Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!

SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Mamiya RB67 with Polaroid back
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 11:50 pm    Post subject: Mamiya RB67 with Polaroid back Reply with quote

I finally got a clump of this film loaded in the back and this is my first baby steps:

Fuji FP100C



just a hint of breeze, but enough to trump f16, 1/30sec

scanned prints @ 720dpi

camera with back


some of the prints drying


I think I've managed to convert a 6 lbs + camera into a plastic Holga.


PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2012 12:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've never understood why people liked the output of Polaroid.

It has always seemed like a quality compromise for the sake of convenience.


PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2012 12:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Luis, agree completely. I certainly don't get the rapture with this, and have two more cartridges to
shoot, plus 4 remaining in this first one. If it could give a negative to be scanned along with the print,
they might have had something.


PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2012 12:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Believe it or not, photo clubs in Italy keep making courses for people to use the new polaroid
(I think it's called Impossible Project or something like that)
and they are having great success, with exhibitions made with the gallery walls with all those
tiny frames hanging.


PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2012 1:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Polaroid backs were intended to allow photographers to check they had the lighting and other aspects correct before shooting film, mostly used in fashion shoots so stylists, hairdressers, makeup artists etc could see how their work looked to the camera and adjust accordingly. A preview to check things, like an LCD screen on a digital camera.

Nice work Bill, I really like #2, the lighting is great.


PostPosted: Fri Apr 20, 2012 1:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Orio and Ian, thanks, I may try some of this film either at the botanical garden or Monte Sano. Need to load a new
battery in my Digisix and read its manual on temp, timer. From what I've read you can screw the pooch by not separating
the film at the right moment for given temps. My very first frame was blank, yes, the Polaroid back has a dark slide, too...sheesh.


PostPosted: Fri Apr 27, 2012 7:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Can you explain how this back works?
Is this like the old instand film, shake it to develop it, or am I missing something completely?


PostPosted: Fri Apr 27, 2012 8:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

attack_donut wrote:
Can you explain how this back works?
Is this like the old instand film, shake it to develop it, or am I missing something completely?


just couple of layers, rip the thing out of casette and peel a layer


PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2012 12:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

luisalegria wrote:
I've never understood why people liked the output of Polaroid.

It has always seemed like a quality compromise for the sake of convenience.

+1 and what Bill said so true down rank camera to Holga Laughing


PostPosted: Sat Apr 28, 2012 12:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, sad to say, I'm in no big hurry to finish the cartridge, much less shoot the other two. Wink


PostPosted: Wed Jun 27, 2012 12:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

My best friend has a Mamiya RB67 with a Polaroid back, but sadly the lens aperture blades stay closed. I was hoping to buy some new lenses for it; they seem relatively inexpensive, and there is quite a variety, even though they are ALL Mamiya lenses. I like the interchangeable back, too.
I am, mildly, disappointed in the reaction towards Polaroid film, here. Not that anyone must love a certain film or a process, or have the same tastes as I. I respect all of you, and even though we have never met, I feel as if we are friends. My first thought, after reading the responses, was that none of you grew up with Polaroids, as we have in America. It is very much an interwoven thread in our culture. My father was an avid Polaroid user. There were literally thousands of pictures we, my brothers and sister, went through after his death. But you have to understand that the actual photo; the one held in the hand, is as much a part of the time and place as the content of the photo itself. It is because the Polaroid is instantaneous. There is an "act" which becomes part of the memory, where ever, or what ever, after the "click" of the shutter there is a gathering around of all participants to see what it looks like. And that gathering around is what is part of the American culture; the anticipation, the pointing at it and each other, the laughter and smiles, and sometimes, the disappointment that it didn't come out well. So, years later, when holding in one's hand that very same print, there is a memory that is slightly more deeper; a connection to the past that is a physical thing, as well as, emotional. There is something precious in the unique, single print.
But I am being sentimental, and I apologize if my observation is in error. But I would suggest walking up to a stranger and asking them if they would mind having a "Polaroid" taken of them. Even the most camera shy will agree because people are curious, and they like the surprise and magic of it, still.
Here are few photos that my father took of me when i was a child. (you can see the accidental finger prints on #3) And also, the fourth one is an image transfer, where the dye of the negative is placed on watercolor paper and then painted with watercolors or acrylics.

#1


#2


#3


#4


PostPosted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 1:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Aspen, I'm sorry if what I said offended you, and can certainly understand what we
experienced in our salad days, grows more tender over the years.

Thanks for sharing these photos.


PostPosted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 2:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oh no, my friend, there was no offense taken. I completely understand that the quality of the film itself is not on par with many other types. And that was the sentiment expressed by most, including you. I certainly didn't mean to put any one on the defensive about that point. I only wished to express that there is more to taking Polaroids than the mere quality of image. I enjoy shooting them, as well as other formats. They do have their place, and I would hope that each of you, if possible, could find a joy similar to the one I feel. Smile


PostPosted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 11:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Not all polaroid film was dire. Type 55 was a 5x4 large format film that created both a negative and a positive. The negs were stunning. There is a book called "New York Sleeps" by Christopher Thomas which shows what the stuff could do. Ansel Adams used similar material (he was a tester for Polaroid) to his usual stunning high standards. Like most film manufacturers, there is the consumer stuff and there is the good stuff.

Whereas I don't mourn the demise of those small polaroids, I wish I had been into LF photography when Type 55 was easily available and in date. You can still pick up boxes of it on ebay but it is pricey and out-of-date.

BTW, I highly recommend "New York Sleeps", it contains many stunning photographs in a style I really like.

K.


PostPosted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 1:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks Kris. I found a link on Amazon for it. I'll get it. Smile And I remember seeing some 8x10 Polaroids.Shocked

http://www.amazon.com/New-York-Sleeps-Christopher-Thomas/dp/3791342347/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1340888676&sr=1-1&keywords=New+York+Sleeps