polaroid 545i

[anthony marsh]

I'm buying a polaroid 545i back for my graphic view.What type film is usable with it?

[John T]

You probably should have researched this before buying the back. All Polaroid film that fit in the 545 series of holders have been discontinued for awhile. They are only available from people who are selling their old stock-with associated unknown storage situations.

Rereading your post, hopefully you haven't bought the back yet.

[Patel.djl]

http://www.the-impossible-project.com/

regards jan

[Frank Petronio]

They aren't making film for it either and they probably won't since it requires an entirely different manufacturing line.

I wouldn't start throwing them away but they are essentially worthless. It is a shame that greedy people are still attempting to sell them for $50 or so on eBay.

[Chauncey Walden]

I use Kodak Readyloads and Fuji Quickloads in mine.

[MIke Sherck]

I use Kodak Readyloads and Fuji Quickloads in mine.

Not to add to the misery, but Readyloads have also been discontinued for a while and some Quickloads have also apparently been discontinued (although not all.)

So in answer to the original question, Fuji Quickloads, left over Kodak Readyloads, or even older left over Polaroid materials, if you can find them.

Mike

[Patel.djl]

They aren't making film for it either and they probably won't since it requires an entirely different manufacturing line.


they are not making them YET, but shure they will later. anyway there are (f.e.) a few 53s left and available there (though i don't know if the price is a good one). i dont think they work on NEW materials just for the smaller formats. AND: they only started yet, lets see what future will bring...

jan

[Robert Hughes]

they are not making them YET, but shure they will later.
I dunno. The Impossible Project reminds me of some of those retro motorcycle (http://superxowners.com/) startups, where a few MBA's hatch an idea to bring back the ultimate street rod. Except they don't know anything about manufacturing (having spent their formative years in business school instead of work), and they expect to get fabulously rich without putting in the effort needed to bring their product successfully to market.

In the end, they fold, the MBA's walking off with the startup cash, leaving lots of machinists, salesmen and customers in the lurch.

[Patel.djl]

I dunno. The Impossible Project reminds me of some of those retro motorcycle (http://superxowners.com/) startups, where a few MBA's hatch an idea to bring back the ultimate street rod. Except they don't know anything about manufacturing (having spent their formative years in business school instead of work), and they expect to get fabulously rich without putting in the effort needed to bring their product successfully to market.

In the end, they fold, the MBA's walking off with the startup cash, leaving lots of machinists, salesmen and customers in the lurch.

you know this is europe, not US of A :D
let us see what will happen...

jan

[rdenney]

you know this is europe, not US of A :D
let us see what will happen...

jan

You don't think such things happen there, too?

I don't know if The Impossible Project is just an exercise or not, but so far everything I've read about the project has been aimed not at peel-apart materials but at instant pictures, such as those used in the SX-70. And the part that does seem like an MBA exercise is that it is responding to a perceived market hipness, not to the yearning of we few in large-format photography.

As for me, the Fuji peel-apart materials are very good and good enough to fill the market niche, as long as they keep making them. They come in 4x5 and they have a loader that is easier, lighter, and cheaper (in terms of cost). It's only disadvantage is that it uses pack film instead of sheet film. I don't see where a startup is going to succeed in providing useful competition for Fuji for these products.

The one old Polaroid project that is sadly lacking, though, is Type 55 positive/negative. But that would be far easier for Fuji to make than for The Impossible Project--the film and chemicals required are pretty conventional. And it can be made in pack formats, too.

I still have my old 545, and I also have a freezer full of Quickloads. But I decided to get a used Fuji Quickload holder--again, it is lighter, easier, and more reliable according to all the reports I have seen.

But I still keep my old 545, and I even still have the old Type 55 clearing tank.

Rick "hope springs eternal" Denney

[BrianShaw]

I wouldn't start throwing them away but they are essentially worthless. It is a shame that greedy people are still attempting to sell them for $50 or so on eBay.

