moominstuff

Moominsean In Japan

2012-01-15T08:55:00.006-07:00

I've been to Japan three times now, and on the past two trips I shot tons of black and white 35mm with a Fuji Natura Classica and a Bessa R4A. All these negatives have basically been sitting in folders unscanned until recently, as I didn't really know what to do with them or how to present them. Well, I finally scanned them and sifted through and put together a small, relatively low-fi book, collecting some of my more favorite shots from the bunch. Finding a "real" publisher is mostly beyond my means (and desire) at this point, so print on demand seemed like the best way to go. So I present to you my new book, 120 pages with 123 photographs, Moominsean in Japan.

I wanted to keep the book as affordable as possible. I only make a couple dollars a book (it would take many sold copies just to pay for my proof copies), but I just wanted to do something that would keep me entertained and that I would enjoy looking at, and other people might enjoy looking at as well. It was an interesting process. I used to work in publishing and did a lot of magazine work, so I had fun putting it together. I worked my way through a couple versions to see how the printing was and what I would need to adjust for optimal photo quality (while choosing the lowest grade paper and printing available). It's not a cheap process, as you have to buy your own book to check it. I went through two versions before the final product.

The final book is slender, and pocket sized. All photos are black and white on white paper.

I spent a couple months staring at the layout, adding and removing and figuring out the best order for the photos, and what might complement what on each page. The subjects are varied, which is a relatively common Japanese way of shooting. The Japanese either pick one subject and shoot the hell out of it, as in this excellent book by Shibata, Bus Stop, or they wander and just shoot whatever catches the eye, which is what Moriyama often does. I don't live in Japan, so I shoot like a tourist who doesn't shoot like a tourist.
There are haikyo shots, which is abandonment and decay...

And plenty of street photography...

As well as shots of daily life in Japan...

And a bit of otaku culture...

And, of course, some cliches, but I am a tourist after all...

A bit of a travelogue overall, though entirely confined to those moments when I had black-and-white film in my cameras. At some point I may put together a companion book of color 35mm photos from the same two trips.
So I hope this is something that you would want on your bookshelf alongside your other photo books! I thought it might be funny to limit it to 500 copies, and I could stop selling it when I turn 85 (if I even sold that many copies by then), but I figure a few people will enjoy this and honor me by including it in their collections.
The book can be purchased from Blurb.com for $21.99 US plus shipping, which ranges from $7.99 to $20+ depending on how fast you want it shipped and where you live.

Moominsean in Japan by Sean Rohde | Make Your Own Book

If you really feel like you want a signed copy, contact me at sjrohde@cox.net and you can Paypal the money directly to me, and I will order it, sign and inscribe if desired (though I warn you that my handwriting is horrendous), and ship it to you. You will just have to pay for shipping twice (to me from Blurb and then to you from me). I thought about buying multiple copies to sell signed books, but it ends up costing me like $400 for just 25 copies, and I don't know if the interest is there.
So, I hope you order a copy and enjoy it!

Soon I will be talking about the Bronica S2 and C, and the various lenses available, and will also write up a review of the Fuji Fotorama FP-1.

Color film developing at home: Easy!

2012-01-03T16:14:00.016-07:00

I live in a city metro area of about 3.5 million folks, 75 miles across from east to west, and there currently seems to be one single place that develops 120 film in house (as opposed to sending it out). Film is dead, long live film. So, best current solution? Develop the film myself!
There are plenty of online resources on film developing, but I've had a couple requests to do this post. Developing color film is really very easy, no more difficult than black and white...but it probably helps to have some experience with home developing. I'm not going to talk at all about black and white developing, as there are even more resources available (I recommend the book Into Your Darkroom Step by Step), but I will go through color developing as if you don't have any idea what I am talking about. I don't even have a darkroom, just a bathroom without windows, and I pretty much develop all of my own film. Small learning curve for basic developing, and then the options are limitless, from kits to mixing your own chemicals. The way I do it is as basic and cheap as it gets...and it works! I will be using 120 film and C41 developing, but the same process works for 35mm (or 127, etc), but getting 35mm developed is easy as most drugstores and Walmart type stores develop 35mm color in house.
First off, you will need some supplies. The most expensive thing you will buy is a thermometer. You need to get a "real" thermometer, not something from the drugstore. Mine looks like this:

Chemical and water temperature is very important for all developing, so buy a decent thermometer up front to save some pain, and it will also last many years.
You also need a developing tank. There are many different brands, as well as plastic tanks and reels, and metal tanks and reels. I use a plastic Patterson tank setup, good for a single 120 spool (that I feed two 120 rolls onto), or two 35mm spools. This is the tank that will be used to develop the film.

You need some kind of measuring container to measure out your chemicals. It should have milliliters and ounces on it, and for the Patterson tank should measure at least 20 ounces.

You will need three containers for color developing. They should be the size of the chemicals you buy, in this case one liter. If you are buying one gallon mixes, you need 1 gallon containers. I'd recommend just getting smaller containers and mix since the shelf life of color developer can be somewhat limited.

My kit has three chemicals, but some may have more. E-6 kits have 4 chemicals, I believe. Just read the instructions.
You will need a timer, as well, to keep track of developing time. I just use my cell phone timer. Optional but useful supplies include a funnel for pouring chemicals back into the bottles, and Photo-Flo to help prevent water spots at the end. You will also need some way to hang your film to dry. I use office clips and rubber bands on my shower rod (ouch!).
Needless to say (though I say it), you also need a dark room (I use my bathroom) or a dark bag, but only for spooling your film. Everything else is done in daylight once the film is in the tank. For color developing, you need hot running water. I use my bathtub. That's it! Aside from chemicals and color film.
To summarize in fewer words, for color developing you need: thermometer, developing tank and spool, measuring container, chemical storage containers x 3, dark room or dark bag, hot water source, and timer, plus color chemicals and color film.
There are a few options for color developing chemicals. I use the Unicolor C-41 Kit, which I buy from Freestyle Photographic, honestly because it is the cheapest kit at $17.99. I haven't had issues with it (though any home developing isn't without its issues), so I continue to use it. It comes with directions, so pretty much what I am telling you here is in the instructions. This is more about showing you my method and how easy it is...I still follow the directions that come with the kit.
In the box you get four packages of chemicals. Follow the mixing directions, of course. You will need hot water at 110F (44C) for mixing. When I say 110F at this point, I just mean hot water. Getting your chemicals to the right temperature is important for developing, not so important for mixing. The powders just dissolve better in hot water. The developer is in a single package and goes into Bottle 1 to make 1000ml (use water at 110F). Make sure you label and date your containers. Blix is made up of Part A and Part B (two packages) and both go into Bottle 2 to make 1000ml (use 110F water). The third mix is stabilizer, which goes into Bottle 3, and can be room temperature. Ideally, using bottled water is best to avoid contaminants in the water, but I don't have any way to get bottled water hot like that without it being a pain, so I just use hot bath water.
A note about the chemicals. The developer is a bit nasty, but the blix is very nasty. I wrap my developing tank in a towel while developing and avoid carpets, because blix is dark red and will probably never wash out of anything. Also, blix is a bleaching agent, so try to keep it off of your clothes. I don't worry much about keeping it off of my skin or anything like that...I've never felt anything from it, but I don't dip my hands in it either. The stabilizer seems fairly benign, but, as with any chemicals, try to keep it off of your skin and out of your eyes.
First off you need to spool your color film and put it in the tank. I'm not going to go into details on this as there are a million online resources to help you. All I can offer is that if you are new to this, sacrifice a roll and practice in daylight, and try with your eyes closed. With my plastic reel, it usually takes me less than a minute if the film isn't stupid curly. Once you have your film in the tank, everything from here on out is done with the lights on.
If you are developing right after mixing your chemicals, getting the temperature correct is easier because the water is already hot. This is the biggest turnoff for most people when it comes to color developing...getting the chemicals hot enough. Black and white developer is usually at 68F, while color developer and blix needs to be at around 102F. It's really not that big of a deal. I take my developer and blix bottles (making sure the caps are securely fastened) and put them in the tub under the hot water tap.

Simple as that! I let it sit like this for about five minutes and check the temperature with my thermometer. The developer should be around 102F (39C). Better to be a couple degrees warmer than a couple degrees cooler, because it won't maintain that temperature while developing.
Step one is a presoak. Fill your tank with hot water and let it sit for 1 minute, then dump out the water. The waste water will probably be green or red, depending on film type. This is just the anti-halation layer coming off, which I guess makes the film more receptive to the developer.
Step two is the developer. Once your developer is hot, measure out 20 ounces and pour it into the tank. I wrap my tank in a towel to avoid dripping and to help insulate to prevent cooling. Development time is short, and I've found that after developing, my temperature is still about the same in the tank:

Once you pour your developer in the tank, start your timer. The directions state to develop for 3.5 minutes. I develop for 4 minutes with fresh developer, and 4.5 minutes for older developer. I rap hard on the tank a couple times to get the possible bubbles off the film. Then pick up your tank and invert (turn upside down, right side up, upside down, etc.) for 10 seconds, then set the tank down. Then at the 30 second mark, pick up your tank and do 4 inversions, and then put the tank back down. Do this at every 30 second mark, 4 inversions each time, until the developing time is up. You can hold your tank, but I think it's best to let it sit quietly between inversions so you aren't adding any additional agitation. Also, I turn my tank one quarter of a turn after each set of inversions so I'm not always inverting in the exact same direction, increasing developer coverage across the film. After the time is up, pour your developer back into the appropriate bottle. It is reusable, so don't dump it down the sink or whatnot.
Step 3 is blix. Your blix should be 95F-105F, so you have a wider temperature range to work with. Same as with the developer, pour 20 ounces of blix into your tank, start your timer, rap a couple times on the bottle, wrap in a towel, do 10 seconds of inversions, then 4 inversions at every 30 second mark. Blix time is 6.5 minutes. After the blix time is up, pour it back into the blix bottle.
Step 4 is the wash. After the blix, you can take the lid off of your tank as the film is no longer sensitive to light. Let your film rinse under the hot tap for 3 minutes.

After rinsing, pour 20 ounces of room temperature stabilizer into the open tank, agitate for 15 seconds, let it sit for 30-45 seconds, then pour the stabilizer back into the stabilizer bottle.
I use Photo-Flo on my film to help prevent water spots.

About half an eyedroppers worth into the tank, add water to above the spool, agitate for 30 seconds, and sit for 30 seconds, then dump it out. At this point, you are basically done and can remove the film from the spool!

Hang your film, squeegee off the excess water (I use my fingers), and let it dry (I use a small fan). Once it is dry, cut it however you want (I cut it into four, with three shots per cut). Simple!
Like I said, all the directions are with the kit and very easy to understand, but to reiterate how easy this is, here is a summary for the Unicolor kit:

1. Prewash hot water 1 minute.
2. Developer at 102F for 3.5 to 4.5 minutes, 10 seconds of inversion then 4 inversions every 30 seconds.
3. Blix at 95F-105F for 6.5 minutes, 10 seconds of inversion then 4 inversions every 30 seconds.
4. Wash under hot tap for 3 minutes.
5. Stabilizer for 1 minute, with agitation for first 15 seconds.
6. Photo-Flo for 1 minute, with agitation for 30 seconds.
7. Hang, squeegee and dry, then cut and scan.

