POLAROID 4x5 Conversion !! A new project !!

[ml_pisel]

I'm proud to present me:
I'm Marco Lucifora, a young architect and designer with passion for photography.
In these days i've started to project a new kind of 4x5 conversion for Polaroid cameras like the 110, 110A, 110B, 120, 150, 160, 900..
I'm lokking for people who are interested in this kind of things and if you want you can take a look at my project page in the indiegogo crowdfounding site where i'll post all the updated news!!

http://www.indiegogo.com/polaroid4x5

Comments are welcome!!!

[ml_pisel]

Hi
just to let you know that i'm just finishing the desing of 3d models needed to make this back and i'm evaluating how to realize the very first early prototype ...... cnc machine or 3d printing (SLS) .... To find the more precise, fast and maybe chep solution !!

[Ari]

There's some good competition out there, Razzle, Alpenhause and Byron, to name a few, but I wish you luck!

[ml_pisel]

Hi,
Thanks man .... you've been very kind !!
I hope to have luck too ... and i'm woking for !!!

[aluncrockford]

Is it something like this


http://www.processuk.net/5x4_Rangefinder_Cameras/cat740598_1184301.aspx

[unixrevolution]

Is this a non-destructive version of the 4x5 Polaroid mods we see elsewhere?

[Ari]

Is it something like this


http://www.processuk.net/5x4_Rangefinder_Cameras/cat740598_1184301.aspx

Those look exactly like the Alpenhause conversions, but instead of a dollar sign, somebody stuck a Pound sign in there!

[J. Fada]

Being quite honest with you as someone who has made a few conversions going back nearly a decade, the amount of your "benefits" looks like you want to make money off the funding. Also, any conversion that doesn't lop off the end of the camera and lose many of the heavy parts is not worth doing in my opinion. I only speak from experience. I am afraid that with the current confines of what you are doing it won't be too successful. You simply won't be able to put the focus point at the current focus point of the camera and that will require whoever wants to modify a 110 to move the front standard regardless of the kind of back you make that will bolt on.

[ml_pisel]

Being quite honest with you as someone who has made a few conversions going back nearly a decade, the amount of your "benefits" looks like you want to make money off the funding. Also, any conversion that doesn't lop off the end of the camera and lose many of the heavy parts is not worth doing in my opinion. I only speak from experience. I am afraid that with the current confines of what you are doing it won't be too successful. You simply won't be able to put the focus point at the current focus point of the camera and that will require whoever wants to modify a 110 to move the front standard regardless of the kind of back you make that will bolt on.

Please don't be so quick to judge my work in sort of swindle !!!
In a couple of weeks i'll be able to post some image of the first prototype, even without any contribution.
The reasons are following:
1- I'd like to patent what i'm doing and this is a quite long bureaucratic procedure here in Italy.
2- I've tried to make prototype in ergal but it was very expensive so i'm contacting people that make SLS print directly from my 3d models and this can be the right way.

And if you ask me why i've created an Indiegogo page project here's the answer: i have to understand if what i'm creating is interesting for people or noone cares about; being paied means also buy the final product or discount for buying it. It's not absolutely to stole money or to have "benefits" like you said.

[ml_pisel]

Is this a non-destructive version of the 4x5 Polaroid mods we see elsewhere?

Yes, it's not the "most revolutionary invention of this century".
It's only a way to try to convert old Polaroid roll camera in a easier and cheaper way.
That's all.

[Fred L]

Polaroid conversions and patents is a hot button topic here you should know, so if you want to go down this road, be forewarned ;)

[ml_pisel]

Polaroid conversions and patents is a hot button topic here you should know, so if you want to go down this road, be forewarned ;)

I think so ... but why not to try?
Maybe it will be a disaster ... but maybe not ....

[Fred L]

yeah, the name that shall not be typed ;)

OP, not saying don't make a conversion, far from that ! My comment was directed to the patent suggestion. I don't think anyone else has done this. Alpenhause, Razzle and Byron are open source if you will. In fact, Daniel (Byron) was offering tutorials on doing one's own conversions but not sure what stage that's at.

Please post photos of your progress if you can.

[J. Fada]

I don't think you are "swindling" but crowdfunding generally offers the people doing the funding something significant for their money. If I give you $1000, you only give me a back. I don't even get a camera. I am then expected to build it myself. I can get a complete camera for less than that by some experienced people.

I know people want to patent things like this, but is there a big enough market out there to go through the long drawn out (and expensive) patent process? I think you are better off just making it and selling it, but that is just my opinion.

I wish you luck.

[ml_pisel]

I don't think you are "swindling" but crowdfunding generally offers the people doing the funding something significant for their money. If I give you $1000, you only give me a back. I don't even get a camera. I am then expected to build it myself. I can get a complete camera for less than that by some experienced people.