Frank... I'm not as eternally hopefull as Mr. Denny (and others); I'm thinking about putting my holder and clearing bucket on eBay. What do you think the asking price should be. I'm thinking of BIN rather than auction. :)

[rdenney]

Frank... I'm not as eternally hopefull as Mr. Denny (and others); I'm thinking about putting my holder and clearing bucket on eBay. What do you think the asking price should be. I'm thinking of BIN rather than auction. :)

I would set the minimum bid at half of KEH's price, with a BIN price maybe 150% of that value.

Note that KEH was selling 545's in the 20-30-buck range last time I looked.

Rick "keeping a lot of things not worth selling" Denney

[Frank Petronio]

Isn't it wrong to even ask money for the damn things at this point?

Of course if you save it another 50 years it could be worth thousands.

I have two, I might get a few more and make my own "Pola 545-henge" out back.

[BrianShaw]

... I might get a few more and make my own "Pola 545-henge" out back.

That is a way-cool idea!

[Gary Williams]

I dunno. The Impossible Project reminds me of some of those retro motorcycle (http://superxowners.com/) startups, where a few MBA's hatch an idea to bring back the ultimate street rod. Except they don't know anything about manufacturing (having spent their formative years in business school instead of work), and they expect to get fabulously rich without putting in the effort needed to bring their product successfully to market.

In the end, they fold, the MBA's walking off with the startup cash, leaving lots of machinists, salesmen and customers in the lurch.


you hit the nail there. And the price of the film is too high too. The market for $2-$3/shot instant film isn't exactly burgeoning.

if Fuji stops making instant film, all these Polaroid conversions will be worth like 9 bucks each.

I hope that Impossible Project survives, but odds are stacked against them. As energy costs ramp up, I would not want to be in any film mfg. business. The energy costs of running any mfg. plant are exceedingly expensive. It's for someone like Bill Gates or Ross Perot to toy with, who can afford to lose a hundred million $$ and not even blink.

[Vascilli]

I just got a Polaroid Miniportrait 253 from a family member with a 545i back. Seeing as film for it is pointlessly expensive, what holders would be ideal replacements for regular 4x5 sheets?

[rdenney]

I just got a Polaroid Miniportrait 253 from a family member with a 545i back. Seeing as film for it is pointlessly expensive, what holders would be ideal replacements for regular 4x5 sheets?

If it's a true 545i, and not modified for this application, any standard 4x5 film holder will work. The 545i was designed to slide into a standard film back.

But if the 545i is screwed to the camera, then it was probably modified to preclude an easy switch. You can still use it with Quickload film, but Fuji has announced (or not) that they are discontinuing that packaging, so buy what you can find now and store it in the freezer.

Rick "who has been stocking up on Qickloads" Denney

[Vascilli]

It has the slots for locking switches on the top and bottom, which according to my research makes it a Graflok style back? I've been looking at film holders but it doesn't look like any of them have would work, instead they appear to just slide behind the ground glass of most view cameras. The Miniportrait 253 doesn't have a ground glass, just the locking switches. I suppose they all have the slots?

[rdenney]

It has the slots for locking switches on the top and bottom, which according to my research makes it a Graflok style back? I've been looking at film holders but it doesn't look like any of them have would work, instead they appear to just slide behind the ground glass of most view cameras. The Miniportrait 253 doesn't have a ground glass, just the locking switches. I suppose they all have the slots?

Yes, those slots accept the locking tabs that form a Graflok back.

If you want to use instant film, a Fuji PA-45 holder for film packs also has those slots, and you can use 4x5 peel-apart instant film made by Fuji in 10-exposure packs.

Most roll-film holders either fit under those locking tabs or have slots for those tabs, and they should also work.

Most ground-glass backs that I've seen use spring levers on top and bottom outside the Graflok interface, so installing a spring back might not be that easy. There might be some that mount using Graflok, I don't know if there are any regular sheet-film holders that have slots for Graflok tabs.

Rick "noting that you can always use Quickloads in the 545i, but stock up" Denney

[Jim Galli]

Isn't it wrong to even ask money for the damn things at this point?

Spoken like a true liberal Frank.


Anthony, check your private messages please.