And there you have it! Home color developing. It takes less than 30 minutes to develop, and I feed two rolls of 120 film onto my reel per development. So, how are the results? Pretty nice in my opinion. A couple examples of self-developed Kodak Ektar.

Kodak Vericolor, expired 1995...

And Konica Centuria 100, expired 2006 (and in bad shape).

Overall, I get excellent results from my home developing. Occasionally I do get some funkiness on my negatives, possibly from poor inversion by me or chemicals getting old. Here are two examples of developing weirdness. The first shot, I forgot to prewash, so definitely my fault...poor coverage of developer, I guess. No idea what's going on in the second shot, though I did accidentally open up the film back while the film was in the camera, but that's not light leakage there...and it was only on a couple shots, not the entire roll.

But, honestly, I've had labs screw up my film a lot worse than I have doing it myself. My success rate is pretty high.
I guess I should mention the life expectancy of color developer. According to the instructions it is good for about eight rolls of 120 film. But is does say that, basically, you can keep using it until you don't like the results anymore. I have thrown out chemicals just because it's been four months since I last used them and didn't want to risk ruining my film. But I generally keep using them for a couple months at least and have developed 20 or so rolls from a single batch of chemicals with no ill effect. I've read of people using the same developer for a couple years. Storage and room temperature probably has a lot to do with how long it lasts. Keeping the bottles airtight and relatively cool will help extend your chemicals lifespan. Sudden death of the chemicals is unlikely...you will just start to see gradual color shifts and probably increased grain. Regardless, home developing is very economical - 8-20+ rolls for $18 versus paying someone $5 a roll for development.
My next task is to tackle E-6 development, which is about the same as C41 with an extra step. Just waiting until I have a few more 120 rolls and 4x5 sheets to develop before I start.
I've also put together a little Blurb book...more info when I make it available for sale. Until next time, have fun developing!

Fuji reclaimed negatives revisited: The 4x5 edition

2011-12-06T17:57:00.004-07:00

Taking a short break from the Fujipet posts (two more to come, I believe) to talk a but more about reclaimed Fuji negatives. More specifically, 4x5 Fuji negatives, and even a bit more specifically, Fuji 4x5 black and white negatives. This is applicable to the regular-sized Fuji film, as well, so fun for all.
I recently bought myself a Fuji PA-45 back for my Crown Graphic. Same thing as a Polaroid 550 back, but easier to find (though not cheap). What does a PA-45 use? Fuji 4x5 pack film. A regular Polaroid 4x5 sheet film back looks like this:

While a PA-45 back looks like this:

Flies in the face of the definition of "compact". So Fuji makes this giant pack film that works exactly like smaller Polaroid pack film, such as Type 669, 667, etc.

There were three types of Fuji 4x5 being made...FP-100C45, FP-100B45 and FP-3000B45 (same as the smaller packs, with a 45 at the end). Well, they stopped making FP-100B45 (and FP100B) last year, and I've heard that they are going to stop making FP-100C45 and probably FP-3000B45 in the next year (though the will still keep making FP-100C and FP-3000B). Bummer! But all of them are readily available on the internet at this point, even FP-100B45 (on eBay mostly). So I don't feel like I'm talking about something here that is unattainable for all of you.
So, as mentioned above, I'm going to talk about reclaiming the negative from FP-100B45. You can seem my previous post for the basics of bleaching a negative, Color is easy...black and white is a bit more delicate. You can rinse a FP-100C negative to your heart's delight and it will probably be fine (though you can lose emulsion along the edges if you are rough with it). FP-100B will wash right the heck off of the plastic. So you need to be able to bleach and rinse the opaque side while retaining the soft image on the other side. How? Well, that's what I'm here to show you...
First you have your negative, which is the side that you peel from the print. It looks like this before you tamper with it.

You need bleach and a soft brush (I use an oil brush that probably cost $20, but use whatever as long as it is not course so you don't scratch the plastic). And, of course, you need negatives to work with.

I use a piece of glass to work on. This one is actually meant for rolling printer's ink onto for block printing. But anything smooth should work.

You don't want anything with texture because it will allow water to flow under the print. So first I wet the glass.

Water will soften the emulsion, but adding water to the glass creates a seal for when you bleach and rinse, preventing water from flowing under the print and washing away the emulsion. So lay down your negative, emulsion side down (the not black side) on the wet glass. I always have it so the white strip is along the top, because the other end seems to be more sensitive to washing away (for both color and black and white negatives). Then you start scrubbing the black surface with bleach.

Rinse and repeat. You will see your image through the plastic as the black stuff washes off.

You want to scrub a bit, then rinse, then scrub a bit more, and rinse, etc. The black stuff will quickly start to wash away. Make sure you aren't letting the running water hit along the top edge, lifting the print up. You want to maintain the seal under the print.

I can usually get all off the black junk off in about three minutes. I like to get all of it off, because any left will be opaque and scan as white spots.

Carefully lift the print off the glass. It will look a bit messy...

All you should do now is let it dry.

Do not rinse off the emulsion right away, thinking you need to get rid of the developer, because you will wash off the softened emulsion, or it will bubble and look like this:

Once the negative has dried and hardened, you will have something that looks like this...

Interesting that some of the black and white negatives seem to have some color...red areas...possibly solarization? Can't wait to scan and see! But...first we do want to get some of that "salt" off of the negative. Now that the negative is dry, you can very carefully rinse it under the tap.

You can take a very gentle finger to it (that's what she said), but you want to only rinse it maybe for 30 seconds and if you start to see bubbling or warping, stop! I wash off both side so I don't get streaks on the shiny side from stray water. Then you just set it aside to dry once more. It should look like this if you did it correctly (and were lucky):

Time to scan! The negative in color...

And then converted to black and white and cleaned up...

The print for comparison. And you can see one of the problems with the PA-45 back...leaks. Mijonju had one when I was in Japan and it seemed to have a similar problem. Haven't taken the time to figure out why or where it is leaking.

The negatives are very thin and require some adjustment in Photoshop. Another scan, this one with bubbles from the emulsion softening too much.

So sometimes you get something good, other times you screw it up. Still fun to try.

Apocalyptic...

Bleaching still works better with Fuji FP-100C45.

EDIT: I made a video demonstrating a bleach of a Fuji F-100B negative to show how easy and fast the process is. One thing I have changed through some experimention is I don't re-rinse the film to remove the developer goop. Instead, I run the emulsion side under cold water for 20 seconds or so, rubbing very gently to kind of "even out" the goop, so there aren't any "wave" forms on the scan. The developer actually does a very good job of protecting the emulsion, and as soon as you start to wash the developer off, the emulsion washes off as well. Better just to leave it.

Tape the negatives to the scanner bed.

You can see again how the negatives look in color...red and blue.

A scan of the print for the negative bleached in the video:

And the bleached negative.

This negative has so much solarization that it actually works as a "positive" scan, as well.

The detail in the shadows is much greater on the negative, much like 3000 goop scans. I'm sure the solarization is increased with cold (it was in the 40s F), which is also a characteristic of 3000 goop negatives.
One more for good measure.

So have at it! Until next time!

Fujipet Goodies...mmmmm!

2011-11-22T10:54:00.007-07:00

Part two of my Fujipet/フジペット website conversion to blog format (Part 1 here). Easier than I expected as the website was written in a narrative format. This time up we have Fujipet accessories and such, AKA...

GOODIES

A complete package, including a promo price card. This is probably a later model. The lighter wasn't part of the deal! It's assumedly there for size comparison (I notice the Japanese often use a lighter or a Lucky Strike cigarette box for size comparison). This set sold for around 52,000 yen.

Here is a Pet with the original box and instructions. I believe the other brochure is a catalog and the white sheet is a warranty or registration card. The different covers on the booklets are probably dependent on the production year.

A nice set with a flash. This flash looks the same as the one from the manual, so it may be an official Fuji product.

Boxes: Fujipet, Pet 35 and Fujipet EE.

A Pet 35 with its goodies...

A Fujipet still in its original bags. Note the price card at bottom right.

A complete set for a red Pet...

And a complete set for a green Pet.

A close-up of a Fujipet box. One side is stamped stating the color of the camera. Also includes a very surly chihuahua.

An EE complete with box, instructions and warranty card.

Another box with a kawaii girl instead of robot boy seen above.

A complete set for a very minty EE, with a different box from above. Interesting Fuji logo on the plastic bag. This set even includes the silicate bag!

A closer look at the EE box.

A closer look at the design on the bag and the silicate pack!

Yet another box design for the Fujipet EE.

This bag sold separately for 300 yen. It sports a vinyl exterior with a plaid cloth interior. The logo is a decal of sorts. Note the name tag holder attached to the strap.

The camera case for the original 120 was leather. I assume it was sold separately.

Both the case and bag for comparison.

A case that says simply...PET.

A lighter brown Fujipet case.

A very fitting sticker affixed to this bag! Matching hair! Also on the top is written Sekiya...the original owner?

A much-loved first-generation Pet with fancy car stickers.

A rare yellow pet with sweet stickers (sentai?) on the bag!

Someone personalized this well-worn Pet with a cute heart tag!

Here is a Fujipet EE with its leather case.

A Fujpet EE case with Mount Fuji on the front.

The Pet 35 leather case has a very sporty look.

This Pet has a nice wrist strap that screws into the bottom mount. These are common in Japan.

A yellow filter ring. I don't know if they made others, but a Pet R. (red) isn't unlikely.

One was made for the EE, as well.

Here you can see how the flash attaches. I'm not sure if Fuji made an official Fujipet flash. The flash on the left is odd and bulky. The umbrella flash looks the same as the one in the manual. These pictures come from this site.

Another modern flash on a vintage Pet! And at right is, I believe, a pinhole Fujipet, with lenscap. Or it could have been modified to shoot photos of stars and the moon. I've found evidence of this somewhere on the web.

I'm not sure if this tripod was made by Fuji, but it looks exactly like the tripod that appears in the manual.

A promotional pin, made of brass. Looks great on someone's jacket, I bet!

And a pin for the EE, available in different colors...

This is a metal bank. Very cool characters on the front!

The back of the bank.

A Fujipet crate! For what? I have no idea. Fujipet ramune?

And another Fujipet crate!

A major "what the heck?" here...a Fujipet bike! Probably some cross-branding from a store that sold Fujipets, or possible a contest prize.

And to prove more than one exists...a sweet red ride!

Gee, the monkey camera on this tin whistle looks familiar! Also available is a pig whistle. These are fairly common an eBay...

Figurines. The website they come from is now down, but they sent me a nice e-mail once.

Promotional cards.

Two adverts from Japanese camera magazines. Translation: Fuji Film. Everyone's Camera - Fujipet. Bag 300 Yen. The different S, SS and SSS are three Neopan Films by Fuji.

Some old Japanese photography magazines...one featuring Fujipets!

A Fujica brochure featuring the Pet 35 and Fujipet EE.

A foldout brochure with various Fuji cameras.

And another nice brochure.

A single-sheet Fujipet calendar!

A very cool promo hanging poster on cardboard...

Sections from a promo poster.

And a page from a Fuji catalog for the EE.

This neat little book was gifted to me...basically a "how to take photographs" book from Fuji in 1958.

Here are a few shots of kids with Fujipets. The third is from Fujifilm's official site (bottom right). The dog could be Hachiko (not the original, who died in March 1934), waiting for his master to return home. The last (top right) comes from this site...a young priest with a Fujipet, according to the caption.

Another photo from a Japanese book on photography. Note the carrying case.

Evidence from a crime scene? Or part of a game...Fujima-san in the temple with the Fujipet. Most likely they are prizes for some contest or promotion.

The Fujipet featured in a modern magazine. I have a couple different magazines/mooks that feature the Pet.

Promo flags, probably for hanging in stores.

This is a Chinese Fujipet copy, "Kofuku". More information can be found at this site. A quick translation states that it was probably made in Tianjing factory in 1960, maybe used by the children of affluent Communist Party staff. It is made out of metal because production of plastic parts was probably difficult at that time in China. It has a double lens, as opposed to the Fujipet, which has a single lens.

A Holga in disguise! Created by TGray and borrowed from the toycamera.com forums.

The one and only Polapet! An amalgam of a few broken Fujipets and a Polaroid Square Shooter. I think it needed a screwdriver to fire the shutter. It's a monster!

And two shots taken with the Polapet using expired film.

And the Instax Pet I made a couple years ago...

The Fujipet was also featured in the original logo for Lightleaks magazine (designed by me, of course). When I stopped doing the magazine design, it became Light Leaks, and recently went kaput. Browsing through the first three issues I did, I had forgotten how cool it looked! =P

That's plenty for now. Still have manuals and a breakdown to cover. Also want to talk about Bronicas and I've had a couple requests about self-developed color. Soon!

FUJIPET GO!

2011-11-16T14:20:00.006-07:00

I was recently sent a message by my internet provider saying that all free web space would be deleted in December because of "low usage". Well, my Fujipet site (link soon to be dead, I guess) will go bye bye, though it's had almost 23,000 Fujipet fans visiting since 2005. So instead of paying someone to host it, I figured I could just break it down into a series of blog posts. I haven't talked about the Fujipet on this blog, except to tear one apart, so what better opportunity?

Welcome! This blog post is dedicated to the Fujipet (フジペット) camera, made by Fuji Photo Film Co. from 1957 to 1963. I will mainly be covering the 120 style Fujipet (also nicknamed Thunderbird in Japan) here, but I will try to offer information about other models as I can. The Fujipet is considered a "toy camera." It isn't built like a toy camera, as the body is made of plastic and aluminum and is quite sturdy, but most of these cameras sport a plastic lens. It was intended as a starter camera for young people, easy enough that even "women and children" could use it.
When I saw my first Fujipet, I instantly fell in love with its design. To me, it is the epitome of 1950s Japanese futuristic style. It is art. It has Astroboy hair. It just looks COOL. When I finally found one (then two), I knew it was something special. Again, it just looks so COOL, and you look cool using it. When you carry it, people give you that "what the..." look. And, yes, it is fun and easy to use! What can it do? Check out the site, and I will do my best to let you in on everything I know about this little wonder. Which isn't a heck of a lot so far, but I hope to increase my knowledge base and share it with you.

THE CAMERAS

FUJIPET 6X6 120 CAMERA

As far as I know, there are three Fujipet models. The camera I will focus most of my attention on is the original 120 roll film camera as seen on the front page. It takes 12 6x6 shots on a roll of 120 film, color or black and white. It was first introduced in 1957 (Showa 32) with production ending in 1963 (Showa 38). There were minor design changes and a few different colors throughout its life, which I attempt to catalogue on the Camera Gallery page.

Technical Specifications:
- Plastic or glass, single element, fixed lens.
- 70mm.
- f11, f16, f22, two plate, with no detent.
- B, 1/50 leaf shutter.
- 6x6 cm ‘Buroni’ format (Bronica - 120 in Japan) for a 56 x 56 mm exposure.
- Base is tripod threaded.
- Flash shoe (cold, with ext sync socket).
- 120x100x75mm, weight:332g.

The key components are as follows:

The lens is plastic in some cameras and glass in others. It is fixed focus (seems to lose focus at around less than one meter). The main body is plastic, with the top being aluminum. The back and bottom piece is also aluminum. As you see, it has a two-lever shutter mechanism. You first press down 1, which "charges" or cocks the shutter, then press 2 to take the picture. Cocking the shutter does not open the shutter. The opening and closing is done by lever 2. I'm not sure why it was designed this way, as one-click cameras were available at the time. It's part of the charm. The shutter itself is a leaf-shutter. The textured color surfaces are glued onto the body. They tend to peel apart, but are easy to glue back on. There are two feet on the bottom for stabilization when storing. The aperture lever acts as the third foot. The notches on the sides are for the camera strap.

There are two shutter settings. I probably stands for Instant and B for bulb. The little red switch slides easily from one mode and back. In bulb mode, you can hold down 2 for as long as you want, keeping the shutter open for extended exposures. Here, you can see the counter window through the open shutter in bulb mode.

The aperture lever under the lens attached to a ring that surrounds the barrel. It slides smoothly from side to side.

The aperture ring offers 3 different graphics. I assume this was done to make it completely obvious for everyone using it. The right side offers apertures of 11, 16 and 22. The top is a visual representation of the aperture opening, from wide to small. The left side offers sunlight variations.

The hood is a simple aluminum or plastic ring that slides out from the body. It is loose and tends to move around a lot on its own. The first model had an aluminum hood, while most are plastic. Very late models seem to have some sort of plastic piece on the lens barrel to lock the hood in the out position. One thing to note about the plastic hoods is that they all have "burn" marks on them. Never appearing in the same place, eahc hood has its own special scar(s) that look as of they were damaged...but all of them have the burns. I have no idea what these are from...most likely some manufacturing foibles...but what, I couldn't say. So fear not if your Pet has these marks.

The Pet uses an external bulb sync flash. It fits on the shoe and plugs into the barrel. Note the hood must be extended to plug in the flash on most models. The plug is closer to the body on early Pets. Releasing the shutter sets off the flash. I don't know if there is an official Fujipet flash.

The Fujipet winds film to the left (as you hold the camera) instead of to the right. I have no idea how common this is with 120 cameras. The film rolls through upside down, but there are upright numbers on 120 film for this design, so it must not be unusual. The back side has a counter window for viewing the numbers on the film. The silver piece on the bottom serves as a tripod mount and holds the back cover of the camera.

The Fujipet next to a 35mm camera for size comparison.

And next to a Diana, or Diana clone in this case.

Note that the Fujipet does not generally leak light. It has a solid aluminum back that screws tightly into place. This kind of goes against the trend for toy cameras. Most toy cameras are built very cheaply (Dianas and Holgas), or are just very old (Brownies and box cameras). The plastic lens makes the camera a toy. There are a few later models that sport a glass lens, and I don't consider the 35mm cameras to be toys, as they are basically "real" cameras, though very cool looking real cameras. My black Fujipet does have some kind of leak on the side that adds a large flare, but I'm told this is very rare. My guess is the seam isn't flush...but I don't really mind. The red Pet has no leaks.
To counter the plastic lens effects (mainly vignetting), the film plane on the inside of the camera is curved. You can see this in the photos that aren't cropped on the Photo Gallery page. I find it particularly interesting that they spent so much time designing a very well-built camera that counters the effects of a plastic lens, rather than just using a glass lens. I guess the initial R&D stage was cheaper than producing precision glass lenses for all the cameras sold.
In creating this camera, Fuji intended to open up the Japanese photography market by including women, children and beginners. Until then, photography had generally required high-end equipment (other world markets had already introduced popular "family friendly" cameras, such as the Brownie, long before). Design was a joint venture between Tokyo National University of Fine Arts and the Konan camera laboratory. Fuji sold nearly a million Fujipets by 1963, making a domestic sales record at the time. The original selling price was 1950 yen. To distinguish the 120 from the other Fujipet models, it earned the nickname "Thunderbird."

Words from a Fujipet User

The camera for boys & girls of Fuji and its name was also Fujipetto. The factory of Fuji Film was located on the north side of Imaizumi Elementary School (in the old Yoshiwara city, in Fuji prefecture).
Nobody used full names these days, so it was only called the ‘Film’. The company houses were also along side the school, and a classmate’s father was a factory manager there (Suzuki-san).
A monthly manga was our favorite magazine – we used to read it while eating chipped-ice in our favorite mom-and-pop candy store. One day I went to play in Suzuki-san’s house and we discovered an accumulation of ‘Children’s’ Science’ magazine. We did not have money to buy such magazine, we were very enviable, and went crazy and read.
Since Suzuki-san was Film employee, although I do not know if he was ‘rich’, he had Fujipet laying in his house.
Then probably Fujipet was considered garbage and thrown away. Now it is remembered in our hearts…

FUJIPET 120EE

The Fujipet 120 EE was introduced in 1961. It uses no batteries, just a selenium cell to move a snappy variable slot aperture over the opening depending on how much light there is. Note the single lever for releasing the shutter.

The later model EE, commonly referred to as EE-2, looks about the the same but has a meter sensitivity knob added to the side Also note the gold badge and the differences on the lens. I believe this camera was made for export due to the increase in popularity of color film in the US and Europe. This information and photo come from this site.

PET 35

The Pet 35, a 35mm version of the camera, was introduced in 1959 to meet the needs of the growing 35mm market. This camera employs the dual levers and can be focused.

I have a Pet 35, and I haven't used it. So at some point that will happen and then the Pet 35 will get its very own blog post! In any case, on to more information about the cameras...

COLOR VARIATIONS

The 120 came in various colors. I'm not sure how production runs and year produced relates to the available colors. Some colors are fairly common and seen on different models, while others are very rare. Grey, or black, is the most common and easiest to find.

Red seems to be the second most available color...my personal favorite.

Green is a bit more difficult to find.

Brown is also very rare.

An interesting and rare green Pet with gold trim. I didn't realize it was different until I had it sitting next to a silver Fujipet. Note that the badge is bronze with green paint.

This is an interesting brown Pet with its red marbling on the back. Mine has green marbling. The Japanese Fuji site lists a grey as a Fujipet color. This is probably the same color I call brown.

A rare yellow pet with gold body. The only one I've seen so far!

This transparent Pet may be one of a kind. It can't be used because the film would be exposed, but it looks to be operational. It may have been a demonstration model. It is also an early model Pet. This sold for 39,500 yen! though having seen regular Pets go for $400 on eBay, maybe it doesn't seem so expensive.