I know people want to patent things like this, but is there a big enough market out there to go through the long drawn out (and expensive) patent process? I think you are better off just making it and selling it, but that is just my opinion.

I wish you luck.

I totally agree with you, i've edited my indiegogo page !!!
Now donations are more correct, i think .... let me know what you think !!!

[Proteus617]

1- I'd like to patent what i'm doing and this is a quite long bureaucratic procedure here in Italy.


This is not a good idea. Please do a long and thorough search regarding patents on 4x5 Polaroid conversions. I'm sure you will find lots of interesting information on photo board archives.

[toyotadesigner]

If you buy a used 4x5 Shen Hao with a nice lens you can mount any standard Polaroid back to it and use the Fuji Instant films without any conversion.

Or you can buy a 4x5 Dayi or Gaoersi and mount a pola back.

Or you can ask SK Grimes to modify an old Arca for this purpose...

OK, they are larger than the old folders and don't offer rangefinders, but usually people want the image, not the technology. But maybe I don't understand this project at all.

[Keytarjunkie]

yeah, the name that shall not be typed ;)

OP, not saying don't make a conversion, far from that ! My comment was directed to the patent suggestion. I don't think anyone else has done this. Alpenhause, Razzle and Byron are open source if you will. In fact, Daniel (Byron) was offering tutorials on doing one's own conversions but not sure what stage that's at.

Please post photos of your progress if you can.

Aye, and Option8 (instantoptions/Nate) is extremely open source, he has a whole website explaining the conversion process as well as a flickr group and can always answer any questions you have, he's pretty knowledgeable about the conversions too.

I would stress not patenting your design, unfortunately. Nothing good can come of it, as we've seen.

Hope you don't mind if I share, I did my own conversion about a year ago, I haven't had much time to use it but it does work well. A rangefinder is much more convenient than ground glass, mine has a diy 4x5 back. It is not something I would want to do more than once. But, it is a very nice alternative to contemplative large format. It makes it much more spontaneous, which can be nice for a change. Here's a photo of mine on the shelf as of 3 minutes ago.

71084

Of course, I usually prefer the Mamiya 7 when I want something more portable, or the real folding 4x5 with movements when I want something contemplative. But it has its place.

[Steven Tribe]

I think you are very naive - to put it mildly!

- This path has been trodden by many, both single projects for own use and with those semi-commercial intentions, for many years. So long, that the price of unconverted Pathfinders has been pushed up to a point where it is only an economic project if, like you, one happens to have inherited one. The antics of certain makers who use their cameras as the basis for "art" doesn´t appeal to many with basic common sense and restricted disposable income, although the core idea is good! After all, pocket sized German 9x12cm plate cameras with focussing and view-finders did very well for 30 years.

- Patents are impossible, Registering a design is probably just as difficult.

- Set-up manufacturing costs for anything under a couple of hundred volume are so high, that it will put a price tag of many 1,000's of €s on each item.

- The whole idea of how you intend to raise capital is both a risk for "clients" and, more importantly, for you, if you get an "investor" who decides to go to Court if there are "hiccups" in the plan.

[ml_pisel]

Thanks to all for suggestions and criticism ...
Today I 've sent the 3D model to the factory That Make 3d print .... so I hope to be able to tell if my idea will work or if it will be a total failure .... maybe todayor tomorrow I'll post some screencap of the 3d model!

[Drew Bedo]

Hello Marco Lucifora,

Before you get too far into this please read the threads here and Photo Dot Net about these conversions going back as far as maybe 2002. trhere was a good bit of drama amid claioms, patents and threatened law suits. Please use the search function and read a while first.

I have never owned one of these cameras, but I have handled a few. It is my opinion (and it is just an opinion) that the Byron cameras are the most thurough and comprehensive re-build out there at a realistic price point. Check the Byron videos on YouTube.

As far as how large the market is: Years ago there were threats of court action over patent infringement. Nothing ever came to court. If there was any real money to be made in this it would have come to a court fight. If there was a real commercial market out there, someone would be making folding rangefinders in 4x5 from scratch in China.

with respect for all, cheers.

[sully75]

Patent!! so funny.

I actually stirred up that sh1tstorm once myself:

http://photo.net/classic-cameras-forum/00D4gM

What happened to that guy? He always seemed to be riding the edge.

I remember seeing one of his cameras covered in cowhide or snakeskin in a photo magazine for $25k

Seriously, how many people ended up buying his cameras?

[Corran]

http://photo.net/classic-cameras-forum/00D4gM

Haha, thanks, I needed some entertainment while I'm waiting for CD's to burn!

[Drew Bedo]

Sully: As someone involved with collecting photographical items , I view your question is not rhetorical. I never see these cameras offered as a used unit. Either they never change hands or they are discarded?

The number made—and sold—is worth knowing.

[ml_pisel]

So, today i've finally sent the files to produce the very first prototype of this 4x5 back ....
And this is how it should look ...

