My first camera...25 years later

Before really taking an interest in photography, I was a camera collector/accumulator long before I had an interest in photography, and I had a particular interest in Polaroids.

 

It all goes back to the early 90s, when a small local shop my mom frequented stuck a Polaroid 125 in their front window one day. I was fascinated with that camera, and the owner was nice enough to humor me, take it down, and show me how it worked. Not too long later, the store closed as the drug store next door expanded and swallowed up the two adjacent store fronts. The older gentleman who owned the shop pulled the camera out of the window one day and gave it to me. I don't know exactly when that was, but I was probably two or three years old.

 

Chances are I could have walked into the drug store and bought film for it(I think Polaroid was still making roll film in the early 90s). Polaroids were still "hot" in those days, but of course by that time the 600 series dominated with some attention devoted to SX-70s and the then new Spectra series. At that age, too, any instant film was pretty much out my reach.

 

I went through the years and picked up my fair share of cameras-aside from Brownies, I also picked up one of the original SX-70s and a Polaroid 250. I used the SX-70 a fair bit, but never really paid much attention to the pack film cameras as I didn't think film was available to it.

 

When my attention turned to 35mm(and later the larger formats) I learned that pack film was still very much alive and could have easily bought some, but my limited budget would have rather bought roll film.

 

I knew about the well regarded Fuji products, but had never really encountered them. After hearing about their discontinuation, I finally bit the bullet and ordered some still in date stock. I'm PROBABLY going to end up using most of it in either my 250 or in a Polaroid back on my RB67(with a nod toward the latter, although I also want to use the 250), but I felt it appropriate that the 125 which I've now likely owned for longer than its original owner-and which quite literally started it all for me-get my first box of pack film.

 

These first two shots are photographically not spectacular and of course the exposure is off. None the less, it's a thrill after all these years to finally see images from my first camera.

 

http://i235.photobucket.com/albums/ee204/ben10ben/IMG_4328_zpsubul6bnb.jpg

I remember roll film in 1977, as we had it for a physics class. I already thought that it was discontinued at that time.

 

List of Polaroid instant cameras - Wikipedia says that it was discontinued in 1992.

 

But pack film stayed in production for a long time, and then Fuji started selling it. (Maybe there is a gap.)

 

The roll film cameras develop inside the camera, then you open a door and peel off the print.

You know how pack film works, in the picture above.

I think the Swinger was one of the big 1960s products, and it was roll film(albeit smaller than the earlier 100 series used). I have my grandfather's Swinger, and he was quite proud of it-apparently he lucked into getting one when they first came out, and thought they were rare because they were in short supply when first introduced. I didn't have the heart to tell him that it was one of the most common and least valuable cameras of the era. The pack film cameras-or at least the higher end ones-still kept some value since you could get film for them.

 

I think Fuji has been making pack film for a long time. It wasn't that all that long ago that Polaroid quit making it(working from memory, maybe '08 or so), but the Fuji products got a lot more popular after Polaroid stopped. Since pretty much every MF SLR system has a Polaroid back available for it, there was a market for it as long as studios were still using MF. I REALLY wish someone made it in 4x5 still-Impossible makes 8x10 pack film($$$) so I'd guess the ability is out there.

I recall reading that often the Polaroid backs used in MF for for testing the exposure etc..then the "real" shot was made on conventional film. Since Fuji announced end of production, there are still some NOS available. I have a pack film in the cellar that I shot once or two roll with in the early 90s. I inherited an SX70, but the AF doesn't seem to work right and it cost me 20,00 Eur just to realize that fact. Ggrrr

Most of my photography at that time involved hiking, skiing or travel and I couldn't imagine standing on a ski trail, a mountain trail, or a street corner waving a damp print waiting for it to dry so Polaroid didn't interest me. Years later I worked for Polaroid on another doomed project.

Before digital, Polaroid filled a real set of needs, in no particular order:

1. 'snaps' to give to people posing for you on the spot
   
2. exposure tests for large format images
   
3. tonal range no longer equaled by conventional films after the decline of "printing out" (one reason Ansel Adams liked it).
   
4. record shots (even if the conventional film negative turned out bad, you had the Polaroid test shot still) [you knew before you left, that you had at least the one shot]
   

Type 52 was my dream film. Used it in conjunction with 4x5 Tri-X (also ISO 400)

.

 

but the whole selection was really nice.

In my pro days we used Polaroid backs in the studio on the Linhof and Sinar 4x5 cameras to check lighting, setups etc, prior to exposing transparency sheet film. In those days the final exposure was it; no post-processing! I hate to think just how many Polaroids I used in that procedure... Nice story, Ben; thanks for the post.

