Instant Film

[_Karl]

I'm new to LF so I really like the idea of taking a "Polaroid" shot before I waste a 4x5 negative.
The problem is, not only does b&w instant film seem to be out of production but I'm not sure what would go where.
Along with my Cambo were film holders:
Polaroid 545i
Polaroid 545
Kodak Professional Readyload Packet Film Holder
Fujifilm QuickLoad
I understand that some film packs are available but all are expired.

I do have a source for some Instax Wide b&w but have no idea what film holder can be used with the Cambo.

Thank you for educating me.
_Karl

[nbagno]

This

https://shop.lomography.com/en/lomo-...k-instant-back


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tin Can]

First don't get rid of any holder ever, things change

watch this https://youtu.be/FCawE-RcjOA

[BLATT LAB]

Also check out https://the-famous-large-small-forma....myshopify.com they make black and white 4x5 instant film

[peter k.]

"I do have a source for some Instax Wide b&w but have no idea what film holder can be used with the Cambo."

Here's a thought .. use your regular 4x5 film holder.
Shooting Instax wide in not as convenient as "Polaroid" because you have to load and unload the film holders in the dark. Then process the shot, by putting the Instax wide properly and correctly back in its plastic container that originally held the ten sheets of film. BTW .. You can process just one or two shots at a time. Close the back of the camera up and just hit the trigger. We do this in the dark, with our hands over the lens opening and flash, and the 'developing' shot exits the camera.

A bit off topic, but to start this discussion, we use Fujifilm Instax Wide in a 3x4 by having widened the height of the film metal 'rails' of the holder. Fits perfectly, but when exposing, one has to adjust the center of the shot, as its higher in the view finder because of the chemical pouch.

But a 4x5 holder, its much larger , so we used an old exposed sheet of 4x5 film, that we have cut four angled slots in the old negative that hold the corners of the Instax wide in place. Understand, that the back side of the film, is the emulsion side that has to be placed face up in the holder.

Then we process it through the rollers of an Instax Wide Camera as stated above.

[jimskelton]

First, instant 4x5 film is rare and if you can find it, will cost a bundle. The same goes for 100 series pack film, though you can sometimes find FP-100C for $60/pack of 10 exposures, but you'd need a pack film back, which would give you a 2 7/8" x 3 3/4" image. The latest manufactured pack film expired back in 2019.

If you want to use Instax wide film, be aware the image size is even smaller than 100 series pack film (2 1/2" x 3 7/8"), but it's economical ($7.50/10 exposures) and Fuji still makes it. If you want to use it, the lomography back would be your best choice at $134US, but you'll have to wait until July to get it.

If you want to try using Instax wide film but don't want to commit to buying a back, try the manual load/process method that Peter mentioned above. Then, if you like the results and want to try building your own back, get an Instax wide camera and prepare it to be a back as per this video: https://youtu.be/crL5PmfyyzA Then, build a back around it. I used book and foam board with hockey tape. I posted a couple of pics below. Looks rough, but works great on my 5x7, and the bristle board dark slide actually keeps out the light.

And finally, if you want to try making your own instant film, here are some instructions: https://www.instructables.com/Making...-polaroid-55-/ If you try this, I'd be interested in your results...

[SergeyT]

Instant film may have been practical [for testing before exposing ‘regular’ photographic film]when digital was not available or affordable.
Why not to use a small mirror less (ex. Canon M) for both metering and instant image review/assessment before exposing film ?

[Wayne]

Instant film may have been practical when digital was not available or affordable.
Why not to use a small mirror less (ex. Canon M) for both metering and instant image review/assessment before exposing film ?

Since when are we practical?

[Oren Grad]

I've shot a lot of Instax, both color and monochrome. It's so wildly different from color and B&W negative films that I don't think there's much to be gained by using it for tests. Both types of Instax are far contrastier, and correspondingly have very limited exposure range, compared to negative film. Polaroid was often used to check studio setups, but I've shot Instax under studio lighting, and because of the contrast it's a poor guide to judging lighting setups and lighting ratios for anything other than itself. Even compared to transparency film, I think the exposure range is shorter, and the color rendition is quite different too.

I think Instax is best used as a distinctive photographic medium in its own right.

New55 is only semi-instant; the fixing/rinsing process is messy and time-consuming. Unlike Instax, it's very expensive per sheet, substantially more than the cost of buying and processing 4x5 negative film. Again, best used as a medium in itself, by those who like the way the negatives and prints look.

[nbagno]

I've shot a lot of Instax, both color and monochrome. It's so wildly different from color and B&W negative films that I don't think there's much to be gained by using it for tests. Both types of Instax are far contrastier, and correspondingly have very limited exposure range, compared to negative film. Polaroid was often used to check studio setups, but I've shot Instax under studio lighting, and because of the contrast it's a poor guide to judging lighting setups and lighting ratios for anything other than itself. Even compared to transparency film, I think the exposure range is shorter, and the color rendition is quite different too.

I think Instax is best used as a distinctive photographic medium in its own right.

New55 is only semi-instant; the fixing/rinsing process is messy and time-consuming. Unlike Instax, it's very expensive per sheet, substantially more than the cost of buying and processing 4x5 negative film. Again, best used as a medium in itself, by those who like the way the negatives and prints look.

All points right on the money.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk