Polaroid 8x10 w/81-05 holder

[Jakelovesphoto]

[QUOTE=koh303;Ever since fuji material became available, it was apparent to anyone who used this stuff just how bad polaroid material really was. Colors were never right, contrast was off, exposure - dont ask, and sharpness was an issue with most color films. All of the above was and is close to perfection with the Fuji color material, and not to mention the BW material they sadly no longer make. Polaroid BW was not as awful as the color, and in some cases was not bad at all (IE T55), but oh, so much work to be able to use[/QUOTE]

It pains me to see you bash Old Pol' but unfortunately I can't help but agree. I think Polaroid never stayed one one product long enough to perfect it. It was always the next thing, big thing, new thing.

[bvy]

Many things can go wrong with such a large sheet and a processor. They do not get sucked in right, or the crimp, or the pod is not spread right, or, it just does not work...

I think that's true in general, but I meant relative to the 81-05 holder. What goes wrong so easily with the 81-05 holder such that people are losing shots/wasting film? Is it related to the problem of inserting the positive sheet? It is alignment?

Thanks for the attachment by the way. Very helpful.

[koh303]

I think that's true in general, but I meant relative to the 81-05 holder. What goes wrong so easily with the 81-05 holder such that people are losing shots/wasting film? Is it related to the problem of inserting the positive sheet? It is alignment?

Thanks for the attachment by the way. Very helpful.

As i said in the post you quoted:
"They do not get sucked in right, or they crimp, or the pod is not spread right, or, it just does not work..." or all of the above.
All of these are true with the newer holder+tray BTW.

[bvy]

What problem did the newer holder and tray solve, then?

[koh303]

What problem did the newer holder and tray solve, then?

The problem of being able to charge more money for something already available for less. The american dream.

[pierre506]

Pierre: Can you be specific about the problems you've had? What went wrong exactly?

The 1st one was the processor could not pull out the slide. I try to rescue it again and again, but finally failed. I checked and found the pod was a little bit of sloping.
The 2nd one was the processor pulled out the positive paper without the negative. It must be my fault.
The 3rd one sounds good after the pulling out noise. I opened the cover and found that the slide had been rolling too much and into the roller again. The result was I only got a half image.
I did not know why and stopped.

[vdonovan]

What problem did the newer holder and tray solve, then?

The 81-05 requires you to slide the positive receiver sheet into a somewhat narrow slot in the film holder. It's a little awkward and the receiver sheet can buckle. The newer tray and holder simplified putting the receiver sheet and negative into the processor. I don't know if it works any better, I've never had any trouble with either.

[bvy]

Thank you all. This is good information to be armed with before going at it alone. I think the next thing is to try it. My 8x10 is currently "in the shop" for repairs. I'll provide an update once it gets back to me and I have some film to work with (I might first try to get some expired Polaroid 8x10 film).

[Mike D]

Thank you all. This is good information to be armed with before going at it alone. I think the next thing is to try it. My 8x10 is currently "in the shop" for repairs. I'll provide an update once it gets back to me and I have some film to work with (I might first try to get some expired Polaroid 8x10 film).

It pains me to see some of the preceding comments about Polaroid film.

I wouldn't bother with outdated material at this point unless it is free. The reagents have very likely breached the pods and have dried up. Even if luck is on your side, the hardening that occurs with any film over time will impact the final image.

Impossible has many guides online, including the original 8X10 Processor User Guide from Polaroid.
https://www.the-impossible-project.com/8x10/

I'm with Tracy on the opinion of the Polaroid peel apart film while it was manufactured. Fuji was nice film, though they never had an 8X10 product as I recall, 4X5 being the largest format. Polaroid made that film for years, contrary to what some said. It was well supported by an 800 number that would immediately help working photographers with any solution, including overnight replacement of manufacturing issues. I know that for a fact. I worked that number for a few years. Honestly though, most calls were about helping correct user errors.

As to consistency, every film has batch variances, including processed film. I've worked pro e-6 lines and saw it in densitometry tests. Polaroid had established tolerances like any other film. That's why pros always bought in bulk.

As to quality of image, I remember a program I worked on that was trying to position Polaroid Pro 100 as a hybrid solution to the expensive digital cameras/backs of the time. I tested both ER and Pro 100 under studio conditions, and with proper lighting for the contrast and filtering for metamerism and batch variances, both gave exceeding nice results for reproduction purposes. As I traveled across the country showing studio shooting of the material, I was approached by many a photographer who claimed I was using special film and not the off the shelf material I was actually using. Their problem wasn't with the film, it was with their technique.

Here's the old film in action. It's hardly the terrible stuff I see being mentioned here, even with what I'm doing to it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqfxEJ85Ez4

So yes, I obviously worked for Polaroid. But I went there after using the materials as a working photographer for many years. We depended on the Polaroid test to preconceive what the processed film would give us and that's what we used for client sign-off before a shoot was closed.

I hope you have great results with the new Impossible film.

[koh303]

Their problem wasn't with the film, it was with their technique.

The ultimate answer. If their technique was so poor it produced bad results from a product, that just means the product was not good enough or designed well enough to prevent this from ever being an issue (see - Fuji instant films).

Here's the old film in action. It's hardly the terrible stuff I see being mentioned here, even with what I'm doing to it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqfxEJ85Ez4

That's a totally awesome (in a totally 90's goofy way), but i thought water boils at 100 degrees?