william_littman1

<p>Zero! I agree this infuriates me as everyone agrees its infantile and after 7 years I'm at a loss for words.<br> That is why I feel the support should be conditional to a commitment to get off charity and run this as a business.<br> But while everything always makes sense on paper the fact remains that the so called " product" is no longer a necessity per se and so has to be supported in part. Those who are interested in it should.<br> So bottom line is we all agree the business model makes no sense- we should expect it does soon and in the meantime people who feel like playing with it wont get too hurt by an occasional expense. 55 got up to 600.00 for a box of 20 after discontinuation . my friend sold several cases at that price. Right now New 55 is about equiv 300.00 for a box of 20.<br> They could consider doing +crowd funding on the side instead of discouraging users</p>

<p>The age for those rules went out with the necessity. I still believe that it is fair to support someone willing to make something available when no one else is.<br> But the support has to be reciprocal so that the investment will translated two fold<br> a) Viability<br> B) reasonable pricing</p> <p>so yes I do believe it is fair to support it if the support is directed at making the product viable for the user.<br> On the other hand if the extra costs are a means to allow this guy to learn what he doesn't know- build himself a factory- obtain patents for what he didn't know- unprecedented lol- lecture about what he says doesn't yet work-all of the above time wasting is the biggest expense of all. time is money ....7 years.....then keep the shares and then in turn keep prices <br> high on an ongoing basis I would say no way José unless they send me a free " fool" decal for my forehead because in such model the film isn't saved - he is and whatever you've saved will go to his account .<br> Whether the actual costs are higher or the return expectations are higher or whether the planning is poor makes no difference to me.<br> So my suggestion is we should support this in exchange for a commitment for light at the end of the tunnel .Otherwise after 7 years It seems the lack of momentum stems from focus on research per se versus research towards practical use and if this weren't true then <br> I would say beyond hopeless in the business side of things. </p>

<p>Bob that was a Ponzi scheme. This new one is so fresh it could be called a" Fonzi" scheme.</p> <p>And that is why my position is that De Bakker is right that it isn't perfect yet but I still feel the product deserves support but as I said conditional to a commitment to stop lecturing while you say it needs work and go do the work. and then that the so called support translates in reciprocity in the form of price stability and sensible prices so it can actually survive .</p>

<p>Lets get something clear. the price is ridiculous because the business model is ridiculous.<br /> If the guy says 85x5 shots = Kickstarter and then the price comes down it is still ridiculous but on a short term basis.<br /> The other day someone asked about that and his response was the prices will remain unchanged for a long time.</p> <p>I have and have had the people who would invest in this so it doesn't have to be made like moonshine but from having followed this from the onset what I get is the guy chose this model because this way;<br /> he didn't know how to go from A to B and wants you to pay for it - get patents for what he didn't know how to and then the icing on the cake is = keep the shares .<br /> Lets not forget the 55 went belly up while all the tech was available so perhaps rushing to <br /> be perfect before rolling up the curtain was not a good idea.<br /> So to me this whole research approach on the road most travelled and "NEW" is only new to him. What is "NEW" and unprecedented is the way he's positioning himself that he has to be given an entire business operation before he can" save The Polaroid" . and that is why all the focus on what still needs to be done. As those who care about pictures will use it and don't care about the derogatory admissions ( me being one of them) but by being alarmist he can keep getting funded instead of having to share the pie with an investor. At least that is how I see it.</p>

<p>Yes I can get exited about the product because I am a photographer.<br /> before I'm curious in the scientific of a film and the film works well enough to use and that is what photographers care about.<br /> If my niece picks up my iPhone and accidentally takes the best photo ever . then she knows not how the contraption works but for an instant became the best photographer ever. I on the other hand know a little bit about how the phone works and it does interest me but the interest doesn't make me a photographer but a photography enthusiast.<br /> As I said the problem with the effort is the cook doesn't understand the audience who is both interested and can be interesting work and of interest and what interests him is the scientific which of course isn't done and never is.<br /> And for those who want crystal clear negs I know this lab in Miami who has agreed to offer<br /> 20 sheets develop and contact BW or color for 2.00 a sheet.<br /> he's one of the best labs ever . I'm exited about that too.<br /> darkroom and digital is the name.<br /> randi Rosenthal mitchell</p>

