No need to be confused about holders. The 545 works like a charm. The 545i is plastic and lighter in weight but works too.
$6.00 would be a logical minimum, Ken.
Last edited by swhiser; 01-24-2014 at 03:33 PM. Click to view previous post history.
At the risk of going off on a tangent, their marketing and branding may have been a jumbled mess, but what killed them is the 1 hour minilab. And they were effectively dead (finally bankrupt around 2000) before digital hit it's stride. Polavision was to be their next great innovation - which came out about the same time as consumer-grade camcorders. Their pro-level films just didn't have the volume to keep them going. I think their pro-level instant film could have lasted longer as a niche product under the umbrella of a Kodak, Ilford, or Fuji.
Originally Posted by StoneNYC
But they didn't ask for my advice.
"Far more critical than what we know or do not know is what we do not want to know." - Eric Hoffer
So I don't come across as critical let me be clear that I well understand why $6 may be the lowest practical price. This would be a huge project. I get that. But I can't pay six bucks a sheet for it, at least not very much or very often. If it were half that it would still be 50% more than conventional negative film (but I'd probably use a lot of it.) If it were, say, $4, I'd use quite a bit too. But at $6 I'm not at all sure. I do have one project I've had in mind for a couple of years that I may be able to start on this year for which this stuff would be just AWESOME, the absolute shiznit, and the price wouldn't be a barrier, but I'll have to see if I can get started on it, other finances and such allowing.
Originally Posted by swhiser
That's why I added that little disclaimer about being willing, especially at the beginning, to go higher. I did the same with TIP early on. And had a blast with it.
Watching this very closely. Can contribute some $$$ if you reach the fundraising point. And the best part is, I never even used the original T55. So I'm a brand new (potential) customer. No prior expectations. Only future anticipations.
"When making a portrait, my approach is quite the same as when I am portraying a rock. I do not wish to impose my personality upon the sitter, but, keeping myself open to receive reactions from his own special ego, record this with nothing added: except of course when I am working professionally, when money enters in,—then for a price, I become a liar..."
— Edward Weston, Daybooks, Vol. II, February 2, 1932
This. The pro stuff was indeed "a jumbled mess" but both pros and amateurs devoted enough to want a Polaroid back, or even know what one was, could and did figure it out. Their bread and butter was consumer cameras for instant gratification of vacation snapshots and such. The high cost compared to conventional materials limited their market all along and the mini lab killed it.
Originally Posted by mgb74
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
New55's not for everyone
Originally Posted by Roger Cole
We're with you. Every project has a price-point. Every photographer has requirements relative to the media-selection.
Presently the project is looking at N55 boxes containing 5 sheets each. Therefore, a unit would be, minimum, $30; but the early price could be twice that and then you'd simply be off to find other alternatives ...
... perhaps alternatives like this: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Polaroid-Typ...item2ece083813
... which is a $150 (incl. ship.) starting bid on a pretty nice, STILL SEALED, box of 20 sheets of not too old (probably good) Type 55. At about $7.50 a sheet that's pretty nice on something functional that's certainly EXTINCT -- and has KNOWN working characteristics.
The realities of Polaroid's and Fuji's discontinuations simply means we're in new world (with old economic rules) where manufacturing at today's equilibrium quantities derives a higher natural price.
We know that price will exclude some folks. For you, it's a little tough to see you go because your stuff on Flickr looks pretty good.
Please also keep in mind that New55 FILM is not a duplication of old 55; it only shares some of its basic characteristics (P/N peel-apart monochrome 4x5 in a single-sheet packet with a clip used in the 500, 545 or 545i holders).
It certainly will not be for everyone,
I was a heavy user of both 55 and 665. Their rendering were unique.
I will definitely support your new 55.
Originally Posted by Ken Nadvornick
My favorite thing is to go where I've never been. D. Arbus
I'd certainly like it to be for me. It was only after the initial "I can't pay six bucks a sheet" that I realized it would work for that project that I had in mind. But I am a hobbyist, not a commercial photographer. I sold a print recently and hope I can sell a few more but it will never be more than a hobby for me, I think, even if the project I have in mind is a sort of "commercial hobby" endeavor.
Originally Posted by swhiser
It's a complex product. I'll actually be quite impressed if you can do it for six bucks a sheet. But when it comes to laying out three times as much per shot as regular Ilford film, I'll still be using more regular film by a long shot.
Best of luck with it. It would be an awesome product to have available.
Polaroid 545 holders? I have a bunch of them, I am going to give them away for free to those who purchase one of my Polaroid 110B/900 4x5 camera conversions.
While the supply lasts.......
I am most enthused over this new 55 project, I hope the rest of you will be as well....
Be sure and stay away from the old original Polaroid 500 4x5 instant film holders, I am amazed at how many are for sale on the "bay" auction site, these model 500 holders are just amazingly useless and worthless, I tried modifying one to accept the last type 55 film packets and it just would not work, even the Fuji Quickloads and Kodak Readyloads would not work, no way of modifying it.