As far as I know, the Fujipet EE camera was produced only in black. The EE-2 has a gold badge on the front.

The most common color for the Pet 35 is black.

With green being very rare...

This is the Pet 35 "Astroboy Special". It was probably a prize or sold at a comic fair. The kana on the bottom says "1959 Manga Matsuri". I borrowed these images from this site.

Here you can see another yellow 120 with gold trim. The Pet 35 came in various colors...black, pink, teal and red, at least. There are two EEs in the photo, but I can't tell if they are different. The group photo is borrowed from this site. I have also seen listed for the 120 the colors blue, yellow (with silver trim?) and peach, but cannot verify that they do exist. They may be have been referring to the Pet 35, as the peach and blue could be pink and teal.

I don't have a lot of information on the Fujipet EE. Other than there being two versions, the original with the red badge and the EE-2 with the gold badge and the sensitivity knob, I don't see much variation between these cameras. The only one I know of for sure is the color of the Fuji Film sticker inside.

THUNDERBIRD

Before the Fujipet that we all know and love, there was... The FUJIPET. Actually, it's still just a Fujipet, but the original model was different in many ways. I haven't really thought of a cool nickname for this model to differentiate it, though I've heard it referred to as the Thunderbird by a friend. I usually refer to it as the first-generation Pet or simply Pet-1.
The biggest difference is in weight. Pet-1 is much heavier than the remodeled Pet. It feels, and looks, more serious than later Pets. Viewed from the front, the levers are slightly skewed. The shutter mechanism is a little bit different and can't be swapped with the later model. The fake leather is much smoother and actually feels like leather. The Pet-2 feels distinctly plastic. The badge is more silver compared to that on Pet-2 (non-gold models), which have a slight bronze color. Overall, a heftier build. Pet-1 is most common in black with silver trim. It is also less common than Pet-2, but there doesn't seem to be any difference in value between the two.

The second most obvious difference is the hood. It is made out of aluminum and is much lighter than the plastic hood on the Pet-2. You can see it is rolled on the end. It is very loose and actually quite annoying. There are small clips on the side that one could possibly bend inward to hold it in place, but it would probably only scratch the barrel.

Another major difference is the placement of the flash plug. It is below the hood, while Pet-2 keeps it under the hood. Visually, this doesn't make that much of a difference, but it changes the design of the shutter plate, keeping you from swapping these parts between Pet-1 and Pet-2. You can actually put the Pet-1 shutter plate in Pet-2 with some degree of success (i think it's always on Bulb), but the Pet-2 plate will not fit into Pet-1.

On the back, we can see that the counter window has a cover, as opposed to the Pet-2 at far right. Again, this is more annoying than anything, and tends to tear up the leatherette.

Inside there are four screws instead of the 3 found in Pet-2. The film winder screw is also different, requiring some sort of camera caliper deal that I don't have. Another minor variation not pictured is with the screw mount on the bottom of the camera. It is smoother and doesn't grip to your fingers as the Pet-2 mount does.

Overall, a very different feel to the first-generation Pet. It's hard to describe, but you feel it when you hold it. The parts are heavier and have a more solid feel to them (except for the aluminum hood). It feels more like a "real" camera, and even has a somewhat less retro look to it than the Pet-2. The Pet-2 isn't a lesser build, it's just lighter and feels a bit more 1960s, while Pet-1 has more of a 1950s feel.Pet-2 does seem a bit cheaper when held alongside Pet-1, but this is probably because it was cheaper to make. Which do I prefer? Pet-2, most definitely. Pet-1 has a few issues that make it less fun to use, such as the hood and the window cover. Also, the bulb switch is very loose, something I'm told is common for these models. Makes for a lot of blurry photos. There doesn't seem to be any correlation between glass and plastic lenses and older and newer Pets. I don't know the reason for that particular variation.

Most first-gen Pets are black, but they were also made in red and green. These are definetely rare and even bring a higher price in Japan, where the Pets are cheaper in general. I haven't seen the green variation, and this is the only red I've seen. It's a very nice looking camera!

OTHER VARIATIONS

There are other variations between Fujipets, regardless of Pet-1 or Pet-2 status. The most obvious would be the date stamp under the top metal piece. Every Pet I've seen has a different stamp, which also appears under the leatherette on the bottom of the camera. I assume the middle is the Showa date. 33 would be 1958... how that compares with the 9 9 30, I have no idea. The bottom is possibly who built the camera, or where it was built. I think that the name at bottom right is Muranaka, but that's with my bad Kanji skills. The others all have too many strokes for me to figure out.

This is the only Pet I've seen with a stamp under the viewfinder, as well as under the metal frame.

Two different decals for Fuji film that appear on the inside back of the camera.

This pet has a screw holding the shutter plate in place. It was a later model Pet with the plastic hood, but it's the only one I've seen built this way. I'm told that some first-generation Pets had this.

The typical shutter plate with no screw as seen above. It is just held in place by the front plastic lens mount screw.

I guess that's enough Fujipet overload for now...to come are extra goodies, manuals and a camera breakdown!

Polaroid Instant Camera...Let's Make!

2011-08-16T13:17:00.009-07:00

I have bags of camera parts just sitting and waiting to be used. Most will remain parts, lonely and apart from useful photographic tools. Some, though, join together and make a new man...Filmy Camerason.
What the heck am I going on about? No idea. Actually, I was just bored and made a very simple camera. And I am going to share it with all of you to show that you can also make a simple camera! Wheee! And to make it even more special, we are making a Polaroid camera. Wheee again!
Okay, anyway, all you need are some spare parts. Not just any spare parts, of course. You can't make a camera from a dried up marker and banana peels. Well, actually you probably could, but I'm not doing that. What I have is a broken Polaroid back (though it still works fine), and a Diana lens that I cut off a camera some time ago. And a cardboard box and tape. Plus some rulers type things and something to cut stuff with, scissors and Exacto to be exact. If you want a "working camera", it is important that your lens has a shutter and some way to fire the shutter. If not, you will just have an open lens and no way to control exposure.

The basic idea here is to make a camera body from the cardboard box, tape it to the Polaroid back, and tape the lens on the front. Simple!
First we need to figure out the focal length of our camera. the Diana lens has to be a certain distance from our film plane to be in focus. Easiest way to do this is the measure that distance on a Diana camera.

We then measure and cut out the sides of our camera. The height should be the same as what we measured on our original Diana.

The lengths should be measured using the slots in the Polaroid back.

For those who are not math geniuses, you will need four pieces, one for each side. Tape these together and you have the beginning of your camera body. Use black electrical tape because you want your camera to be light proof.

The next step is to make the front of your camera body. Because cardboard is so thick, you want the front to inset into your camera body or you will be adding an extra 1/8 of an inch or so to your focal length, which might screw with your camera's focus. The easiest way to do this is to set your walls onto a piece of cardboard and mark the interior dimensions, then just cut it out!

Before we tape the body together, we need to cut out a hole in the front for the lens. It won't be centered on the cardboard, because the body actually extends farther on one side sue to the shape of the Polaroid back (as seen above). So Just do a bit of measuring, or just guess bases on setting the lens where you think it should be if you feel lucky. The hole should be smaller than the diameter of the lens barrel, but larger than the aperture.

After this, we can tape out lens to the cardboard. I found that taping underneath was plenty to hold the lens and seal it from light.

Now we just need to tape it all together. Pay special attention to corners, and I taped the box to the Polaroid back on the inside. Check for light leaks with a flashlight in a dark room. They will show up as points of light. You need to be sure to seal all leaks before putting film in your camera.

So there you are! An ugly, but usable camera! No viewfinder, but just aim in the general direction that you want to shoot. Let's take it out for a spin...

Yikes! That kind of sucks! Looks like S. H. I. T. Hmmm...that doesn't seem to have the same effect as spelling it out loud. But I knew they would turn out like this. The Diana shoots a 4x4cm photo on a negative, which is pretty darn small. It wasn't designed to cover the area of a Polaroid. This is the same thing that happens with those Holgaroid backs. If you cropped the image down to its presentable size, you might get something like this.

So, okay, I don't really like the results. What else can I do with this? How do I get a full frame on my homemade camera? Simple answer? Pinhole. I've done this before. And before. And again. But this is even a more basic pinhole camera that anyone can make. So we take that lens off, grab some aluminum foil and tape it over the hole in our camera.

Grab a pin and poke a hole in the foil...hence the name "pinhole".

It's really not as big as this macro shot makes it look. It is about the diameter of a needle. And, yes, it's all ragged. The pinhole size and how clean the edges are has a direct effect on your image...how sharp it is, how long to expose, etc. As well, the focal length (how far your pinhole is away from the film surface) effects the image as well. The closer you are to the film plane, the wider the image, or the "more you see". The wider pinholes tend to have a tunnel effect with things stretching out towards the edges of the shot. If you make a pinhole and skip the lens part, you can just pick a random height for your cardboard body.
So my pinhole is big, ragged, and close to the film. Who cares? It's still cool because I made it, and yours will be as well. But not as cool as mine.
Anyway, for a shutter, I just use a piece of black tape and fold over the end. You just need to peel back to expose the hole and then recover.

For Polaroid film in full sun with an average needle pinhole, you will probably need to expose for no more than one second. Basically peel back and then cover...not quickly but don't take your time. You can adjust depending on results. Inside your exposures can be as long as 10-30 minutes. And you rarely get it right on your first or second shot. It's certainly an easy way to waste a $10+ pack of Polaroid film! So let's see how mine does...dog shot!

Your image is also dependent on motion. If your subject is moving, it will show in that short exposure time, which is quite long compared to a mechanical shutter exposure. Also think about your hands. It is difficult to hold the camera, and then peel and replace your tape shutter without any kind of camera shake, even trying to brace it on a table or the ground. I've used a tripod in the past with decent results. There are ways, but this is just a screw-around pinhole camera for fun, so let's not take it too seriously.
Pinholes are also good for self portraits! You can try lots of things, like hiding it in the grass, aiming towards the sun or whatnot. And you can get as close to your pinhole as you want! The closer, the better, as long as you have light on your subject (my face). Shot with Fuji FP-100C and expired Type 108.

I'm not a huge pinhole fan, but they can be fun at times. Good project if you have kids. If you don't have a Polaroid back, you can make a pinhole camera out of just about anything. Take the lens off of any film camera and put some foil on the front, poke a hole in it and you have a pinhole camera. If the camera has "B" setting, you can actually use that as your exposure method. If not, just rip out the shutter and use tape! I also used to make pinhole cameras from large boxes and put photo paper inside and exposed them outside for 30 minutes or so. Lots of options, and there are plenty of pinhole resources out there, most more serious than my silly camera. Some involve lots of math...which doesn't sound like much fun. Anyway, enjoy making stuff!
Until I think of something else to write about!

Choosing the right BW film. And...the future?

