Hacker News Reader

Comment by Animats | Hacker News Reader

That film is still made? Wow. That's descended from Kodak's instant camera film. Kodak was found to be infringing Polaroid's patents and was given 30 days to exit the instant photo business. They even had to buy back all the cameras. But Fuji and Polaroid cut a deal for the Japanese market, and when the patents expired Fuji could go worldwide.

View on HN

In fact, the Instax line has been quite profitable for Fuji--it's very popular with kids and hipsters. But, as noted above, all the peel-apart films are gone now. You might find some old stock at high prices, but it's not being made any more.

I'm shooting my last pack of FP-100c in my Mamiya RB-67 at the moment. I emailed the Polaroid Originals crew about reviving pack film but they said this:

Thank you for contacting Polaroid Originals. Unfortunately, that film is no longer in production. Polaroid ceased production of this film type years ago, and we are unable produce new film packs as we do not have the production machinery.

I sold my Polaroid 405 backs when Fuji made their cuts, figuring it would be the last chance to get any money for them. Not surprising that new Polaroid can't do it, unless they want to buy Fuji's production line. (tangentially, I had an RB-67 for a while too. They're great, but I ended up trading it for a Hasselblad, because it's half the size)

And I feel I must report that Polaroid is resurrected and make color, black and white in both SX-70 and 600 formats, as well as sell new (with builtin rechargeable batteries, charges with USB) cameras.

Not exactly resurrected. It's The Impossible Company, who were making compatible cartridges for Polaroid cameras, that has bought the Polaroid brand and began marking themselves as "Polaroid Originals". So AFAIK, It's Impossible cartridges (which weren't that good last time I tried, and very expensive) relabeled as Polaroid Originals.

I don't know if they bought the patents for the old chemical process, and I don't think they are using it.

I have to concur with this. I tried the Impossible polaroid film a few years ago and it's not very good compared to the original polaroid film and the Instax film. I use the Instax mini now and it's a great little instant camera.

Impossible changed recipes several times, and while I hear that the old Polaroid had different (better) colors back in the day, the recipe Polaroid is using now (the "originals" line) is much improved both in development speed and color rendition from what they sold under the Impossible brand.

I myself think that the colors of the Instax line are fantastic, but if you want a larger image, Polaroid is yet again the place to go.

Have you tried Instax Wide ? The camera is more expensive than the mini but the film price is quite similar to the mini, and of course, way cheaper than Polaroid.

Polaroid runs about 2USD a picture (being 8 pictures by cartridge).

Instax Wide, by its B&H price, is around 0.9USD a picture.

I think Polaroid image size is 3.1 by 3.1 inches

Instax wide is 3.9 by 2.4 inches

I’d bet good money Instax Wide isn’t long for this world. It has nowhere close to the popularity of the Instax mini line and is supported by just one not particularly popular Fuji model in their current lineup of Instax cameras. Instax Wide camera models see updates at a glacial pace compared to the Mini models too.

Instax Mini film can be bought in a ludicrous number of physical retailers (considering the overwhelming ubiquity of digital photography now) - Target, Michaels, Urban Outfitters etc. Instax Wide not so much, another indicator of it’s increasingly niche little market.

I have the latest Fuji Instax Wide model given to me as a gift and it’s really not difficult to see why Mini is so much more popular - it’s significantly more expensive and much bulkier than the cute little mini models. I used it three times and then left it in a cupboard, it’s simply too large to carry around regularly.

Finally I’d argue the difference between 3.1 inches of image height on a Polaroid and the 2.4 of the Instax Wide feels much more different in person than the numbers alone might suggest. For me personally, I don’t think it’s a nice substitute for the look and feel of the traditional Poloroid format.

I know it is the Impossible Company. AFAIK the issue is not so much with patents, as with process and chemicals. Even Polaroid themselves could not produce it at the end - they had a big batch of some critical chemicals they expected to last for many years, but people didn't stop buying Polaroid film as fast as Polaroid had projected, so they had to announce an abrupt halt. (Whenever it was, 2010?)

The Impossible Project had to do a lot of research and find alternative recipes to get the thing going again.

As for expensive, you can get single packs of 8 images for under $20. Not exactly cheap, but not prohibitive. If you compare price per image area with Instax, it's not bad.

Both come in at around 30 cents per square inch.

You can get a 20pack of Instax Wide for 17USD, and it's almost the same area than a Polaroid. A B&W 10pack (I haven't tested, so I don't know the quality) is around 14USD. I think it's pretty good value.

I still haven't bought a Wide camera, but even with all the Polaroid 600 cameras I have around, I think I'll buy one...

But here it's not nested so deep - I can actually answer here. :)

Thanks for pointing that out. I might get an Instax Wide. But I will try out at least one new formulation Polaroid pack in my 600 camera. I am curious about the colors. It's fun to not have only one formulation to choose from.

There's also the issue about lens quality. Some Polaroid cameras have very sharp glass lenses, while the Instax cameras have so-so optics.

Another point to bring up - now in this day when digital cameras have quite thoroughly succeeded in capturing "perfect" colors, there is something to be said for the slightly more "grungy" colors of current Polaroid stock.

The Instax film, while I adore it, is almost too good at times. The colors are natural and spot on, of course there's always a fraction of the market that wants something else.

Ops, I see I answered you in two different comments, didn't check the username . Sorry!

Would those impossible cartridges work in a Hasselblad polaroid back?

Indeed! It's all the same - the colors are a bit different, that's all. https://www.polaroid.com/news/polaroid-celebrates-the-return...

Yes, there are still a lot of films now. Sadly Fujifilm halted production of many large size instant films (FP-3000, FP-100) and keeps small Instax instant films only.

The Instax Square and Instax Wide are a bit larger than the Instax Mini though.

Instax square makes the most sense for a Hasselblad back in terms of film size, not only is it square it’s also only 2mm larger than it was designed for. The hardest part is as they say shaving off enough to have a coupling mechanism and keeping the film plane where it is in a standard back and fitting a complex eject mechanism.

It doesn’t help that square instax as a format is new and cameras compared to mini / wide are more expensive, along with the film.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com