Problem with Impossible Polaroids

<p>Have any users of the new Impossible Polariods experienced problems with fading? Both these scans looked fine when the images were first taken but a few days later they showed some fading in the shadow areas. Any idea what is causing this?</p><div></div>

<p>2nd scan:</p>

<div></div>

<p>I get the feeling that they are marketing the inconsistency and instability of this product as a "feature".</p>

<p>http://www.the-impossible-project.com/projects/pxfilm/px600ageing</p>

 

<p>Yes i saw that link before but it doesn't really deal with my problem. I sent the scans to Impossible but they say they have not seen this fading problem before.</p>

<p>It appears the statement in the link Rob provided does address exactly the type of fading you've experienced:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>"<a href="http://www.the-impossible-project.com/projects/pxfilm/px600ageing">First batches of the PX 600 film remain light- and temperature sensitive</a> even weeks after exposure of the picture.<br />"Please store your pictures cold, dry and away from direct light to preserve their original state after exposure."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The sample photos show fading very similar to yours.</p>

<p>Did you protect the photos from exposure to light? For example, simply scanning the photos in a state in which they're still light sensitive would probably accelerate the fading.</p>

<p>The information on the Impossible Project website does seem to indicate that they are gearing their marketing toward the hipster and alternative art demographic who, as John observed, might regard consider a "feature" what more conventional photographers might consider a "flaw".</p>

<p>Photographers who want more conventional results may want to either wait awhile for others to test the materials or buy only small batches.</p>

<p>Loosing contrast and getting an orange tint is not exactly what is happening to mine plus Impossible's reply to me having viewed my scans, was to say that they have not come across this fading problem. I'd go along with John's statement above.</p>

<p>I don't mean to nitpick here, Peter, but after reviewing the information on the Impossible Project website, I'm not seeing anything to indicate that users should expect anything other than inconsistent results - altho' serendipitous might suit this particular medium better.</p>

<p>The sample photos from the PX Film section of the website do not resemble original Polaroids in any way other than in the way the materials are packaged for compatibility with existing cameras. Unless I'm overlooking something, I'm not seeing any indications that users should reasonably expect consistent, standard photographic results. Every sample photo there shows low saturation, usually in monochrome hues, low contrast, and a faded or fogged appearance. <a href="http://www.the-impossible-project.com/projects/about/team">This photo of the founder</a> shows a more dramatic orange shift and fading than your sample photos.</p>

<p>The instructions clearly emphasize parameters far more restrictive than original Polaroid brand films did. The Impossible Project PX Film appears to be extremely sensitive to temperature, light and handling. It clearly warns that use at temperatures above 27C/81F may produce orangey results. The instructions specify a very narrow range of optimal ambient temperatures.</p>

<p>It also appears to be exactly what many alternative photography fans wanted.</p>

<p>I find it interesting that a company markets their failed attempt at making a decent Land film as a "feature" for the alternative photogprahy market....shame on them! I sense they'll not last long in the film business...until they find a way to (1) give alternative results that (2) are fairly permanent. </p>

<p>The other thing that troubles me is that when the OP called to complain, they told him that they never heard of that fading issue before....so much for trust in that company.</p>

<p>I'm not seeing any reason to criticize the folks at The Impossible Project, Dan, other, perhaps, than the backward "P" which my keyboard can't reproduce. They're not making "Land" film or Polaroid film and, as far as I know, they're not privy to the trade secrets or copyrighted trade names of those products.</p>

<p>They are already (1) offering an alternative process and (2) have explained in detail the characteristics and limitations of their products.</p>

<p>Look at the website. Read the official statements. Look at the sample photos. At least regarding their PX lineup, nowhere can I find that they have they claimed to reproduce the standard photographic quality of the original Polaroid films. They are supplying an alternative emulsion process, developed in-house, using a physical form factor that is compatible with existing cameras. And their target market has been the alternative process crowd (read: hipsters and artistes). And unlike Polaroid, which realized only too late the potential market that might have saved them, The Impossible Project embraced the alternative art crowd and is marketing directly to them.</p>

<p>If you read <a href="../alternative-cameras-forum/00WN7e">this recent discussion</a> on photo.net's <a href="../alternative-cameras-forum/">Alternative Cameras & Lenses forum</a>, it appears that the management at The Impossible Project are responding appropriately to complaints from customers.</p>

<p>I can't explain why the OP received the statement he got from TIP when he contacted them, because it is clear from the information and examples on the website that his results are precisely what any user should expect from their PX films. But an anomalous incident regarding tech support aside, I'm not seeing any legitimate basis for complaint. TIP have clearly indicated the limitations of the existing PX film. Anyone who chooses to buy and use their product must assume the risk and responsibility for the results they got. If a photographer prefers more archival or more conventional results, there is no shortage of conventional, proven products on the market to suit that preference.</p>

<p><em>"I sense they'll not last long in the film business...until they find a way to (1) give alternative results that (2) are fairly permanent."</em><br>

Yeah, but they already sold out of the SX70 film I was gonna buy....so I'd say so far they're wildly successful</p>

<p>I'm not impressed with the Impossible Project film, however their customer service seems top notch. They didn't dumb down the explanation of the problem they are having with the film. It was explained to the consumer the same way a TIP executive would get the information. Also nice to see a company recognize a problem and work to compensate the customers without a class action lawsuit.<br>

This reminds me of Kodak when they use to do film (or much more film than today). I remember getting an obscure Kodak film off of eBay and calling up Kodak to try and find out how process the film (it was WL surveillance film). The guy I talked with was knowledgeable and seemed excited about using it in pictorial photography. He didn't steer me to Kodak developers and e-mailed me all the technical data for the film. He even followed up and asked me how my experiments worked. I e-mailed him a sample and he e-mailed me back a critique and suggestions on how to get a better image with the film. He struck me as a guy who loved his job and enjoyed helping people.</p>

 

I have a question......

 

What would you say if Fuji offered an instant product that behaved this way?

<blockquote>

<p>Look at the website. Read the official statements. Look at the sample photos. At least regarding their PX lineup, nowhere can I find that they have they claimed to reproduce the standard photographic quality of the original Polaroid films.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You may be right about that, Lex, but I can't remember them mentioning this "lomographic" image quality either. ;-)<br /> They said they'd produce a film for 600-series cameras. That's all. I think it's normal, or at least understandable, to assume that they mean a good film, and not some unstable medium that delivers Holga-like pictures at best.<br /> Indeed, they didn't specifically promise a normal quality film. But they did allow us to hope for one.</p>

<p>Good point, Ron. I'll admit to having different expectations for Fuji, Kodak, Polaroid or Ilford than I would for a company trying to reinvent the wheel. I tend to put TIP in the same category as any alternative process, which usually involves some inconsistencies.</p>

<p>Since the TIP site shows several examples of photos from their PX lineup it's difficult to fault them for delivering pretty much the results they've illustrated.</p>

<p>It's not something I'd be interested in. I went through my Polaroid experimental phase during the 1980s, and a little messing around with floating off emulsions in the late '90s or early 2000's. But there seems to be enough of a market in the retro and hipster crowd to justify The Impossible Project's efforts.</p>