Film Cameras

Came across this in my travels, not a bad idea! I'm back!

“I’m Back was created with the intention of reusing the old analog in a digital way, but maintaining a “retro” aspect in the photos thanks to the focusing screen. It is not intended to have the quality of a digital camera of last generation, therefore, it is not an accessory to be at par with a digital or even an analog. I’m back gives a unique result in its genre. In similar solutions, like “Pinhole”, “Lomography”, it gives photos with the use of a “Scanner” and other art form, yes, the art of photography is after all an art form and not something to be judged by the quantity of pixels or any less.

I’m Back was designed not only for professional photographers, but for ordinary people who are passionate about photography and for technology from old cameras, for anyone who wants to have fun like they used to, even when the photo was not good and it was a source of anger and also a laugh. Good times!”

"A fool and his money are soon parted" - used to be the truism.

It looks like it needs updating to: "A Kickstarter backer and their money are soon parted"

Now what lunatic scheme can I dream up to put on Kickstarter with no hope of it being a commercial success? Or of getting beyond being vapourware.

I grant you - a film purist would not like this idea, but for those that are playing within both film and digital world, this could be interesting. Good luck with the cardboard, tape and iphone...sounds like you might be onto something - would love to see some of those photos!

And it is not even my idea, seen it on PP. I'd modify it a bit to make it more comfortable to use. Really just a +4 diopter (250mm) lens projecting an image onto a piece of tracing paper. Lens would cover about 5X7 inches. Then just photograph the image with a small digital camera or with your phone.

We baby sit an inquisitive 2 year old. Sounds like a good winter project.

“I’m Back was created with the intention of reusing the old analog in a digital way, but maintaining a “retro” aspect in the photos thanks to the focusing screen. It is not intended to have the quality of a digital camera of last generation, therefore, it is not an accessory to be at par with a digital or even an analog. I’m back gives a unique result in its genre. In similar solutions, like “Pinhole”, “Lomography”, it gives photos with the use of a “Scanner” and other art form, yes, the art of photography is after all an art form and not something to be judged by the quantity of pixels or any less. ...

I predict that a year from now this will not have progressed much as the previous effort here had:

Thanks for anyone that an year ago helped our project reach 325% funded on Kickstarter!

The old and original project now evolved

I expect more "evolution" and no actual product...

Dreams can be so sad :(

Besides, with a home made square cardboard tube, a +4 close up lens and a iPhone you could build a camera that would operate in a similar manner but with a total cost (assuming you already have a phone or small digital camera) of 10 or 20 dollars, an afternoon and some packing tape.

Good luck with the cardboard, tape and iphone...sounds like you might be onto something - would love to see some of those photos!

John, you're making it more difficult. If you already have the cellphone camera and an SLR, just put the cellphone lens up to the camera's eyepiece, and take a snapshot. This is pretty close to what they're doing. Of course you would expect that their quality is a little better because 1) they don't have to go through the viewfinder optics, and 2) they presumably selected a "cleaner" focusing screen for higher quality photos (but you could probably get a similar screen for your SLR camera).

If they wanted to improve the image quality, the obvious thing would be to replace the focusing screen with a "field lens," essentially like the viewfinder in those old-time cameras with a "brilliant" finder. But this brings in another problem - it will "unflatten" the image plane because of its much greater thickness in the center (if you understand what a field-flattener lens does at the image plane, this is just the opposite). Then, the obvious way to deal with this is to use a weaker fields lens, which will vignette badly unless you move the digital camera lens farther away, etc. So the tradeoff for better quality is a much longer optical path.

If I had to bet on it, I'd guess that they will be initially successful, mainly because people don't realize what it really is. But once customers see how poor the quality is, the backs will gradually be relegated to a dusty shelf.

Does anyone else have trouble supporting a project when the write up leaves you scratching your head as to what exactly the product does or how it works?

I say that in the context of the fact that they seem to use a lot of WORDS to describe how it works, but they almost seem to just be "camera sounding" words strung together. I'm not really seeing how removing the "camera cap" and adjusting the "exposure hole" tie in together. I'm also wondering why they keep referencing a Rasberry Pi but seem to indicate that you get more resolution when you use theirs rather than supplying your own.

John, you're making it more difficult. If you already have the cellphone camera and an SLR, just put the cellphone lens up to the camera's eyepiece, and take a snapshot. This is pretty close to what they're doing. Of course you would expect that their quality is a little better because 1) they don't have to go through the viewfinder optics, and 2) they presumably selected a "cleaner" focusing screen for higher quality photos (but you could probably get a similar screen for your SLR camera).

Done that, with my half frame Pen F and also the screen on a TLR. This thing also reminds me of a contraption made by Nikon many years ago to use Poliroid 4x5 pack film on a Nikon F, the Speed Magny. An ungainly thing to be sure, with the image projected onto the film and due to the layout two mirrors are required to get a correct image, left to right.

Photographing through the eyepiece should work for my OM-1, I have a ultra fine screen for it intended for super telephoto lenses.

I dunno... The concept is not so much different than those Marty Forscher Polaroid backs from the 70s/80s which, apparently, were extensively used by commercial professionals. Like those Polaroid backs, it seems these might/could be useful for testing exposure, lighting, composition, etc. for film users especially if it ends up costing very much less than buying parallel digital equipment. But it will need a screen (like about 5") to be useful in that manner.

Oh, and that big protrusion on the back would not be a problem with a "sport finder" such as the Canon F-1 Speed Finder.