View Full Version : 20x24 polaroid pictures

Pages : 1 [2]

09-11-2007, 01:26 AM
Thank you David. I didn't think about strobes.


09-11-2007, 01:46 AM
I understand Linda Broadfoot & Anna Tomczak (both NE Florida area photographers) use the NY studio for their Polaroid 20X24 work. The Jax Main Library has featured their work (as well as other local photographers such as Jerry Uelsmann & Jay Shoots - Linda's husband). Anna frequently has her work displayed in galleries in the New Smyrna Beach area (just South of Daytona). If ever in NE Florida area, highly recommend finding their exhibits - it'll certainly make you want to join the list of Polaroid 20X24 users.

09-11-2007, 06:15 AM
Hi Guys

I've used the camera several times, if you look on my home page www.seamusryan.com the image there is one I made on the 20x24 camera had copied onto to 5x4 trannie, scanned and printed out as a 30x20 digital print. That shell in particular was only 2 inches big. To photograph it we had the 20x24 camera at full bellows extension we then attached a standard 5x4 bellows to the front of the camera, giving us about another 2foot of bellows, and here my memory gets a little fuzzy, but I think it was a 90mm lens which we inverted on the front of the camera. That meant that the lens was so close to the shell and the strobes so close to the shell that the light meters were giving us error messages, we had to have the shutter open but covered because the workings were on the inside, so I can't praise John Reuter enough, he's the camera operator which title does him an injustice.

A little aside about the shell it self. I source my shells from an ethical shell trader here in the UK and when ever I get some new shells I bring them home and lay them out on a black velvet cloth likes jewel to show my partner. When she saw that particular shell and the price I paid for it she asked what I was going to do with it ( a little less politely than that) but when she came by the studio and saw it hanging to dry on the wall she apologized and promised never to question my purchases again (considering that she pays most of the bills around here, I've never held her to that promise).

I also shot some colour to do transfers, to save you trawling through my site I've linked them directly here, my site is currently under going a major overhaul so please forgive if some of the links go wonky.

if anyone has any specific questions please do not hesitate to contact me

enjoy and be well


Jim Chinn
09-11-2007, 07:02 AM
Half the fun of the 20x24 is reading about how the operators solve technical challenges in fullfilling the creative desires of the photographers. a truly collaborative effort.

David A. Goldfarb
09-11-2007, 07:12 AM
So how do you do a 20x24" transfer? I guess this question is mainly for Seamus, but if others have done it, please chime in.

I've only done 4x5" and 6x6cm, where you partially develop the print, open the pack, and roll it onto a damp warm sheet of watercolor paper. Since part of the orange-yellow layer gets left on the original sheet, if one wants a neutral result, you can shoot with a warming filter to balance the loss of orange in the transfer.

I haven't tried an 8x10" transfer yet, but I know there's a method that involves transferring directly to the watercolor paper without partially developing on the Polaroid receiving sheet, which should prevent the color shift. Is this how you do a 20x24" transfer?

09-11-2007, 10:42 AM
I've only done 8X10; and, unlike the 4X5, there are two separate steps. The exposed film is placed in processor along with the final support which can be either Polaroid's or your choice of paper (has to fit in processor, though). From what I've seen of the 20X24, it appears that this is done by hand rather than thru a processor. Looks very labor intensive requiring assistants.

David A. Goldfarb
09-11-2007, 10:47 AM
I've done normal Polaroid 8x10", but for a transfer, as I recall, there's some trick involved, because the processing pods are attached to the receiving sheet.

09-11-2007, 11:27 AM
Mention has been made of what are called "direct transfers" with 8x10 where you tuck your final support paper under the pod attached to the Polaroid receiver sheet and run everything through the processor. The dyes go directly to the watercolor paper (or whatever) without ever touching the Polaroid receiver sheet.
With 20x24 we do it the same way as with small pack film. Pull it through the rollers as normal, separate early, then re-apply the neg to the final support (dampened watercolor paper, generally) with a silk-screen squeegee.


David A. Goldfarb
09-11-2007, 12:03 PM
Thanks, Tracy. "Direct transfers" are what I was thinking of.

09-11-2007, 12:43 PM
Hi David

I've done the 10x8 transfers through the processor and don't much like them as you are restricted to a 10x8 paper size which means unless you over mat them they don't present very well, but maybe that's just me.

with the 20x24 the main worry is the sheer size, all of your problems get magnified, the 2 main ones for me were getting a good contact with the paper, using, as Tracey pointed out, large squeegee rollers, too little and you get lots of spots with no contact, too much and you can squeeze the chemicals too much out the sides, and then when separating the neg from the water color paper you have to watch out for the chemicals pulling away, pulling to fast gives lots of holes, pulling too slow or judery leaves marks across the print.

I know, I know, why put your self through it.... because when they work they are glorious

enjoy and be well


Will S
09-12-2007, 09:03 AM
Mr. Gaiman responded to my question over at http://www.neilgaiman.com/journal/2007/09/even-odderments.html
and he even posted a picture of the photo session that shows the camera and the name of the photographer.

Someone did tell him that the film was running out, but who knows what they really meant by that.



09-12-2007, 10:29 AM
Ah, that camera is owned by a company in Milan. It was the first 20x24 Polaroid system shipped by Wisner. (late 2000 or 2001)
As to the film, we are planning projects well into next year. Beyond that, we'll see.