the labs yet.

Sevo

[Frank Petronio]

No such thing exists (or ever will exist I think).

Once Fuji kills their instant film it's all over, you'll have to do film tests and trust your equipment.

And back up those most valuable shots with a reliable, archival digital ;-) hahahaha

[cobalt]

And back up those most valuable shots with a reliable, archival digital ;-) hahahaha[/QUOTE]


NOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Gene McCluney]

Right I knew that, I was thinking more like......as long as there is still some Polaroid film left around.

What about the point though? Did anyone else learn LF shooting Polaroid? Don't you think there is some value in it?

Absolutely, using Instant film can really speed the learning of LF. Because you get "instant" feedback (well 90 seconds or so). I have learned enough about my equipment from testing with Polaroid and Fuji films over the last 30 years that I can usually nail the exposure of a studio transparency first try. I still shoot a test though.

I think the Fuji (brand) of instant film will survive for many years, now that they are the only vendor.

[erie patsellis]

In certain situations, a scan back is a nice way to get a digital capture, IF you have enough light and a static subject...

[Gordon Moat]

. . . . .

What about the point though? Did anyone else learn LF shooting Polaroid? Don't you think there is some value in it?

I did, though I went about it from a little different direction. I spent a great deal of time with a Polaroid 250 Automatic and some pack film. The thought was that with only ten shots, I better be good about composition and shot choices. So I learned the ins and outs of Instant film prior to using 4x5, though we did have some 4x5 practice in college.

Once I got my own 4x5, one of the first purchases was a Polaroid 405 pack film back. I still have that, though I mostly use Fuji FP100C in that now.

Clients definitely enjoy getting handed an Instant proof. Most of the time I use them to do a quick exposure check, though it's useful to show composition and layout. On location with clients/AD/CD people, I tend to use the larger Polaroid 550 back and Fuji FP100C45 (larger version pack film).

The main difference I have seen between the Polaroid and Fuji instant films is that Fujifilm have better quality control. When I have handed a client or AD a Polaroid, quite often I get those back, but when I have handed them a Fuji Instant, quite often they ask if they can keep it.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat Photography (http://www.gordonmoat.com)

[Gene McCluney]

The main difference I have seen between the Polaroid and Fuji instant films is that Fujifilm have better quality control. When I have handed a client or AD a Polaroid, quite often I get those back, but when I have handed them a Fuji Instant, quite often they ask if they can keep it.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat Photography (http://www.gordonmoat.com)

I concur..the Fuji FP100c45 prints are little jewels with beautiful gloss and good neutral colors, far better than the last batches of Polaroid color Type 79. I shot a subject the other day that had a red background, and the REDS on Fuji are outstanding, they really pop..yet the overall color balance is neutral, far more neutral than the Polaroid films I previously used. I don't think we have to worry about Fuji dropping their instant films anytime soon, since they now are picking up the Polaroid users. The Fuji films also process better with less processing streaks and flaws, in fact no flaws.

There is still confusion however, particularly from Polaroid users that have only used single-sheet 4x5 instant films, such as Type 79. Many are unaware that pack-film backs from Polaroid and Fuji fit their cameras just fine (most modern 4x5 cameras) and enable you to use the Fuji materials. The Fuji pack-film back is in current manufacture. The Fuji pack-films are completely compatible with same-size polaroid pack film backs and cameras.

[Andrew O'Neill]

Did anyone else learn LF shooting Polaroid? Don't you think there is some value in it?
__________________

I did. There was tremendous value in shooting Polaroid film. It was great to have instant feedback learning the zone system and exposure, DOF, focusing with swings/tilts, etc. I still have a box of 55 sitting in the fridge. Saving it for next summer in Japan.