7144271443

Regards ...

[sully75]

#1: I really would not go into any trouble yourself in trying to patent this thing. You are going to make absolutely no money off this. Not trying to be rude. It's true. There are 5 guys ahead of you who have tons of experience, one has created a whole crazy camera system. Plus a million hobbyists. And one certifiable lunatic, who claims to actually hold a patent anyway.

#2: I'm not sure why you are concerned with not-modifying the original camera. These are not particularly collectible cameras, there are plenty around in original condition (with the original useless lights and accessories). It's not like they are a rarity.

#3: All that said, I would be totally psyched if you made a 3d printing pattern for a back that would replace the entire hinged portion of the original back and put it in the public domain. So then people could print them out and mount them on cameras themselves. If you believe me on #1, and it looks like you have some good design skills, you'd be doing everyone a service.

#4: to me, the real challenge is making the Polaroid 900 into a useable camera. It has the 110b viewfinder, but an extremely crappy lens. If you put together a kit of a 3D printed back and a machined, replacement lensboard (and maybe a new rangefinder cam), something that wasn't too terribly challenging to put together, I'd definitely buy one. For...$250. That's about it. There are other options out there but to me the prices are too high.

[sully75]

Sully: As someone involved with collecting photographical items , I view your question is not rhetorical. I never see these cameras offered as a used unit. Either they never change hands or they are discarded?

The number made—and sold—is worth knowing.

Good question Drew. My only thought is that it seems like you'd either have to be really rich to own one, since they were prohibitively expensive. So...maybe no one needed to sell their old ones. And perhaps he supplied them to the pros he features on his site for free? One forum member has one here, very nice guy.

[Drew Bedo]

Sully: I am unclear on how one could print outt trheir own film back.

Ml_psel: Ok, I understand that this part would go onto the back of the Polaroid 110 body. What goes onto that part, a film holder, a grafmatic, or a ground glass?

[E. von Hoegh]

The problem I have seen with any of the conversions, is that there are used cameras available at a small fraction of the price that are far and away more useful. For what the "better" conversions cost, you can buy a nice Linhof ST IV or V.

[sully75]

Drew, you know about 3d printing, yes?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3D_printing

If someone made a design for a back that would replace the entire back on a Polaroid 900, it would eliminate (what appears to me to be) the hassle of fitting an existing 4x5 back to the original hinged back. So...pop out the pins, replace the old back with the new back. It would also allow you to design the new back to maybe stay a bit further from the viewfinder...I've only handled one conversion, but it seems like the back really cramps the viewfinder area.

Also it would eliminate a lot of metal.

One thing with these cameras...I don't think they need a ground glass. I would be into a back that was just open. You could have a slip in ground glass like a film holder if you needed it. If I'm going to put a camera on a tripod and focus with the ground glass, it's not going to be this camera.

[Drew Bedo]

Sully, I don't have a clue on 3d printing. Is it like folding up an origami pattern on card stock and maybe coating it with resin to harden up?

[Drew Bedo]

Oh—OK now that I've followed the link and read some I guess I get it. Seems like the way to go, but the gear seems expensive for DIY. Does Hobby Lobby sell a consumer level model?

[Fred L]

Talked to people involved with 3D printing recently and they see the immense possibilities of small scale printing which could become an entirely new workforce/manufacturing base for some products. What you can make with these printers is astonishing.

But back to the conversions, I also don't see why keeping the body intact is sacrosanct. The only collectibility is for those looking to do conversions themselves, otherwise they're just shelf queens.

[Corran]

Good question Drew. My only thought is that it seems like you'd either have to be really rich to own one, since they were prohibitively expensive. So...maybe no one needed to sell their old ones. And perhaps he supplied them to the pros he features on his site for free? One forum member has one here, very nice guy.

A friend of mine gave me a Polaroid 900 the other day. It was abandoned by the landlady renting his house. She is very well off and it was indeed a travel/leisure camera back in the day. I have seen plenty of SX-70 cameras in shops but this was the first 900 I'd ever seen other than my converted one. I might ship it off to get converted too, or maybe sell it sometime. Also has the silly flash and humongous case!

[ml_pisel]

... I'm again
The reason to keep the body intact is intended for sevaral aspects:
1- take all the original parts may not decrease the future value of your camera
2- cut the original back and melt it with a 4x5 back is very frustrating and difficult to do ...
3- remove two inges and replace all the back piece is fast and you can do it be yourself without any particular service man ...

[Drew Bedo] asked me how to use after back implantation:
It's very simple .. after replaced the back you'll have the exact space of a international 4x5 back so you can use all the film holder that you want..... i'm making compatibility test and till now i've verified the possibiltiy to use: "Fidelity 4x5 film holder"; Polaroid 550 ( or FUJI PA-45 ); polaroid 405 ... and i'm waiting for test whit 120 roll film holder and a ground glass.