<p>Sir no one can do all at the same time concurrently. When a photographer picks up a camera he cares it will work in the sense of facilitating his work a tool . at such time I care it works as it should. same goes for a film. artists are people who care that tools work as they should when they should and that is at the decisive moment which isn't the time to be distracted on why how or how come. yes i have spent a lifetime preoccupied to the extent of having made a camera that requires that you know less how it works because it works as have my peers defending such freedom from nuisance and distraction. and when its all said and done I am interested in discussing how things work but after I have perfected them otherwise why would i lecture instead of correcting the problem. ? The relevant point is before you teach you might want to get into work first?</p>

<p>No you are correct. Once I have finished my shoot for Vogue I can put on the nerd hat <br> and be curious about nerdy stuff. But while in photographer mode I'm curious about the subject- not lighting-not cameras-not film . Me and my clients care about how things<br> work. they work so we can work</p>

<p>ADS= COMMERCIAL.</p>

<p>You of course are entitled to your opinion. perfection is a relative consideration .<br /> I can tell you that I was assistant to Andy Warhol- Helmut Newton- Peter Beard and others and have received responses on this matter directly from most of the most prominent photographers of the 20th century and also made cameras for many of them.<br /> All who agree Polaroid 55 was the choice negative for artistic pursuit despite other negatives being free of error and funky effects. and so that is a perfection in such regard.<br /> I am glad you have such clarity on your choice.</p>

<p>It is my position that people should indeed support this effort but conditionally. It has been 7 years and he had to go learn how to materialize this when it had been successfully done since 1947.<br> I'm sure the difficulties are not imaginary but when you go down a path you need to know what<br> it will take to get to the finish line at the onset- they didn't. still don't entirely.<br> With this said Type 55 was something you shot on location and developed bk at the studio. that isn't a problem.<br> The uneven spreading of the development is characteristic of Polaroid process. I'm sure it will improve but appears satisfactory enough to me at present.<br> The print as I said was only a hint of what the negative was about to me so makes no difference to me .<br> The only reason these things are disclosed in an alarming manner is as I said again because <br> the person doing it is used to speaking about research which is what he cares about- not a business person who would have empathy towards what the user needs to hear.</p> <p>In this case the use is artistic so the issues are not as critical in stage one as you say. they are only critical because as you can see he doesn't understand that if it were a restaurant you keep the cooking in the kitchen and you let the customers enjoy their meal.</p> <p>So yes there is an obvious unprofessionalism in the lack of separation of these issues but as far as I am concerned its poor presentation but still feel the product should be supported conditional to the enterprise assuming a business posture that users can rely on and they the research bloggy channel has to go backstage or one has to assume the audience will be crash test dummies for cameras and film instead of Pro's.<br> The product itself at present is in better shape than how they present it. In my opinion that is not the problem.</p> <p> </p>

<p>It can be ordered as negative or slide film</p>

<p>One more relevant response ; Salomon made two detractive observations in regard to the professionalism of the product.<br> The issue isn't the product. nobody is going to ask for a refund on a Gaugin or the Mona Lisa because the brushstrokes are not invisible and or seamless.<br> The issue is the mindset of people who live to research versus what is considered professionalism in business.<br> Anyone who ever received medical care at a university Hospital by students will confirm That its going to take way longer bumpy raw and unapologetic because they'll tell you that if you want fast to go elsewhere.<br> All of the esoteric disclosure on what took 7 years is of no interest to professional photographers- it may interest science enthusiasts.- not professional photographers. <br> Bob is correct that professional photographers want to know what is available - when and how much<br> On the other hand the current technical difficulties are not an issue.<br> To know what is available and continuity is.</p>