2011-07-20T13:40:00.008-07:00

Does it matter which black and white film you use? Of course it does! But...picking film can be a rather arbitrary affair, particularly when using different films in different cameras, and then using different developers (or even different labs!) to boot. I know I mostly talk about Polaroid on my blog, but I do shoot film, though not as often as I used to...mostly because I tend to forget about the film cameras I've brought along and go through packs of Polaroid instead. I do think about the disappearing availability and subsequent cost of peel-apart, and I realize that in 10-15 years there probably won't be much of it around, aside from expired Fuji peel-apart (if you think that Fuji is going to be making instant peel-apart film in 15 years, you are probably wrong). So I often consider what I will focus on when my stash has been depleted. It will last me awhile, though there is a delicate balance between having enough to last me 10 years or so, and the films' ability to be usable after that amount of time. Polaroid film expiration seems to be totally independent from its surrounding packs. I have Type 108 from 1989 that still works beautifully, and I have Type 669 from 2006 that exposed very dark and very blue. So I can't even rely on numbers...all I can do is keep shooting and hope, through proper storage, that it will last.
On a side note, I read a lot about how people buy Polaroid and are afraid to use it, because then it will be gone!

I rarely feel like I am wasting film. If I am shooting it, and I am enjoying myself, that's all that really matters. I have a stash of Polaroid, but not a hoard. The film is there to use, and I never say "Oh, I shouldn't shoot any more packs on this trip". Sure, I may save certain films for special occasions...I'm not going to use a pack of Type 85 to shoot pictures around my condo. But, really, it's use it or lose it when it comes to Polaroid film. As long as I like my resulting shots, I will use however much is necessary on any given outing. Though I do know when to stop...low light, etc. I think about what and when I am shooting, but I'm certainly not afraid to use my film.

ANYway, so, yes I think about what I want to focus on after Polaroid, and even things I might be interested in doing concurrently. Glass plate collodion is something I would love to work with someday...when I have the time, space and money. Large format is another field I'm becoming increasingly interested in. In the interim, though, good old black and white 120 and the occasional 35mm will have to do. So, back to the original question: what is the best film to use? Results are so dependent on so may factors, as mentioned above, as well as lighting conditions, exposure time, the camera lens, and just about anything else you can think of. But most films do have tendencies. All I can really do is show some examples of different film types in different cameras, and maybe describe some of the qualities that I glean from different film types. Most of these black and white examples are developed in D-76, which is a nice, straightforward developer that generally gives consistent, even results. I am sure some will read this and not agree with my comments or results, or may have tips, etc. regarding certain films and developers and whatnot. This is not a "professional" comparison or review. Just a personal overview with some comments based on my experiences with the films, and will help you to see how different films behave in different cameras.

First up is my most used 120 film format, Fuji Acros 100. I find that Acros generally has a decent amount of contrast with loss of detail in the shadows and bright areas. So it has stronger blacks and brighter whites. It still retains fine grays between until you get to darker or whiter areas. All in all, it is a very "sharp" film. A few examples with a few different cameras...

Kowa Six with 85mm lens

Rolleicord III

Rolleiflex

Kowa Super 66 with 40mm lens

Snappy (a Diana clone)

Holga 120SF

Like I said, this is the film I shoot the most. This is partly because I like the results. Also, it is much cheaper than other film brands without a loss in quality or any added oddities that many cheaper films exhibit. So for a decent price, you get a nice, sharp film.
Fuji Neopan 400 (which isn't available in the US anymore, I believe) has more even tones than the Acros. More grays with lighter blacks...or less contrast overall. So the shots are either lighter or darker across the board. Shows a bit more grain than Acros, as well. I have a tougher time shooting 400 film because I don't use a light meter. My internal meter is set for 100 speed film, so it's difficult to calculate the adjustment. Plus, it is so bright and sunny here, slower films seem to be easier to use. A couple examples of Neopan 400.

Holga 120SF

Kowa Six with 85mm lens

Snappy

Kowa Super 66 with 40mm lens

Those are the two primary types of 120 film. In 35mm format, I use Neopan 1600 in my Natura Classica. This is a very high contrast film, with a fair amount of grain. Much more sensitive to light. Fuji has stopped making this film recently, which kind of defeats the purpose of having a Natura Classica (though they still make color 1600 and there are some other brands available). A couple examples of 1600 in the Natura:

There is another 35mm Fuji film called Neopan SS. It is a 100 speed film, and is not sold in the US. I have a couple undeveloped rolls from Japan, and I may add a couple examples when I get around to developing it.
I don't often use Kodak film, mostly because it is expensive. Right now it is $4 to $5 for a roll of 120, depending on type. But I do like it...I just don't have a lot of examples. In college, Plus-X was the go-to film, so I will start with that. The film speed is 125, which is close enough to 100 that it doesn't make a big difference in exposure times. Plus-X seems to me to be a very "in between" film. The tones are even and seems to retain detail in dark areas, but it does lose detail in the bright areas. Grain is present, but the grain size is relatively small.

Rolleiflex

Snappy

Kowa Super 66 with 40mm lens

I like Kodak TMax 400 quite a bit, but I don't use it much...again, because of the price. It seems to be a very rich film, with dark blacks and nice detail.

Holga 120SF

Snappy

And I love Kodak Verichrome 100, which is no longer produced. Even expired, it seems to last forever and produces lovely, dark tones. Grain is always present, though this may be an artifact of expired film. It is commonly available in 620 format, which is the same size as 120 with a skinnier spool. To use it in 120 cameras, I respool onto a 120 spool. There was also a Verichrome 400 that I haven't used.

Bronica S2 with Komura 50mm, expired June 1973

Fujipet, expired March 1968

Imperial Mark XII, expired March 1962

Instacore F2 126, expired December 1975

Holga 135BC, expired March 1962

Kodak also makes a black and white film that is developed in color developer, T400CN. It seems to be very low contrast and higher grain; an overall very soft image results. I've only used it once, but other examples on the Interwebs seems to back this up.

I've only used Ilford films a few times. I like the results, but I usually go with cheaper options. Some folks live and die by Ilford, and they are strong supporters of analog film (they provide the film tech in Impossible Project black and white integral films). I don't think D-76 is the best developer for some of the Ilford films, as it seems to have increased grain. But I typically like my results with Ilford.
Ilford Delta seems to be fairly even toned. Overall gray with even details in dark and light areas.

Snappy

Rolleicord

Ilford FP4 has richer blacks, similar to Kodak 400, and seems to be finer grained and shows more detail that Delta.

Great Wall DF-2

Snappy

I also have quite a bit of expired Ilford FP3. This expired in 1957 and was shot with an Ansco Panda. Tends to be very high contrast and grainy...but it is really old.

Ilford also makes a black and white film that is developed in color developer...Ilford XP2. Overall seems to be a very nice film that supposedly has very little grain, though I noticed it falls apart a bit in low light, with an increase in grain. A sharp film with lots of detail throughout, and rich blacks. These are from the same roll and same camera.

Bessa R4A with 21mm lens

Arista.edu is a brand supplied by Freestyle at a budget price. It is supposedly a rebranded film of some other type. There are three speeds...100, 200 and 400. Arista.edu 100 is a very competent film, comparable to Acros with a bit more grain. Overall an even tone, maybe a bit dull, but can exhibit rich blacks. For the price, less than half of a roll of Kodak, you really can't go wrong.

Bessa R4A with 21mm lens

Holga 120SF

Holga 135BC

Imperial 620 (respooled onto a 620 spool)

Snappy

Arista.edu 200 seems to be similar to Verichrome...overall a darker, richer film than most. The high grain is from using Diafine as a developer.

Diana

Holga 120SF

Arista.edu 400 is a film type that I can appreciate because of the results, but hate using it because it is super curly and a pain to spool when developing. A dark film overall with loss of detail in the highlights. The developed film is very blue.

Diana

Holga 120SF

The odd thing about Arista.edu films is the three films seem to be from different sources. The color of the plastic is different, the color of the halide that washes away is different. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if the 100 film you shoot a year ago is different film from the 100 you shoot this year. It's something rebranded, so it may be whatever source brand is cheapest at the time. But it is totally worth it for the price, particularly when using toy cameras with the mixed results inherent in the cameras.

Fomapan is a brand I rarely use. Not really sure why, it's just not been part of my film usage. It seems to be pretty similar to Arista.edu film as far as results and quality. It is cheaper than most brands, as well. It is probably a good choice for use in toy cameras where quality is not an issue (sorry Fomapan, if you are actually a high quality film!) As I have used this film only a few times, I will just post an example of each.
Fomapan 100, Meteor

Fomapan 200, Snappy

Fomapan 400, Fujipet

The last film I will mention is no longer produced, which is too bad because it was one of my favorite brands: Fortepan. I've read that Fortepan was an "old style" film, using old formulas and lacking a halide layer. So it shoots how film used to shoot...
Fortepan 100 was, for me, a film that could be used in any camera, in just about any situation. There is definitely grain present, but it can have dark blacks with no detail, or it can blow out light areas, or it can be even toned across the board. It works well in low light and bright light. There is a most definite softness to the image, making it ideal for toy cameras, yet it could still retain a massive amount of detail at times. They stopped making it a couple years ago, and I think I used up the last of it just a couple weeks ago. I miss it already!

Diana +

Fujipet

Great Wall DF-2

Holga 120SF

Kowa Six with 85mm lens

Rolleicord III

Snappy

Alternately, there is a Fortepan 400 that I didn't care for at all. If I remember correctly, it was super curly. Maybe I just wasn't using it right, but it didn't ever really work for me.

Great Wall DF-2

Holga 120SF

So...there you have it. Yes, there are some other film brands available, like Adox, Efke and Rollei, but I haven't used them at all or enough to form a serious opinion (except for 127 Efke and Rollei). I have had quality control issues with Efke and the couple times I used Rollei films, I wasn't all that impressed. I think they are actually owned by someone else now. Holga also makes a film that I haven't used, and Lomography has some branded BW films that I haven't used. Chances are they are some rebranded Chinese product, like Lucky film (which I also have not used, but I've read it is the curliest of curly films). There are also gobs of expired brands available, like Ansco and a million off-brand films. My goal here is was just to inform based on personal experience with some of the more common films.
We should all buy film while we can, as it will get more and more expensive as silver prices increase and digital takes over. Someone will probably always make some kind of film, but it won't be cheap! If stored properly, BW film will last a long time past its expiration date, but don't feel like you have to hoard just yet (unless it is something that you use that is being discontinued, like Fuji Neopan 400). There is still quite a lot of film available online and at specialty photo shops, and much of it is very affordable. And I'm not into the whole digital versus film argument, but, really...digital is such a turn off for me. It's good for some stuff and can produce some nice pieces, of course, but it's not film. I can't count how many times photographers have told me (and they do, quite often, when they see me with a film camera) that they can't afford film photography, while they stand there with a $1200 digital camera and a $700 lens (plus the computer software!). And all I see is ...aim at a person two feet away with a 12" long lens, and then "clickclickclickclickclickclickclickclickclickclickclick". Like, seriously, how many frames of the exact same shot do you need? And how is that fun? I dunno...just not my bag.
Anyway, do what you will, but I am a film supporter, and I hope to be shooting film in some form or another until I die, even if I have to make the chemicals myself. I hope this post encourages many of you to do the same!
And, yes, I am well aware that I am not posting much this year...just been messing about with other things. I have ideas, just haven't taken the time to type them out. Thanks for continually stopping by, though...so many are obviously interested in film! Almost 300,000 visitors and almost half a million page views! Spanks a million!
Until next time, seeya!