I want also clarify why i've starting this project:
71469

As you can see i've tried by myself to convert a 110a back ... but it's still unfinished .... and i wanted to do something simpler and more functional.

[aluncrockford]

I suspect that the conversion that ML-pisel is looking at might have been done before and there are many options but this one http://davidharms.wordpress.com/new-project-polaroid-110a-4x5-conversion-back/ looks to be a very interesting option and as soon as my 110A turns up I will be getting in touch

[Corran]

Note that $7,000 one is for a 150mm f/2.8 Xenotar that you have to provide. So tack on another $1500-$2000 for that lens...

[Drew Bedo]

aluncrockford: Thanks for the link. I read some of the blog and watched the video. Seems that at the end, he had adapted a pack film back to accept a single load for a tintype Dagureiotype or maybe a glass plate. I don't see how one could load a 4x5 film holder ("double dark-slide") or Grafmatic magazine.

What most of us (me anyway) are looking for is a way to conveniently shoot 4x5 films with a hand-held rangefinder camera at a reasonable cost.

[Fred L]

Having owned a couple of mods, I have to say that so far I really like the Byron conversions the most. Definitely not the least expensive but Daniel makes a very clean conversion geared towards street shooters using Grafmatics. Regular film holders need to be modded to fit securely but I'm happy I can use the Grafmatic and Polaroid 550 with it.

As for the 'other' conversion, I have to say that something other than what appears to be a Graflok back would have been more in line with the pricing.

[Drew Bedo]

Could 3-D printing technology be used to make parts for the injection molded Titan cameras? What about a plastic Grafmatic? How about a lens board. Mounting flanges or retaining rings; could they be made this way? What about Lens cones for Fotoman bodoes or Holga bodies that are light-tight?

Anybody have an idea that is worth doing this way?

[ml_pisel]

Hi, only a second to comunicate that tomorrow or friday ( here in Italy ) i'll receive my very firt prototype and as soon as i can i'll post some photos !!

[sully75]

Could 3-D printing technology be used to make parts for the injection molded Titan cameras? What about a plastic Grafmatic? How about a lens board. Mounting flanges or retaining rings; could they be made this way? What about Lens cones for Fotoman bodoes or Holga bodies that are light-tight?

Anybody have an idea that is worth doing this way?

I think you could do any of these things. You need to be able to make the plans for the printer. It's probably beyond my skill level. I'm not sure that you could mold threads or something like that. But I think you can pretty much make any shape you want.

Yeah if someone would make a plan for a cam, a lensboard and a back for the Polaroid 900, we'd be seriously talking. That would be cool. They go for about $20 or less on ebay, I have a premo one but I'll likely never get to it. The viewfinder on these cameras is pretty sweet. Leica on steroids. It's actually a Fuji MF rangefinder on steroids.

[ml_pisel]

And here it is !!!!
As I promised ... this is the 3d printed model of my device !!!!

You can see it free and coupled with a Fuji PA-45 holder ... just for test !!!!
And i'm very proud and excited to confirm that it works !!!
I'm able to use the viewfinder and the rangefinder .... and i've mounted it in about ten minutes ... just the time to remove the inges of the original parts !!!
7199871999

[sully75]

And here it is !!!!
As I promised ... this is the 3d printed model of my device !!!!

You can see it free and coupled with a Fuji PA-45 holder ... just for test !!!!
And i'm very proud and excited to confirm that it works !!!
I'm able to use the viewfinder and the rangefinder .... and i've mounted it in about ten minutes ... just the time to remove the inges of the original parts !!!
7199871999

Well after poo-pooing you, I have to say, NICE JOB! That's exactly what I was hoping to do.

Not sure what the tab is on the viewfinder side. What's that for?

How much are you planning on selling these for?

If you could do a lensboard for the 900 that would mount with the original hardware, and a cam for the rangefinder, I would buy one. Probably, anyway.

[ml_pisel]

Thanks,
1- Tab on the viewfinder was design to be shure that there will be no interferences between rangefinder and the back itself ... but I will probably remove it in the final version ...
2- The beauty of this thing is that it can be used with all similar cameras ( I hope ) .... Infact this is tested with my 110A Pathfinder, but I have also a 900 and I'll test it in this days..... but I think that 110A, 110B, 120, 150, 160, 800, 850, 900 share same back a most of their components so with one device it will possible to convert ( and re-use ) a great number of abandoned cameras !!!

3- Final price of this thing will be about 280-300 euros not more .... but I want to explain why: final pieces have to be in aluminum or ergal .... or similar material, made by a cnc milling machine. People who made this kind of work realize a minimun of 100 pieces with a fixed cost of programming cnc machine. So initial cost for me will be very heavy and a little risky!! So i'm thinking to make a kind of pre-order buying ( with a resonable discount ) directly from Ebay.