<p><br /> <br />it is obvious that from a quantitative point of view the quality of digital suffices yet everyone agrees there is an" artificial" appearance to it by which in HD everything looks a little bit " avatar" <br /> Secondly convenience and what suffices ends up being boring to a certain portion of a market <br /> at some point- consumism will make sure of that whether people actually need a new computer or not they tend to upgrade if only for lack of being motivated by something better. <br /> <br />What Salomon says about instant film as a viable commercial product is from the viewpoint as a justification by someone who marketed products. what he says is true. <br /> But that is also what killed America. <br /> One of my favorite films" Seabiscuit" at one point the lead role says something like" America the great depression- you could get anything you want in any color just as long as it was black. " I as a manufacturer add my two cents " you can get anything you want made in America just as long as you are willing to purchase( quantity) a lot more than you can ever use or ever need. <br /> It is indeed appealing to those who have artistic interests because if only laziness and you can have a negative without having to learn then so be it. <br /> I personal always hated the t55 prints and threw them out and sent all my negs to contact at the lab anyway but it doesn't bother me if people like the print. <br /> <br />Thirdly and again for artistic purposes digital is yes yes yes yes yes = it can be anything but what it cannot be is a first step which is unchangeable . that is a no <br /> so film = yes familiarity= yes a certain quality = no it cant be everything= it can only be within parameter= parchment isn't= leather isn't = wood. <br> <br /> The metallic aspect of silver or platinum based photography has an unique tonal response which I have no doubt some day could be mimicked by digital presets and then I would have to concede that if some day there is a full frame 4x5 digital back then I could obtain the proportional qualities of realism which I find appealing and if it so happens to be that by then someone has perfected a digital preset which mimics these panchromatic films then I would not think twice. <br> <br /> With all this said only makes sense if ones artistic effort is sufficiently dedicated to justify the expense. meaning if your pictures are not well composed with digital and its free arguing spending money to not expect a better result is a silly argument. <br> <br /> But a great violin player can benefit from using a Stradivarius over a modern Japanese reproduction. there are some places where technology reached its peak before and so people go back when they realize sometimes what most believe is progress is actually digression. <br> <br /> Einstein realized everything is curbed( elliptic )from space to time to progress and therefore one would be wise to differentiate the technologies of consumism and convenience with the technologies to achieve excellence in art. they are not one and the same. and that the future will take us to what has been and to summarize you could say that what killed the American Dream was the nightmare which said one had to dispose of last years car and get " this years car" and at some point you realize things peak and then there is only one way things can go if they are to be different. Politics has this dichotomy.<br> <br /> In short yes for those who don't mind developing then they sell the same film at 2.00- a sheet <br /> and I don't use 4x5 for everything but I do love it when it is justified. <br /><br /> Jim I think you are right about the evaluation you made. <br> <br /> In a few days Ill tell you what I think of the business model <br /> Happy New year to all </p> <p> </p>

<p>http://www.new55.net/</p>

<p>Sounds great- wish you much success!!!<br> I think the way of the future could consider using/ adapting obsolete x-ray processing machines which are automated and inexpensive due to the obsolescence . black and while chems are in many cases reusable to a degree. I use jobo now or the old ciba tube ol Duggal haha</p>

<p>BTW positive negative film is available again in small quantities<br> http://www.new55.net/</p>

<p>BTW the 4x5 film is now available again. if you don't need both a positive and a negative it costs about 2.00 a sheet <br> http://www.new55.net/</p> <p>and then Fomapan 100 costs about 1.00 per sheet</p>

<p>Looks Like the 4x5 positive negative film is already on sale in limited quantities</p>

<p> /> I found this selection of interest from a range and exposure standpoint even though poorly exposed and lit and amateur. I think Fomapan can work as type 55 if developed properly and rated lower as a negative and higher as a positive. Would you kindly share your images and how developed. it seems rodinal 1/50 works best for this desired tonal range.</p>

<p>Fred + Allen= good points and precicely my point.<br> If photography captures the experience of life then one can just " do it" or do it with an understanding and then have an aim.<br> I would dare accuse that most forum or social media discussions focus on a 2 dimensional juxtapoisition and participants quasi demand that one variable should prevail over the other and by which the mattesr should be settled.<br> we live in a Time space continuum and while Henri words were not a scientific as Einstein I would have to agree that when photographing life a successful photographer is as a juggler .<br> The more dimensions which are taken into account concurrently make up for a " better decisive moment"<br> that can be verified present and true in the ikonic photos everyone agrees are landmarks though one variable may be the one which seals the deal the other ones may be the icing on the cake.<br> Both your responses are very true and what I say as well.<br> We did care as to why and how when we were learning and on training wheels / now your niece with your iPhone clicks- you love it and who cares as to how or why.<br> That is what has changed. We came we learned - we conquered and now we just want to do it. ;)</p> <p>Fred yesterday I watched the film 91/2 weeks with Mikey Rourke shot exactly 30 years ago.<br> Ronnie boy was in the white house and credit cards were issued as if supermarket coupons and sex wasn't novel but it was sexy as to now people just do it or don't ;)</p> <p>If there were a point to the whole approach is that whether one gets paid for taking pictures or not the value ( aesthetic) is the same and the audience wants to hear what it is that you have to say.<br> much the same as if with politics where it isn't popular to just make it up as you go along.<br> If one doesn't care to have an audience for a personal message then obviously why not skip the nonsense altogether and voila.<br> Henri chose a Leica because it was the most responsive / less intrusive tool at the time for that purpose many felt the same way about rangefinders.<br> When I started assisting my grandfather I was 5 and getting my portrait taken by him with one of his mammoth cameras was like the anesthesia prior to root canal - it took forever and by the time he took the picture I was in the land of placidity or frustration.<br> When I decided to try to bring the responsiveness of the Leica to large format thru my camera those who took pictures like my grandfather didn't see a point as they didn't seek the responsiveness or if they did they did sunny 16 and paparazzo style. that is a very limited approach no longer desirable.<br> I think a very good analogy for this is a performance by female figure skaters in competition where the summation of concurrent variables in a set time seals the value of the performance.<br> That is the decisive moment . some care- some dont</p> <p> </p>