Kato Motors in Kiyose, Tokyo: Subaru 360 heaven!

2011-05-06T10:03:00.017-07:00

While in Japan last month, I was browsing through the May issue of Nostalgic Hero, a Japanese magazine dedicated to vintage Japanese cars, and noticed a very nice red Subaru 360 featured in one of the articles.

In one corner of the article in small print was a web address for a dealership...Kato Motors. I figured, heck, I'm in Japan, how can I pass up a visit (and shoot some Polaroids)? The dealership is in Kiyose in Tokyo prefecture, which is about an hour by train from Ikebukuro station in Tokyo via the Seibu Ikebukuro Line. I planned a day to head out there, and wander about Kiyose and some of the other small towns in the area if time permitted. This was March 31, 20 days after the earthquake and tsunami, so I had to make sure the train I needed was running. Though some of the alternate trains were down, the semi-express and local trains were still on the go.
I get to Kiyose about 9:30am, Kato Motors doesn't open up until 11am. So I wander around Kiyose for a couple hours. The dealership is a couple blocks from the station, and the town is fairly small (though the Tokyo metro area is mostly connected for miles, so you could keep walking for a long, long time and still be in "the city"), so I made a nice circuit. Kiyose is basically a farm town, with lots of cool, big Danchi (public housing or apartments, kind of like projects in the U.S.). A few shots in the area before we get to Kato Motors...
A danchi, shot with Type 672:

One of the many fields, also shot with 672. Not sure what the main product was in the area, though I did see some aloe. Nice kei truck, as well.

More danchi and some diosaurs, from the Rolleicord III...

And a tricked out Cedric. This shot made me think of the U.S., where you will see really nice cars in crappy apartment complexes...

While wandering around, it was supposed to be sunny, but it rained. Only for a short time, though, so still a pleasant walk. So after my trek, I headed back to Kato Motors.
Kato Motors is owned by Noboru Kato, and has been in business since 1977. Though he had a few other car makes, he specializes in Subaru 360s. What is a Subaru 360? Basically a VW Beetle clone. They were produced in Japan from 1958 to 1971, and were sold in the U.S. in 1969 and 1970. The basic shape changed very little during its entire run. I'm sure you've already clicked on the Kato Motors link above, but if not...here is a row of beautiful 360s! Shot on Type 690...

They look a lot like Bugs? They are actually smaller, and though they use a similar rear air-cooled engine style, the engine is actually only 356cc two-cylinder. The VW Beetles are four cylinder. So the 360 has much less power, and should have a top speed of around 60mph. They are very light, though, and can be quite speedy on the get-go, or so I've read (though U.S. magazines ragged on it, but more on that in a few). A few more Polaroids of the Subaru 360 with ID-UV and 690!

I saw three different 360 models on the lot...

Of course, I didn't just stand outside and take photos. I went in to meet Kato-san (and his quiet mechanic). Between my broken Nihon-go and his broken English, we managed to communicate! Very nice visit and amazing collection of stuff in his little office...

I looked through a couple photo albums, and he told me about his trip to California sometime in the 1990s for a Microcar convention. They had a microcar rally, with a Kato Motors Mazda Carol, which he said was "very quiet, but very slow"!

I took a couple Polaroids of Kato-san outside, one for him and one for me...

Always cool to see someone holding one of my shots! While outside, he took me around the side to show me an early Subaru 360 kei truck (they made trucks and vans, as well as the beetle-esque model). Probably 1958 or 1959, he was in the process of an engine overhaul. There is another Kei truck in the front, as seen in one of the shots above.

He also had Subaru R2 and a cool little Daihatsu, and some kind of van which is not a 360...

And a pretty little Honda Life and a Honda 600...

There was this kakkoii karuma in the back, but I can't remember what it is...

All in all, an excellent visit and I'm glad I made the effort. Noboru Kato was super friendly and it was a pleasure talking to him, and it makes me want a 360 even more than before!
As mentioned previously, the Subaru 360 was available in the U.S. in 1969 and 1970.

You can read more about it here, but, short story, it sold very poorly and received terrible reviews in the auto magazines (with some flat-out lies about the car's lack of power). But the past is the past and now they are collectible! They aren't super expensive, ranging from $1000 to $6000 depending on condition. This is pretty close to the Japanese Yen value, though they float around 400000円 to 800000円, or $4500 and up, depending on exchange rates. But they have many more years to choose from, and I'm sure the earlier models are worth more. This isn't too far off from VW Beetle prices, as you can get a basic 1970s Beetle for around $2000, though some models can go as high as $20,000. I am casually keeping an eye out for a nice 360 for a nice price, myself. You can read more about 360s and collecting at the Subaru 360 Driver's Club and the Vintage Microcar Club. A couple of interesting books available on Amazon.co.jp are the Subaru 360 Complete Book, which has a lot of technical info and not as many pictures as I had hoped, and Memories of Japanese K-cars, which is one of my favorite car books ever, beautiful stuff.
If you are making a trip to Tokyo, or you live in Tokyo, spend an afternoon in Kiyose and visit Kato Motors! Yeah, Tokyo Tower is okay (nice view, but 20,000 either very young or very old short people), but think outside of the tourist box!

This is a different post than my usual camera stuff, though I still have film shots! It's just hard to keep coming up with new camera stuff to talk about, particularly as I hone in on my specific photographic needs and what I actually want to use on a regular basis. But I do want to spend some more time talking about the Bronica S2, maybe comparing it to the Kowa Six. At some point I should talk about Impossible Project film, as that is interesting to me, in good and bad ways. I also have totally nerdy Polaroid post in the works. You will be like, uh, yeah, okay Polaroid nerd, I guess that's interesting if you like Polaroid film.
Until next time, some more Subaru 360s!

Bronica Zenza S2A mini review

2011-04-08T20:42:00.000-07:00

This is the shortest blog post ever! See here for my followup review of a friend's Bronica Zenza S2a with a 50mm lens.

Just got back from two weeks in Tokyo (yes, right after the earthquake and tsunami). I took a LOT of photos, it will take me a long time to develop and scan all of the film. I probably shot over 400 Polaroids, as well! Here are a couple from what I have scanned so far (which isn't much).

I have a couple blog posts to work on when I have time. Will be talking about the Bessa R4A, and I still want to do a followup post on the Kowa Super 66. Will also be talking a bit about my trip and a couple photographer get-togethers. Ja ne!

Post-gallery opening blog post...

2011-03-18T10:27:00.003-07:00

My little show opened on Thursday, March 17th, so I wanted to give it a bit more coverage as you can see it until April 16th. The gallery is open on Saturdays, but If you give Thomas Schultz a call, he says he will open up at just about any time if you want to stop by. More info here and here.
The show features 25 framed peel-apart Polaroids, and three large archival prints. The large, unframed, signed prints are for sale at $250 (which may seem to be expensive but a large portion of that is the cost to print). The original Polaroids are not for sale. If you are interested, contact me!
The night started slow but picked up as the sun set. I had a steady stream of visitors of all ages. Most were curious about the format. A couple color shots of the show, Type 669 and Fuji FP-100C with the 195.

A small collection of visitors with Thomas Shultz, gallery purveyor, at center.

Another shot of Tom chatting with friends...

A future Polaroid fan!

Photogenic hair...

And photogenic faces...

Standing around and obviously discussing my work! =P

And fire dancers! There was other activity at the center and this was the most anticipated of the night...

All in all, I had an excellent night. Just enough visitors to keep me busy and social, but still a small enough gathering to keep things comfortable. Please check it out if you are in the area!

Take some time and read this article about El Mirage.
Until next time, seeya!

Dr. Moominstein returns! Polaroid 195 head transplant...it lives!

2011-02-22T19:07:00.013-07:00

My poor Polaroid 195 has seen a lot of use and abuse. I've probably taken 2,000 shots with it (and it was already 30+ years old). A couple years ago, I kinked the cable and had to replace it, which I talked about here, and I replaced the bellows. More recently, I tripped on the dog's leash and dropped it on the sidewalk. Ever since then, it has had issues with focusing, only working sporadically. While I now mostly use my 190, it seemed kind of pointless to just let the 195 die, unused on a shelf...so I kind of started from scratch! What's old is new again, with a 195 lens fitting on to a 250 body. Many folding cameras are nearly identical in build, with the lens being the main difference, so in theory, the fronts should be swappable. I looked at various folding Polaroids, and didn't want a plastic body, and I wanted a Zeiss lens. I don't care about back timers, and a local shop had a couple 250s for cheap, so a 250 was going to sacrifice its life so my 195 might live again. Yes, I didn't even dig up the corpse of an already dead 250...he was alive and healthy, and I killed him for my project. It was worth it.
First thing to do is to remove the "good" part of the 195 (and the bad part of the 250) - the front. The body is a mess, but the front part that houses the shutter and lens was in perfect working order. This is really a simple matter of removing a screw and a bolt on the bottom, and the four screws inside that hold the bellows to the front.

First, remove the four interior screws, then the screw on the right bottom. This will leave the front swinging from the bolted post.

There are a couple small differences between the 195 and other cameras. The 190 and 195 have a small support foot on the bottom that none of the other folders have. Also unique to the 195 is the absence of a spring on the bottom. Instead it uses a piece of metal that creates resistance, similar to the resistance from the springs. You need this resistance to focus the camera. I was figuring the 195 front would work fine with the 250 spring system since the 190 uses a spring and the 195 and 190 are almost identical otherwise.

So after removing the bolt (I used a monkey wrench), the front slides off of the strut pole.

I had also had a couple issues using the 195 with light leaking in a circular shape on some prints, so I opened up the lens board and wrapped some electrical tape around the inner lens to make a better seal.

Here you can see how bent the 195 is...that bar should be parallel with the base.

I made an effort to bend everything back into place, but between the damage done when I replaced the shutter cable and dropping the camera, it was beyond repair.
And we have the head of the 195 awaiting transplant alongside the donor 250.

I took apart the 250, clipping and removing the wire that powers the meter, since the 195 doesn't have one.

The front comes off easy...just don't lose the spring!

All that is left to do is to put the 195 front onto the 250 body. I couldn't really take photos of this because it was a two-hand job, but I'll describe it quickly. First, slide the 195 front into its bar, line everything up and put the right bottom screw in, so that is holding the strut, front and under slat (the part the spring will go in). Feed the knob on the bottom strut into the hole under the camera and then attach the smaller end of the spring onto it. While holding the stretched out spring, fit the first left-hand hole over the exposed vertical bar end. Before feeding it through the second hole, you need to fit the spring end over the post, then feed the post through the second hole. Then you replace the washer and bolt! It's easier than it sounds, really...maybe a three-minute job. Then you replace the four screws that hold the bellows in place (just close the camera and it will all line up), and reattach the cable (which I forgot to mention, but you can see how it works here...just a matter of three screws and a small flathead screwdriver).
Just remember, work right to left!
In the end, we have a living, breathing 195!