[sully75]

Hmmm...well...that's way too expensive for me. But why do you have to make them out of aluminum? Why not 3-d print them? Or sell the pattern for 3d printing? I think plastic would be fine.

[ml_pisel]

Hmmm...well...that's way too expensive for me. But why do you have to make them out of aluminum? Why not 3-d print them? Or sell the pattern for 3d printing? I think plastic would be fine.

For 3d model that you see i've spent about 350,00 eur.
It'a made in ABS plastic and it's quite hard but threads for screw won't be very resisting so this model is good for testing purpose and not for a long use. This is why it's better to do a aluminum one.

And for 3d file i don't think i'll sell cause like all of digital contents it will be available for download in warez forum after a few minutes!!!

[Ari]

aluncrockford: Thanks for the link. I read some of the blog and watched the video. Seems that at the end, he had adapted a pack film back to accept a single load for a tintype Dagureiotype or maybe a glass plate. I don't see how one could load a 4x5 film holder ("double dark-slide") or Grafmatic magazine.

What most of us (me anyway) are looking for is a way to conveniently shoot 4x5 films with a hand-held rangefinder camera at a reasonable cost.

I owned two Pola Conversions made by Steve at Alpenhause.
They were wonderful; accurate rangefinder, close-up option, sleek profile, and used every 4x5 back on the market.
And he's priced well below $1000 for basic conversions.

Not to hijack the OP's thread, his dedication and skill are admirable, but since you asked...

[Drew Bedo]

I agree: Nice job.

[Drew Bedo]

TYoday 1.00 Euros =1.31 US Dollars.

So . . . 300 Euros= $393.



cnc machined aluminum? I thought the beauty of this 3-D printing approach was that the part could be made on-demand a piece at a time in plastic for a pretty low price.

[sully75]

Drew, I think currently the raw materials are fairly expensive. But I don't know.

Honestly it's prohibitively expensive at that price. $400 + camera = have someone (Alpenhause) make one for you.

I'd much prefer some sort of plastic back, these cameras are heavy to begin with.

[LF4Fun]

And here it is !!!!
As I promised ... this is the 3d printed model of my device !!!!

You can see it free and coupled with a Fuji PA-45 holder ... just for test !!!!
And i'm very proud and excited to confirm that it works !!!
I'm able to use the viewfinder and the rangefinder .... and i've mounted it in about ten minutes ... just the time to remove the inges of the original parts !!!
7199871999

nice job but don't you have to reset the infinity point & readjust the rangefinder?

[ml_pisel]

TYoday 1.00 Euros =1.31 US Dollars.

So . . . 300 Euros= $393.



cnc machined aluminum? I thought the beauty of this 3-D printing approach was that the part could be made on-demand a piece at a time in plastic for a pretty low price.

Unfortunatly, it's not so simple ... cause it's all about how many objects you have to made ... I'll try to explain:
1- 3d printed items are very expensive, and they are not so good for a long use or hard stress and the price is equal for every item you print;
2- Platic made are lighter, good enough for long use but they have a great problem: cnc steel made mold are incredibly expensive ( for this device I asked and they said me about 5500/6000 euros ) and usually minimun order is intented for 500-600 pieces .....
3- metal casted ones are unattainable!!!!!
4- CNC made items are in the middle: initial cost is high (about 1500 euros to program the cnc machine ) but more items you buy low is the final price .... and minimun order is usually for 100 pieces, and they aren't so heavy ;) !!!

That's it !! ;)

[ml_pisel]

nice job but don't you have to reset the infinity point & readjust the rangefinder?

The trick is that i've move the focal plane about 38mm behind original and i haven't changed lens .. so just setting focus wheel to infinity ... and then moving lens 38mm behind infinity sign.... and it works !!!
I'm also studing a new plate to make this simpler !!

[ml_pisel]

PS ... I want to excuse me for my very poor english !!!! :)

[Drew Bedo]

Not to worry. In 1905, my grandfather came form the area of Potenza to New York city. He taught himself to speak english in the burroughs of NYC. Reading your posts is a little like listening to my grandfather . . .and I understand what you say. My only knowlege of Italien is a few short words I heard my grandfather say when he hit his finger with a hammer.

I will say that this project looks more and more like it will not wok out from the money aspect. The exhisting conversions go from (I think) about 800 to 1,800, disregarding the high end. Does $400 cover your cost and give you a profit? If fhis project starts at ~$400 for the back part, then needs other work for the infinity stop and RF cam, it goes on up in cost. I do not really see this as a DIY project where I can buy the part and be ready to go.

Maybe it would be a commercially feasable project if you can sell the CNC machined aluminum back to the guys already doing the conversion, Razzlw, alpinhaus et al.

[Drew Bedo]

Not to worry. In 1905, my grandfather came form the area of Potenza to New York city. He taught himself to speak english in the burroughs of NYC. Reading your posts is a little like listening to my grandfather . . .and I understand what you say. My only knowledge of Italian is a few short words I heard my grandfather say when he hit his finger with a hammer.