<p>Are you the one to contact?<br> PM?</p>

<p>Thank you!!</p>

<p>Can anyone tell me where to announce a sale?<br> there used to be a classifieds but I cant find it.<br> Thanks </p>

<p>Photography was Novel when my ancesters started playing with rudimentary and bulky toys and felt like pioneers and when the natives felt their soul was being stolen by the silver print.<br> Photography isn't novel anymore and if someone takes a picture a la Bresson today it will not raise any eyebrows as we are desensitized by so much over exposure to imaging <br> What has changed is back in the day people just lived without concern to relevance . 20 years ago a few lived la vida loca and the rest saw it on the weekends at the movies . <br> Now its a different era where it seems everyone with a smart phone is out to vote on the rave of the day and after 10 years of that even social media gets old.<br> There has been an assault on the western way of life as a result of economic debacles starting after the Irak war and it seems the trend is water down until we drown haha</p>

<p>W hen I met him he had become a painter / no longer a photographer and wouldn't touch a leica with a 10 ft pole;)<br> I think we have come to a crossroads in time when there are fewer and fewer chairs available that nobody has sat on and then the chairs one can sit on seem to be even fewer.<br> Look at the presidential debates... I think looking and sounding presidential comes second to the purpose of the Job attainment which is that those who are presided over can be allowed to live with dignity instead of as presidiaries of a unacceptable economic disparagement in a system presenting itself as " the socialist side"<br> I don't care who started what but feel the job description and the tone vary with the times.<br> Photography is similar in a way. unfortunately in the early days photography was a rich mans game .<br> My great great great grandad karl peter Mazer was one of the earliest photographers a painter turned darerreotypist in the court of the Romanovs .<br> The my grandad was Evita Perons photopgrapher in Buenos Aires and his family was very poor but he was clever and would take his box camera to the Argentinian beach of Mar Del Plata and shoot 3 plates for a dollar.<br> In the days of world war one a dollar in Argentina equals what you would get for 300.00 today so in a few years he made the equivalent of a million dollars then bought houses.<br> When the war ended the dollar value changed over night he sold the houses and now had a million dollars.<br> Capa got a break because he had talent but three times the cojones. and the third musketeer was Depardon who I haven't met but once made a camera for him.<br> The obstacles which are relevant to great picture taking however have nothing to do with having been born with a silver spoon in your mouth but a bright as silver ability to focus on 1000 things concurrently.<br> Money then can bridge some gaps in terms of staying on course and getting there but its a bit overated perhaps because as with any business there is a marketing pressure to own every stupid accessory filter grip and connector ever made.<br> I started shooting with one camera and one lens and did most of my career that way.<br> When Kodak had me give fashion photography seminars in the Caribbean the commercial photographers attending would show up with trunks and trunks and trunks of gear and as many assistants.<br> I was working for Vogue- none of them did or did since. I was poor - they were quite affluent by comparison.<br> I think a good portion of artists are wealth and get brakes and an equal amount of artists aren't and get brakes but those who aren't affluent usually have great personalities and which is worth more than all the money in the world. <br> And regarding evolution I once had a few brief encounters with an art Director Alexander Liberman who told me that the creative life of a photographer is like that of a butterfly - he must transform evolve adapt ot his creativity dies.<br> I burnt my first photographs ;)</p>