This 250 has a better Zeiss finder than the 190 (and 180), with a larger viewing area (the other 250 at the shop had the smaller finder). If you are looking for Polaroid cameras with the Zeiss finder, this is something to anticipate and look for.

It's a family reunion!

Of course, I had to take some shots to test the focus...and it works beautifully! Very expired 669 and a setting sun...

Good stuff!
On a side note, I no longer have my 195 front cover because I set it down (along with a now missing print of some vintage arcade cabinets) so I could take this long exposure at this semi-abandoned ropeway station on Shikoku. I walked out without the cover and print.

Moominstein's monster lives! Argh! Grrr!

For more interesting monsters, check out Mijonju's Konica/250 beast!
Until whenever, adios!

Expired: A Photographic Exhibit

2011-02-08T22:28:00.008-07:00

I haven't been able to think of much to blog about recently, but I do have an upcoming gallery show that I guess I should promote a bit. It is titled "Expired", and will feature about 25 peel-apart prints "in real life", meaning they will be small and ragged and beautiful for what they are...Polaroids! Here is the flyer:

And my little artist statement about the show:

Many things come to mind when hearing the word “expired”. Death may be first and foremost for some, while others may think of milk. Expiration is inevitable for all things, living or not. Disorder comes from order, and nothing lasts forever. The American Southwest has a particularly unfriendly attitude towards so-called permanence. Extreme temperatures (sometimes low as well as high in a 24 hour period), a baking sun, dry desert winds, insects, animals…you name it, it exists here to tear down all things. As well, the Southwest is an odd mix of old, somewhat old, and the fastest-growing “new” in the country. Humans destroy the old at a rate tenfold what nature can do, and replace it with an often bland newness. Expiration is all around us, in the bare mountains, the dry desert plains, the decay of man-made and natural forms, the sun-baked storefronts with warped wood and peeling paint, the rotting automobile carcasses, and the near empty towns scattered throughout the region.

We often strive to preserve which will eventually be no more, those expired objects that surround us, and photography is one method of preservation, to create an image of what is and what was, or may soon be no more. Sean Rohde chooses to preserve the concept of expired in the Southwest with film that is also expired. More specifically, expired Polaroid instant film. Using fully manual, vintage Polaroid cameras from the 1960s and 1970s (more specifically the 180, 190, 195 and Colorpack III), he explores the deserts and towns of Arizona, California and Utah to record and preserve images of objects and places that are often gone six months after. The film he chooses includes Type 669, Type 690, and ID-UV, all color films, all expired anywhere from 1995 to 2008. Polaroid film itself is a virtually expired medium. There are those that continue in the spirit of Polaroid, but these specific Polaroid films will soon be long gone.

Sean Rohde shoots what he sees, making no changes to the environment, yet the images often display the essence of the Southwest rather than being straight shots of what is in front of the camera…a combination of film and camera choice, technique and photographic eye. The colors of red, orange and blue are present throughout the Southwest as shown in these photographs, and the colors often seem burned by our desert sun. The prints themselves are sometimes ragged and faded, which only serves to enhance the subject matter. The prints are expired objects, presenting images of expired objects, and it is worth noting that they will not last forever. They will crack and peel, curl and fade. These Polaroid prints are literal, tactile representations of the “expired” theme that is presented in the photographs. These are here to look at, these expressions of expiration…for now.

Sean Rohde has lived in Phoenix since June of 1997, having spent 27 years of his life previously in northern Indiana. Working as a registered nurse, he spends his free time shooting many analog film formats with vintage cameras. More of his work may be seen at http://www.flickr.com/photos/sjrohde and you may read his ramblings about film and camera reviews/modifications at http://moominsean.blogspot.com.

Still working on the frames and some other stuff, but should be a good time when the time comes.

The show runs from March 17th to April 16th, and the opening is on March 17th from 5pm to 9pm. The gallery is at 14010 N. El Mirage Road, El Mirage, AZ. El Mirage is a community in the northwest Phoenix metro area.

View Larger Map

The building is a nice little community center looking area on the west side of the street. Contact the gallery for visiting hours outside of the opening times.
Be there or be 3 1/4" x 4 1/4"! I'll be the one with a Polaroid camera in my hand.

Soon I plan on talking about the Kowa Super 66, and I also have some TLR action happening. Another trip to Japan in a couple months, as well!

Konica Instant Press

2010-12-19T11:55:00.027-07:00

No pseudo-clever title for this article. Most instant Polaroid cameras are made by Polaroid, but there are a few companies that make Polaroid compatible film cameras. I've already talked about Keystone cameras, and there are a couple of NPC cameras that are clones of the 185 and 195 (at least in name) that I haven't used. I've talked about the Moment, a Russian type 40 clone. Fuji also makes proprietary cameras, as well as the high-end, fully manual Fotorama FP-1. Kodak also made instant cameras that used Kodak instant film. There are also many cameras that use Polaroid backs, such as Mamiya, and just about every other medium format camera (and even some 35mm and large format cameras). There is one more important Polaroid peel-apart compatible camera (hint...it's mentioned in the title).
The Konica Instant Press was released in Japan in 1983, and sold outside of Japan in 1984.

This is the first fully manual Polaroid clone, created a good 10 years after the 195, followed by the Fuji FP-1 around 1995. It was originally marketed as a professional camera for proofing and for real estate, etc. It was only produced for a couple of years, 1983 and 1984, I believe, and seems to have passed under the radar for the most part. It's value was never underrated, though, and it has consistently sold for $700 to over $1000 since the mid-1990s (unless you get lucky and find a deal). It is fairly rare, though it can be found on eBay and Craigslist every so often. So...why so special?

The Konica Instant Press:

An overview from the manual...

The camera is a folder, meaning that it has bellows and that it can be folded into the body for compact storage and protection of the camera elements.

The bellows are actually the weakest part about the camera. They are much thinner than those present on the 180/190/195, and seem to be prone to wearing out (more so than the Polaroids, which get leaks along the edges). I had to tape up a line of leaks along the top of the bellows (or is it bellow, singular?).

The camera is made of both plastic and metal parts. The body is mostly plastic while the viewfinder is all metal. The pack holder is basically just a Polaroid back stuck onto the camera.

You can see that it has a tripod mount on the bottom, and this one has some exposure guides on back in Japanese, so one could assume that this camera was an import and not a domestic camera.

The camera takes all Type 100 pack films. I read in a book that it takes Type 80 as well, but this is not true. It does not have the notches that allow for the extra tabs that Type 80 packs have (to prevent the film pack from sliding back into the camera). It would be an easy mod, but not really necessary at this point with Type 80s being relatively rare (and I have plenty of other cameras that I can use for Type 80s).
It has a plastic left-hand grip, which I find to be a bit slippery, so I grabbed a Konica strap from eBay.

The Konica Instant Press features a 110mm Hexanon lens (the FP-1 has 105mm, while the 180/190/195 have 114mm lenses).

Aperture is 4 to 64 (the FP-1 is to 5.6, 190 and 195 are to 3.8, and the 180 is to 4.5). So it has the advantage of opening almost as wide as the 190/195. The aperture is also a slider, not clicking into place, so you can use apertures between the settings if desired.
Shutter speeds are from 1 to 500, with a B and T setting. This is comparable to other Polaroid manuals, except for the inclusion of a T setting, which allows you to keep the shutter open until you press the shutter button again. Neither the manual Polaroids nor the FP-1 have this setting, which is a great feature for long exposures. It also has a flash mount. Filter size is 49mm, allowing you a full range of filter and hood use. The manual Polaroid cameras seem to use a unique filter size that requires a Polaroid brand filter (UV, yellow and ND).

Firing the shutter is a two-part system, like all other manual Polaroids. You cock the shutter above the lens, and fire the shutter via a button on the cover (with the camera open, of course). The shutter button allows for timers and cables, as well (the Polaroid manuals can only use a Polaroid cable that fits over the shutter button).

Focusing is actually similar to the old Polaroid Type 40 cameras, such as the 110 series, via a knob on the side of the camera (the cover).

The Polaroid manuals' focus consists of left and right finger grips, allowing you to directly slide the bellows section in and out (this is actually the same for all automatic folders, as well), while the FP-1 has a dial for focusing. While I'm used to the Polaroid method, I find the Konica focusing allows for an amazing amount of precision. I'm not sure if the camera actually produces a sharper image, or the focusing dial is just that much more precise. It is extremely sensitive and accurate. Focusing is done through a single viewfinder, with a center circle that brings two images together until they "match", bringing the subject into focus...much the same as most focusing systems. This brings up another advantage that the Konica has over the Polaroid manuals...the Konica allows you to focus as close as 0.6 meters. This is closer than the FP-1's 0.8 meters, and much more so than the Polaroid manuals' 1.2 meters. This means the camera basically has built-in close-up ability. The precision focusing is a blessing for this close-up work, as even a slight difference in focus means a blurry subject.
The viewfinder is large and bright, and features moving guidelines within the finder depending on focus.

So the area within the guidelines is the image area. It took me a a couple shots with my subject not being in the photo before I realized this!

I was using the entire viewfinder, as one would with a Polaroid manual camera. I'm not sure if the FP-1 has the same method or it uses a full viewfinder. Once I figured out what was going on, it's really nice to have accurate frame lines, particularly when shooting close to a subject.

You can see that the camera produces a lovely image when shooting close! This was shot at 125/f11 and it is still loaded with bokeh (though some hate to use that word). A couple more shots close up...

Again, the pinpoint focusing is wonderful. It also shoots nicely from a distance.

So how does it shoot compared to other instant peel-apart cameras? This is really tough to answer. It definitely seems to produce a sharper image than most other cameras I've used, comparable to the 600SE, which can produce amazingly sharp images. This is probably a combination of the nice lens and the very accurate focusing. I attempted to (generally) take the same shot with multiple cameras and the same pack of Fuji FP-100C and the same exposure settings (f11 and 60). The framing isn't always the same, and the sun decided to peek out through the clouds while I was doing this, but it's still a somewhat interesting comparison.

Konica Instant Press

Polaroid 190

Polaroid 180

Polaroid 190 (I'm currently having issues with the focus on this camera)

Converted Polaroid 110A

Converted Gomz Moment

And one more with the Konica Instant Press

I also took a shot with the 600SE and 50mm lens, but I forgot to remove the dark slide, a definite annoyance when using that camera. And I took a shot with the Colorpack III, not realizing I had the rollers out...so I produced this vaguely amusing mess.