I will say that this project looks more and more like it will not work out from the money aspect. The existing conversions go from (I think) about $800 to $1,800 . . .for a Byron, disregarding the high end. Does $400 cover your cost and give you a profit? If fhis project starts at ~$400 for only the back part, then needs other work for the infinity stop and RF cam, it goes on up in cost. I do not really see this as a DIY project where I can buy the part and be ready to go.

Maybe it would be a commercially feasible project if you can sell the CNC machined aluminum back to the guys already doing the conversion, Razzl, Alpinhaus et al.

[ml_pisel]

Not to worry. In 1905, my grandfather came form the area of Potenza to New York city. He taught himself to speak english in the burroughs of NYC. Reading your posts is a little like listening to my grandfather . . .and I understand what you say. My only knowledge of Italian is a few short words I heard my grandfather say when he hit his finger with a hammer.



;)

My wife is still laughing and kidding me !!!

;)

[ml_pisel]

A quick update:

So the future of this item will be in PLASTIC !!

I think in a few days i'll be able to show the functional version ... and even some photos taken with my modified camera !!!

[ml_pisel]

And here we are, if someone's interested, please take a look at my very first functional prototype:

www.marcolucifora.com (http://www.marcolucifora.com) in the section "fotografia"

In these days i'll go around making some photos just to try my new toy ;) !!

[aluncrockford]

That is just perfect, I suppose a screen might be a good idea to look after the lens as well as to help focus, but that is a mere detail , the back is exactly what I am after . Good work and I hope I am not the only one who buys it

[pound]

A quick update:

So the future of this item will be in PLASTIC !!

I think in a few days i'll be able to show the functional version ... and even some photos taken with my modified camera !!!
interesting, if it is going to be in plastic, what would be the price be ?
i look thru your flickr photos. What the 3 round knobs for ?

[ml_pisel]

Price is what you find in my site, with the difference between the shipping quote ...

About the 3 knobs: i've tried a solution of 2 knobs, but especially for filmholder like Fuji PA-45 it seemed to me that assembly was a little bit weak. So i've putted 2 knobs on the bottom to ensure the filmholder to the back and 1 knobs on top to be less disturbing for eyes and focus operations.

Cause note that the beauty of this device is to be used with all cameras, like 110A, 120, .... with normal focus oprerations trough the viewfinder and rangefinder !!!

[Old-N-Feeble]

Marco... I suggest you add your website to your signature. ;)

[ml_pisel]

Marco... I suggest you add your website to your signature. ;)

Thanks for suggestion, just done!

[ml_pisel]

Hi, i had the very first customer who belive in my project and have bought one item from my ebay auction!!!
At now i'm also in contact with the italian representative of "the impossible project" which asked me to show him my prototype!!!
What else can i say, i'm pretty exited cause it seems that my project is really intersting for other people!!!

[Gordon Flodders]

The song entitled 'Oh So Quiet' by Bjork has suddenly come to mind.

GF.

[ml_pisel]

The song entitled 'Oh So Quiet' by Bjork has suddenly come to mind.

GF.

Sorry but i'dont know the song, so i can't understand what do you mean ..... :confused:

[ml_pisel]

Here some (ugly) photos taken with my converted camera, using an expired Fujifilm FP-100C 45 and an expired Fujifilm FP-3000b. Photos were taken by change the filmholder, using the Fuji PA-45 and Polaroid 405.

http://flic.kr/s/aHsjzf6yVQ

PS My photos are very boring ... but the I am a bad photographer ... with a good camera ;)

[aluncrockford]

Err ,is there the slightest hint of light creeping into the side of the right hand side of the frame , if so this is not a good thing .

[ViewCameraNut]

I think that your project sounds great. The conversions presently out there are a fortune!! If you can find an inexpensive solution you should do very well, and with no cutting and tearing off of the old back to boot! Keep it up, don't let ANYONE discourage you. Best of luck, Mike.
Please don't be so quick to judge my work in sort of swindle !!!
In a couple of weeks i'll be able to post some image of the first prototype, even without any contribution.
The reasons are following:
1- I'd like to patent what i'm doing and this is a quite long bureaucratic procedure here in Italy.
2- I've tried to make prototype in ergal but it was very expensive so i'm contacting people that make SLS print directly from my 3d models and this can be the right way.

And if you ask me why i've created an Indiegogo page project here's the answer: i have to understand if what i'm creating is interesting for people or noone cares about; being paied means also buy the final product or discount for buying it. It's not absolutely to stole money or to have "benefits" like you said.

[ml_pisel]

Err ,is there the slightest hint of light creeping into the side of the right hand side of the frame , if so this is not a good thing .

