PDA

View Full Version : 8x10 Instant Integral film



gth
25-Sep-2010, 15:01
"The impossible Project" has announced they well come out with a 8x10 Integral film. How that will work in terms of camera back, is not released, integral film needing a more automated back then peel-apart film. Ca'tching... and out comes developed positive 8x10 image!

They showed a 20x24 in version at Photokina:

"Impossible saved the last intact production machinery for the legendary 8 x 10 inch film format and got it from the USA in late 2009. We carefully re-located this unique equipment from Waltham near Boston to the Impossible factory, where the 8x10 production machinery is now set up.
To produce film for our integral film adventure on the 20 x 24 Polaroid camera, we restarted the 8 x 10 pod machine and proved - as you can see above - more than successful! This joyful experience boosts us to forward our 8 x 10 film project at full speed in order to hopefully soon bring the wonderful 8 x 10 format material back."

Daniel Stone
25-Sep-2010, 15:29
can't understand why they don't just make it like it was before.

have been watching out for an 8x10 polaroid processor/film holders, but these might not have any use if they go the 'integral' route :mad:

-Dan

Andrew O'Neill
25-Sep-2010, 15:36
I hope it doesn't look as crappy as their other products.

Ben Syverson
25-Sep-2010, 16:26
I think you got it mixed up... The 8x10 won't be integral -- the 20x24 is (which is admittedly crazy). The big news for 8x10 is that they started up the pod machine and got some pods filled with their new chemistry. However, they'll need to make slightly new chemistry for peel-apart. Since it's a simpler product, hopefully they can just remove things from the integral recipe. I don't think peel-apart needs an opacifier or a mechanism to stop development.

gth
25-Sep-2010, 17:32
You might be right, I am just copying from the email I got from Impossible Project. See Below.

Not exctly clear but is seems they did 20x24 in integral and used the old 8x10 machinery for it (which was peel apart??) anyhow.... interesting, although as Andrew pointed out is pretty crappy quality at this point. I've used their first flush 600 film and the results are, well, hmm... and $$$$. But it is fun!

Their email:

"Our friend Jan Hnizdo traveled all the way to Cologne to set up the fabled 20 x 24 inch Polaroid camera. And for the first time in the history of analog instant photography, we dared to use integral instant film instead of peel-apart film in this legendary camera. Therefore we produced a special, unique large-format integral instant film which contained the brand new and 2nd generation of Impossible Silver and Color Shade chemistry. This unique and impossible adventure came to a happy end that saw the presentation of 9 portraits taken of visitors and guests. Everyone was blown away by the details and quality of the image material. See for yourself:

AND:

Impossible saved the last intact production machinery for the legendary 8 x 10 inch film format and got it from the USA in late 2009. We carefully re-located this unique equipment from Waltham near Boston to the Impossible factory, where the 8x10 production machinery is now set up.
To produce film for our integral film adventure on the 20 x 24 Polaroid camera, we restarted the 8 x 10 pod machine and proved - as you can see above - more than successful! This joyful experience boosts us to forward our 8 x 10 film project at full speed in order to hopefully soon bring the wonderful 8 x 10 format material back."

Ben Syverson
25-Sep-2010, 18:17
Yeah, nothing in that email indicates that their 8x10 will be integral. I'm very interested to see what will come of their experiments with 8x10. I imagine they would have more control vs integral.

gth
25-Sep-2010, 19:05
The thing is Ben, their whole set up is based on an integral process. We'll have to see what happens and if they can stay in business.

It's a shame with Polaroid... a lot of technology and know-how went down the drain. It is a basic problem with photographic film emulsion and process technology. The basic science is known but the actual technical implementation how it is done to make it work, is a secret, company owned technology that can be wiped out with a pen stroke by a bean counter.

Something to watch for as regular film technology fades out - commercially. Hopefully Kodak will understand their cultural significance and put their film technology in the public domain if they ever totally abandon film as a business.

Ben Syverson
25-Sep-2010, 19:21
Hopefully Kodak will understand their cultural significance and put their film technology in the public domain if they ever totally abandon film as a business.
The technology is one thing -- the equipment is another... The only reason the Impossible Project exists at all is that they were able to save the integral machines. The same goes with Kodak. Getting the secret formula for modern T-grain color emulsion is worthless unless you have the multimillion dollar multilayer coating machine to lay it onto film.

mohan
27-Sep-2010, 11:46
Can someone please explain what "integral film" is?

Thanks

Mark Sampson
27-Sep-2010, 13:44
'Integral' here means self-developing, like the SX-70 and Spectra films. As opposed to the peel-apart pack and sheet films.

Ben Syverson
27-Sep-2010, 13:45
"Integral" means the film is completely self-contained, like Polaroid 600 film. Other instant film is "peel-apart," meaning the positive print is pulled apart from the negative.

Tracy Storer
28-Sep-2010, 07:30
It is also worth noting that integral films shot on 20x24 or existing 8x10 cameras will yield backwards images. The old small format Polaroid cameras for integral films all incorporated a mirror...
But hey, a lot of this wet plate work people are doing now, (tintypes / "alumitypes") is backwards as well.

Drew Bedo
28-Sep-2010, 08:54
I used to have a B&J 5x7 with a 4x5 back and shot 4x5 exclusivly with it. It worked great. With the extension rail mounted, it would do super macro. It was long enough and strong enough or mount the longest (heaviest) focal length I could find.

I now use a petite Wista Mfg Zone VI with only 12" max extension. It is half the weight and bulk of the B&J, (and I am 20 years older). I have never looked on any camera as "The One" camera for me. If I were single, I would still have every camera I have ever owned.

If the price is right for you, get the 5x7 and shoot away . . .till you want a different camera; be it 4x5, 8x10 or ULF.

dng88
19-Apr-2012, 14:15
anything happen? or just impossible ...

unixrevolution
20-Apr-2012, 08:04
It is also worth noting that integral films shot on 20x24 or existing 8x10 cameras will yield backwards images. The old small format Polaroid cameras for integral films all incorporated a mirror...
But hey, a lot of this wet plate work people are doing now, (tintypes / "alumitypes") is backwards as well.

If you really wanted your 8x10 polaroids to come out right, the solution I'm thinking is to build an 8x10 graflex completely backwards. View and compose from the back, and drop the mirror, and shoot off the reflex mirror.

I haven't heard anything about the 8x10s from Impossible but I'm eager to see if they get it going. 8x10 Instant would just be *the business*!

In the meantime, New55 has a promising 4x5 black and white P/N film in development:

http://new55project.blogspot.com/