[Chris Strobel]

There MUST be some other creative ways to put these 545i's to work.Think the Macolantern or Mac fish tanks :D

http://www.uberreview.com/wp-content/uploads/mac-o-lantern.jpg

http://scienceblogs.com/zooillogix/fish%20in%20mac%20classic%20aquarium.jpg

[Vascilli]

Yes, those slots accept the locking tabs that form a Graflok back.

If you want to use instant film, a Fuji PA-45 holder for film packs also has those slots, and you can use 4x5 peel-apart instant film made by Fuji in 10-exposure packs.

Most roll-film holders either fit under those locking tabs or have slots for those tabs, and they should also work.

Most ground-glass backs that I've seen use spring levers on top and bottom outside the Graflok interface, so installing a spring back might not be that easy. There might be some that mount using Graflok, I don't know if there are any regular sheet-film holders that have slots for Graflok tabs.

Rick "noting that you can always use Quickloads in the 545i, but stock up" Denney

None of the stores in town have Graflok sheet holders. I suppose any normal ground glass back would fit, though? (Seeing as apparently all 4x5 backs use the Graflok tabs to attach)

[rdenney]

None of the stores in town have Graflok sheet holders. I suppose any normal ground glass back would fit, though? (Seeing as apparently all 4x5 backs use the Graflok tabs to attach)

The ground-glass backs on my Calumet/Cambo and Sinar cameras do not use the Graflok tabs to attach the ground glass. In both cases, the ground glass is held in place with two spring locks, one top and one bottom, that hook onto pins in the back. The spring locks are pushed in and the ground-glass back slid to one side to remove. The Graflok tabs have no function when using the ground-glass back on either camera.

There may have been a camera in the past that used the Graflok tabs to secure a spring back for a sheet-film holder, but I doubt it. The reason I doubt it is that I don't think there would be room for the sheet-film holder when the tabs are closed--the tabs will interfere with the slide-in film holder when closed.

The roll-film and instant-film holders I have either fit under the Graflok tabs, or have slots milled into the edges to accommodate the Graflok tabs.

In this image from one of the articles on this forum, you can see the spring levers above and below the ground glass, and they clip into the pins (or, in the case of this Osaka, tabs) on the back. The Graflok tabs are open and unused.

As I look at this, though, I wonder if that pin arrangement for the ground-glass holder/spring back is part of the Graflok design. I had always though it was just the tabs and other general dimensions. Maybe my Cambo GG holder will fit in my Sinar and vice versa. But I wouldn't bet on it.

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/cameras/ebony/chnpt.jpg

Rick "who has never attempted to mix and match ground glass frames" Denney

[Jack Dahlgren]

Rick,

That looks like an ebony rather than an Osaka. And yes, the spring levers (the arm with a thumb rest) hooks onto a pin underneath. The sliding tabs do not hook into the gg at all. Those flat tabs just to the right of the levers capture the end of the lever so it doesn't flop all the way open when it is unhooked.

[rdenney]

Rick,

That looks like an ebony rather than an Osaka. And yes, the spring levers (the arm with a thumb rest) hooks onto a pin underneath. The sliding tabs do not hook into the gg at all. Those flat tabs just to the right of the levers capture the end of the lever so it doesn't flop all the way open when it is unhooked.


Yes, an Ebony. Brain fart.

But the question is whether the pins under which the GG-holder spring levers hook are part of the Graflok standard and therefore whether a GG-back intended for one brand's Graflok back will fit on a different brand's Graflok back. I'm thinking they are not, but I've never considered it and will have to experiment next time I have both the Cambo and the Sinar out in front of me.

Rick "with apologies to Ebony" Denney

[Jack Dahlgren]

Here is the patent for the Graflok back:
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/2549670.pdf
The same basic elements can be identified in the ebony above with some minor differences in type and location of spring and the fact that the pin is housed rather than being a hook as in graflex patent.

It appears that the levers and hooks/pins are part of the invention and as far as I have heard the graflok was pretty much stable in its configuration over the years, so it is a sort of a standard. If something can attach to a real graflok, it should hook to any graflok clone unless there is some additional interference which the new design introduces, discounting the obvious fact of different film sizes (9x12, 4x5, 5x7 ...).

But nothing can be assumed with such a wide variety of camera designers over many decades!