Hello everyone. From the late 60's thru the 90's, I always used a Polaroid 4x5 positive/negative material before exposing a chrome or neg material as Rick mentioned. All the negs were then put into a sodium sulfite solution & returned to "the lab", hypoed & washed/dryed. Usually only one neg was maintained. Presently, none of the chromes exist, but about twenty of those negs have been scanned & are now archived. PN55 was/is not the finest grained, but they are here! Calumet 4x5 & 210mm Extar. PN55 material. Aloha, Bill

Type 52 was my dream film. Used it in conjunction with 4x5 Tri-X (also ISO 400)

I've been using LF for a few months, and one of my biggest disappointments when I first got into it was that Tri-X 400 is no longer available in sheet film and hasn't been for quite a while. Now all we can get from big yellow in traditional grain sheet film is TXP-320, which is a great film in its own right but quite different from TX-400. Aside from hunting down now expired 220 stock, you also can only get TXP-320 in sheet film. The going rate from the major suppliers(B&H, Adorama, Freestyle) is ~$100 for a 50 sheet box of 4x5 TXP-320(Ilford charges around $35 for a 25 sheet box for most of their films, and most of their emulsions are available in sheet film).

 

As I said, I wish that some kind of instant film was still available in 4x5, and the positive/negative film would be particularly attractive.

Hello again everyone. Ben, my last "adventure" into 4x5 cameras was in 2014. Like you, selection of a film was a bit ugly. I settled on the EDU line of films from Freestyle Camera Sales mainly because the emulsions (400, 200, 100 asa) are also in 120 & 35mm size. Present cost are less than $1 per sheet in 25 packs. I do not think it would take more than 5 sheets to zero what-ever developer you wanted to use. My choice (then) was 510-Pyro in a UN54 light proof system. Aloha, Bill

Bill,

 

I have a box of Arista 100 that I haven't opened yet. I keep meaning to tack some 120 and 35mm onto an order from Freestyle-it's certainly inexpensive enough.

 

With that said, FP4+ has been film of choice of late in 4x5. Although I don't like it as much as Plus-X, it's at least still available in all sizes and is not terribly expensive. In fact, Ilford charges roughly the same price per surface area for everything from 35mm to 4x5.

 

My freezer is currently stocked with quite a variety of sheet film-in addition to the staples of FP4+ and TXP-320, I have some Velvia($$$) along with a bunch of expired Kodak B&W that I want to play with. I've had some advice on how to shoot Ektapan from the good folks at LFP(I have probably 100 sheets of it). I have some Graphic Arts film, which is an ortho litho film, and I've been advised that it's possible to coax a continuous tone negative(or at least tame the contrast some) with a dilute developer.

 

I standardized on D76 a while back, but am open to experimenting with other developers.

My first Nikon, circa 1974, 43 years later and I STILL shoot with it! That 50mm f/2 Nikkor is awful wide open or 1 stop down due to spherical aberration but by 5.6 it is still a great performer.

Edited May 3, 2017 by scott_murphy|5

Bill,

 

I have a box of Arista 100 that I haven't opened yet. I keep meaning to tack some 120 and 35mm onto an order from Freestyle-it's certainly inexpensive enough.

 

With that said, FP4+ has been film of choice of late in 4x5. Although I don't like it as much as Plus-X, it's at least still available in all sizes and is not terribly expensive. In fact, Ilford charges roughly the same price per surface area for everything from 35mm to 4x5.

 

My freezer is currently stocked with quite a variety of sheet film-in addition to the staples of FP4+ and TXP-320, I have some Velvia($$$) along with a bunch of expired Kodak B&W that I want to play with. I've had some advice on how to shoot Ektapan from the good folks at LFP(I have probably 100 sheets of it). I have some Graphic Arts film, which is an ortho litho film, and I've been advised that it's possible to coax a continuous tone negative(or at least tame the contrast some) with a dilute developer.

 

I standardized on D76 a while back, but am open to experimenting with other developers.

 

I still prefer D-76 1:1 @ 68º F. I have tried pretty much all of them and still come back to the old standard. For many years I used to use Microdol-X 1:3 and shoot at 1/2 the normal rated ASA but it is impossible to find now. D-76 1:1 would probably put the grain-o-phobes into anaphylactic shock but that does not bother me in the least. Grain is part of the true photographic process.

I still prefer D-76 1:1 @ 68º F. I have tried pretty much all of them and still come back to the old standard. For many years I used to use Microdol-X 1:3 and shoot at 1/2 the normal rated ASA but it is impossible to find now. D-76 1:1 would probably put the grain-o-phobes into anaphylactic shock but that does not bother me in the least. Grain is part of the true photographic process.

 

To me, Tri-X in D76 is what B&W looks like. I know that this is a sweeping statement and I use a lot of other emulsions, but still when I'm picturing a scene in B&W in my mind that's what I see.

 

One of the nice things about solvating developers like D76 is that even though the grain can be large, it tends to not have the defined edges of the other developers. This does reduce sharpness, but to me gives the grain a look that makes it just blend into the image.