I think the light creeping was in the film, cause is in the side where you lift the polaroid out, and not in the cutted part near the viewfinder as i tought before ....
I'm waiting also photos taken with 4x5 plain negative and 120 negative to see the results .. but laboratory is quite slow in this kind of envelope

[ml_pisel]

Hi just a little update...
If you want to see the final product and how it works, please take a look at my (ugly) video i've putted on vimeo...
This is the link:

http://vimeo.com/44535591

[aluncrockford]

Hi Marco, did you get the rest of the film back and was it light tight, apart from that it looks very positive

[Vascilli]

Wow that looks great. When will they start to be sold?

[ml_pisel]

Hi thanks all for interest.
I'm finishing my new site, it's online and it has only a few minor bugs, like thumbnail preview .... but it works so for who's interested, please take a look at
http://www.polaconv.com

for info and sales !!
regards

[ml_pisel]

SO my new site is done and it works very well ....
so if you like, please take a look at http://www.polaconv.com to see a great number of pictures, the video I've made, sales .... and so on ...
I have made also four cameras already converted, they are sold with the focus plate setted, the macro chain and even an original polaroid leather bag!!!!
So don't loose this opportunity !!

[Kirk Gittings]

The site doesn't work. A pop up comes up trying to sell me something and won't let me see your site.

[ml_pisel]

The site doesn't work. A pop up comes up trying to sell me something and won't let me see your site.

Hi
I've just try to connect to the site and it worked well, just to test it i've used both Iexplore and Chrome bowser .... and it was good !!

Cannot understand why didn't worked to you ... maybe try again.
Sorry for the inconvenience but maybe the hostingsite was down for some manteinance ......

regards,
MArco

[MMELVIS]

Site is not working with Firefox due to the use Iframes. Will work in Internet explorer

[Jody_S]

Just a heads up, your ebay auctions are not showing up on other sites (ebay.com, etc). You need to specify shipping to each country (USA, Australia, etc) if you want your product to show up in searches.

[aluncrockford]

Having just received one of Marcos backs I am afraid to say it is not quite ready for the open market, on the credit size it fits perfectly but that is where the plus points stop. There are a number of fundamental flaws, to start you need to refocus using a ground glass screen ( not provided) and the range finder to recalibrate the focus which is straightforward apart from the small point that the new point of infinity is halfway down the rail and it needs tape to hold it, there is no way of securing the front without it. The holder will take a graphmatic but not a DDS making it a very niche product indeed and finally because of the design itself and the need to drop the left hand corner of the back to allow you to use the view finder it is not light tight. The conclusion is that this is very much a work in progress and you might want to wait for all the problems to be resolved before looking at this product as a viable option for a polaroid conversion

[Steve Smith]

Obviously the lens needs to be moved back to compensate for the film being further back but why would the rangefinder need to be recalibrated?


Steve.

[aluncrockford]

Apologies ,the range finder works perfectly the problem is with the lens which is not secure in its new position and it can move without a deice to keep it in place, hence the gaffa tape.

[ml_pisel]

Apologies ,the range finder works perfectly the problem is with the lens which is not secure in its new position and it can move without a deice to keep it in place, hence the gaffa tape.

As I already answer by mail, POLACONV is a young product and comments and critis are welcome.
But to be honest you have also say what I said when you have bought my product: "you'll have 1 year of free upgrade for any new items that I'll design for Polaconv backs".
And i've confirmed that to use Polaconv back with 4x5 chassis i'm desinging new metal plate to ensure the filmholder to the back.
I the auction is even written that with 15,00 i'll do the conversion without any configuration problems.
Ground glass is not provided because polaconv back is designed to make a "point and shoot" 110 camera .... there's milions of 4x5 camera better than Polaroid 110 ... so for me it was unusefull to make a ground glass....
For focus matter if you look at POLACONV home page you'll find that i've designed two accessories for cameras that i sell already converted and they are the "focus plate" and the macro chain to shoot in near subject without blocking the lens in the coupled position. These are accessoried that works only with 110A and 110B cameras .. so i can't sell them to anyone cause 4x5 POLACONV is compatible with all 40type cameras ... some customers asked me before purchasing and i've shipped them with the Polaconv back, very simple.
SoI think that before emmit sentences it's better to ask and to talk, talk and talk.
regards

[Kuzano]

Fugly!... simply Fugly!!!

Over the years, I have determined that the design premise of Polaroid (with the possible exception of the 600SE made for them by Mamiya) has been to start with UGLY and see how much worse the designers can make each model.

As Frank Lloyd Wright proved so well..."Form Follows Function", but in the case of the Polaroid Pathfinder bodies, I believe you have to cut away a ton of ugly, to get to the "function", before you have a beautiful form. Nobody is really doing that on these conversions. Personal observation of course.

I have a half dozen Pathfinders 110,110a,110b,120 and 900 camera bodies and Rodenstock/Polaroid lens/shutters. I've threatened to send them to someone for conversion, or tackle them myself (convert). My problem has been that I may end up with a very portable 4x5, but VERY UGLY, camera, as I perceive most of the final cameras once converted. That comment does not even take in still packing around nearly a pound of UGLY.

In addition, using my premise for a 4X5, using a very conventional 4x5 roll film back will give me a good 120 roll film back up to 6X12 Pano. Portability is my goal, and am not concerned with any perspective movements. I have my lightened, stripped GG focus Super Graphic Graflex for movements.

Finally, I came to the conclusion that the way to get what I want, is to butcher away the UGLY, and use only the part of the camera that is functional. The picture included here shows the original model, and the cut down final result. The portion cut away does not weaken the folding mechanism, or degrade the parallelism of the standards front to back in any way. If anything good can be said about the Pathfinder design, it is overbuilt. The cut away material produces a basic but hacked frame, door and folding standards/bellow assembly:

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y174/kuzano/P9070005Medium.jpg

I have contacted you by PM and asked if you will sell just the back casting, enabling me to mod it to my cut down Polaroid 110. No response.

Thanks if you will let me know the answer to my query.

If this works, I will then attempt to save the rangefinder, yet cut away the UGLY on an advanced model. I plan to use the 200 Quickload and ReadyLoads I have in the freezer, and use a DDS holder converted to a slide in GG viewer.

Not attempting to hijack your thread, I am not interested in producing or selling these cameras. Strictly for my own use.

[aluncrockford]

err Marco the focus option is not something that has been mentioned before, your site is not accessible, which has also been highlighted by more than one other person . So if you would like to send me the focusing option please do. you need a focusing screen to make the focus adjustments . As already mentioned the idea is a good one though it might have been better to go through all aspects of the design before marketing it .

[ml_pisel]

Fugly!... simply Fugly!!!

Over the years, I have determined that the design premise of Polaroid (with the possible exception of the 600SE made for them by Mamiya) has been to start with UGLY and see how much worse the designers can make each model.

As Frank Lloyd Wright proved so well..."Form Follows Function", but in the case of the Polaroid Pathfinder bodies, I believe you have to cut away a ton of ugly, to get to the "function", before you have a beautiful form. Nobody is really doing that on these conversions. Personal observation of course.

I have a half dozen Pathfinders 110,110a,110b,120 and 900 camera bodies and Rodenstock/Polaroid lens/shutters. I've threatened to send them to someone for conversion, or tackle them myself (convert). My problem has been that I may end up with a very portable 4x5, but VERY UGLY, camera, as I perceive most of the final cameras once converted. That comment does not even take in still packing around nearly a pound of UGLY.

In addition, using my premise for a 4X5, using a very conventional 4x5 roll film back will give me a good 120 roll film back up to 6X12 Pano. Portability is my goal, and am not concerned with any perspective movements. I have my lightened, stripped GG focus Super Graphic Graflex for movements.

Finally, I came to the conclusion that the way to get what I want, is to butcher away the UGLY, and use only the part of the camera that is functional. The picture included here shows the original model, and the cut down final result. The portion cut away does not weaken the folding mechanism, or degrade the parallelism of the standards front to back in any way. If anything good can be said about the Pathfinder design, it is overbuilt. The cut away material produces a basic but hacked frame, door and folding standards/bellow assembly:

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y174/kuzano/P9070005Medium.jpg

I have contacted you by PM and asked if you will sell just the back casting, enabling me to mod it to my cut down Polaroid 110. No response.

Thanks if you will let me know the answer to my query.

If this works, I will then attempt to save the rangefinder, yet cut away the UGLY on an advanced model. I plan to use the 200 Quickload and ReadyLoads I have in the freezer, and use a DDS holder converted to a slide in GG viewer.

Not attempting to hijack your thread, I am not interested in producing or selling these cameras. Strictly for my own use.

Dear sir,
I've already answered by pm on 23rd august 15:39.
But i think that my polaconv back is not suita le for your hacked camera cause is designed to fit exactly the 40 type camera body and to be mounted it uses the original hinges.. That semems to cutted away in your hacked body

[Steve Smith]

I came to the conclusion that the way to get what I want, is to butcher away the UGLY, and use only the part of the camera that is functional.

That reminds me of my father's advice to me as a child when I wanted to make a wooden model boat: "Start with a block of wood then cut away all the bits which don't look like boat".


Steve.

[ml_pisel]

For trouble with my homepage i've found a rapid solution....
The problem is that imcreator website hosting is free for some options but have a charge for other service....
So if you have trouble with your browser you can tape this address:

http://http://www.i-m.co/mlpisel/polaconv/

That is the source of my website but in a few days i'll solve the problem with the regular address

[ml_pisel]

Hi,
Finally i've able to solve problems for viewing my homepage .. but now it works ( ihope )
so if you want to take a look simply go to:

http://www.polaconv.com