So, yeah, I like the Konica Instant Press a lot, and I will be using it often. It has some distinct advantages over the 190/195, and once I get the right filters and a decent hood, I think it will produce some fantastic images. Though I won't stop using my 190, the Konica will have a spot on my car seat next to it. The 600SE is a different beast altogether, so it can't really be compared to any of these cameras in terms of quality or portability, but the Konica is certainly a viable alternative to the 180/190/195 and you could easily just use the Konica and not own the others. Compared to the FP-1, I can only say from my very limited experience of having messed around with Artsyken's camera while in Japan. But I wasn't too keen on the dial focusing, which seemed a bit stiff. The Konica focuses a bit closer than the Fuji, 0.6m compared to 0.8m, and the Fuji the lens only opens to 5.6, while the Konica is 4, which seems to be a distinct advantage. Owning the Konica (and various other Polaroids), I personally don't see any reason to also own the Fuji FP-1. But it probably is a nice camera on its own.
The manual for the Konica Instant Press can be found online here.

Introducing...The Konica Instant Press!

So, when is too much...too much?

Edit from the future!
The camera was having an issue with firing the shutter. It wasn't the shutter itself, rather the mechanism between the button and the lens. I was a bit wary of taking the camera apart as it wasn't cheap and I didn't want to mess up the focus. Turned out to be pretty easy (mostly) to remove the front, and you can't mess up the focus as it is a separate mechanism in the hood of the camera. I figured I would post shots and a short explanation for those interested. Though I discovered none of this was at all necessary by the time I was done.
First step is to release the bellows, which only requires the removal of four screws from the inside.

There are two rails that hold the lens board in place. To remove the board, you remove three screws to take off one rail, and the front piece is loose.

Removing the lens is easy in concept, difficult in execution. You just need to remove the screw from the back that mounts the camera on the board. But they had three dollops of glue on the threads that made it extremely difficult to remove. I cleaned the threads while apart so it was much easier to put back together.

Under the lens, it looks like the Showa production date for the camera, or at least the lens.

So I had two problems. At first, pushing on the button didn't release the shutter. It would stop maybe 1 mm short of firing the shutter. I could reach around the front and push it all the way to fire. But then the mechanism started to bind. Before I took it all apart, I couldn't really tell what was going on. But there are basically three parts to fire the shutter. The button presses down on a bar. This bar pushes down on another part that connects with the shutter mechanism, firing the shutter.

After looking at all of this and thinking about it for awhile, the fix was actually pretty simple. The binding was fixed by pushing up on "2" (top photo) with my thumb, which bent it back into place, so it moves straight and does not catch on the surface of the board. The second fix...I actually can't figure out why the piece doesn't push down far enough. It is seriously like 1mm or less short. I tried bending it a bit, but it needs to pretty much be flat to fire at all focal lengths, as a different amount of surface makes contact depending on how close or far you focus. So I just took two small pieces of black electrical tape and made "1" slightly thicker on the bottom, so it had enough to push the proper distance. That's all it took. And I could have done all of that without taking apart the camera. Still, and interesting learning exercise.
A quick video of the shutter working properly...

Until next time!

Reclaimed Fuji intant negs!

2010-12-07T13:04:00.019-07:00

I'm certainly not the one to think this up, though I've tried similar with Polaroid film in the past without success. There is currently some activity in "reclaiming" a full color negative from Fuji FP-100C. There is a good thread on Filmwasters and they also cover it in a video podcast I believe, but I figure I would quickly go over the process here, as one can never have to many useful Internet resources!
First off, don't be put off thinking this is difficult. It took me awhile to get around to messing about with this, and it took me about five minutes to make my first color negative, plus drying and scanning time.
Basic supplies are bleach, a brush, some kind of surface such as glass or a piece of plastic, and water. Also, of course, the remains of a Fuji FP-100C...the back side that you would normally throw away (you'll see what I'm talking about in the step-by-step).
So you have your bleach and brush...

And your Fuji FP-100C remains, which you can tape to the glass if you want, solid black side up. The idea is to remove the black backing on the negative without getting bleach on the other (emulsion) side. I taped my first down, then didn't bother after that and I didn't have any problems.

Then you dip your brush in the bleach and begin applying it to the black surface. I added a little scrubbing motion with the brush to loosen the backing faster.

You can see the black stuff coming off. It's probably a good idea to wear gloves, but whatever. Rinsing it under water shows the black stuff draining off and an image underneath.

Holding it up to the light. you can see the image (yes this is a different neg than seen above)...

Keep brushing and rinsing, or you can apply the bleach and leave it sit for 5-15 minutes and then rinse, and you will eventually wash off all of the black stuff and be left with a nice color negative. The emulsion side has developer goop on it, which should be gently rubbed off under water before or after working with the bleach (sodium sulfate will wash it off in a snap). The image is in/on the plastic, like a true color negative.

Hang to dry and you have a large color negative ready for scanning! It really is as simple as that. So I scanned the negative. Uncorrected, it is faded and somewhat sepia in nature.

And after some color correction done in Photoshop, we have a photo with a very lovely tone. You can see where the bleach got on the emulsion side to the left.

Here is the original print for comparison.

And another example, before and after color correction...a shot of the preparation of my next blog post in a few weeks.

That's it! Makes me sad about all of the Fuji negs I've thrown away in the past, particularly from my Japan trip. There are other methods out there on the Interwebs. Some use paper towels or sponges, some use different chemicals. Experiment and see what works for you.
On a side note, I thought to try this with black and white film, to see if I could get something similar to Type 665. It works...sort of. I chose to use Fuji FP-100B, because the 3000B already has a scannable negative. And I figured it would be most similar to FP-100C. The big difference is that the image on 100B is on the developer, not the plastic, so it washes off, and washes off very easily. So...it is possible to remove the black backing from FP-100B, but you can't get any water on the other side. This is very difficult to accomplish when you are trying to rinse off the bleach and black coating. After a couple failed attempts, I chose to just use the paper as a handle and painted and rinsed very carefully.

I still got water on the opposite side at the very end of the process, but it mostly worked. After drying and scanning, here is the negative as it naturally appears. Oddly enough, the image was positive in different print I washed, but here it is negative.

After reversing, converting to black and white (the image is purple otherwise), and adjusting contrast, this is as good as this one gets...

A bit messy. The original print for comparison.

Here is another previous, mostly failed, attempt with FP-100B with much of the image washed and scratched off. This one I attempted to tape down to seal off the emulsion side. Print and negative...

I believe that this is definitely a doable process with FP-100B. A few workarounds that might help would be to let the goop dry completely so that it takes longer to wash off, and to paint the bleach on and let it sit for awhile, with luck reducing rinses. Taping it down to seal the underside almost worked, but after a few rinses and bleaches, the tape just bubbled up. But a careful process would make this a viable process...though it doesn't provide the same high quality negative that FP-100C does.
And this does not work with Polaroid films, as the black backing doesn't dissolve from bleach.
I also wanted to try Type 689, as it seems similar to FP-100C, or an earlier version. Some people believe they are they same film, but this experiment kicks that idea out the door.
For some reason, I saved a bunch of Type 689 negatives (and other types). No idea why, but glad I did now!

The process is the same, though the black backing is a bit more tenacious and requires some scrubbing. The other difference with 689 is that it has an opaque coating on the emulsion side, as well, which FP-100C does not have. This washes off with warm water, leaving a lovely blue negative underneath.

The negative is actually very dense and a monotone blue...so when it gets scanned and reversed, it is sepia/orange. This is a scan after some adjusting of contrast in Photoshop...

Super orange! But, we can treat it as a black and white negative, which it basically is as it has no color to it (except orange), and we get a decent image.

Pretty cool! Too bad Type 689 is relatively rare at this point. I also tried Type 669, 690, and 667, but the back doesn't come off of any of them with bleach.
So, to summarize, the following film types have been tested by me (or verified by others as with the Fuji 4x5) as working for negative retrieval (a few) or not working (most).

Working (backing removable with bleach with transparent negative)
Fuji FP-100C, FP-100C Silk and FP-100C45 (emulsion will discolor and deteriorate with extended exposure to bleach)
Fuji FP-100B and FP-100B45 (emulsion washes off if not very careful)
Polaroid Type 689 (very dense blue negative)

Not working (possible to remove black backing but emulsion is opaque)
Fuji FP-3000B (emulsion opaque, but already has a scannable negative image)
Type 667, 107 and 47 (emulsion opaque, but already has a scannable negative image)
Type 669 and 108 (can scrub back off but black underneath, emulsion opaque)
Type 690 (can scrub back off but black underneath, emulsion opaque)
ID-UV (can scrub back off but black underneath, emulsion opaque)
Chocolate and Blue 100 (can scrub back off but black underneath, emulsion opaque)

In closing, another reclaimed negative saved from last year...

Anyway, another something to mess around with. Next up I will be reviewing the Konica Instant Press! Until then...

OMG! A Russian Moment conversion!

2010-10-18T20:28:00.004-07:00

OMG, of course, stands for "oh my GOMZ!" In 1952, the Russian camera company GOMZ (Gosularstvennyi Optiko-Mekhanicheskii Zavod) created a roll film instant camera known as Moment. Polaroid wasn't officially sold in Russia, so GOMZ made a copycat camera and produced a Type 40 equivalent. It wasn't a success. Too expensive and the film was very poor quality, so less than 9,000 were produced. According to Land List, Modern Photography did a review of the Russian instant film, but I don't know the month or year so I haven't been able to locate it. There are other Google-able sites on the Moment camera and GOMZ, so I won't go into any historical details, except to mention that GOMZ became LOMO, whose name was eventually pirated by whom many consider to be the evil overlord of analog photography, Lomography (I'm personally indifferent...any company that promotes film over digital can't be all bad).
So the Moment camera is somewhat rare, though not so rare that there isn't usually at least one available on eBay at any given...moment (haha). It's just a matter of waiting to grab one for a decent price. Which I did. Here it is...

Very similar in design to the Polaroid 110A/B, with some differences. The lens isn't quite as nice as the 110 lens. Easy to remove, though...just screws off.

Film speeds are from Bulb to 200, and the aperture is 6.8 to 22, though it continues to get smaller after 22, looks to be around 32 at it's smallest. On a side note, the aperture blades are behind the shutter.
The focus viewfinder is a bit odd. It's the same finder that I see on other Russian folding cameras of the time.

On the top is a sport finder for framing...

And the focus is controlled by a sliding bar on one side. It actually clicks into place at each number.

So, neat looking camera...but close to unusable, unless you want to find some Type 40 that still works. I'm not much into just having cameras to look at and not use, though I certainly appreciate cool-looking cameras. I bought this to convert to pack film, of course! I've done this previously, and the process is pretty much the same. I figure this is the first time someone has been able to use one of these in 50 years or so, unless someone else has converted a Moment in the past.
First up is removing all of the extra bits from the back.

And the back that will go on the camera...

I had to cut out the film end of the camera to fit the back on and allow for the film to be pulled.

And I had to cut the original back to fit.

And then put it all together!

And I had to tape up a spot on the bellows where the finder rubs against it while the camera is closed.

Let's put some 669 in, take it outside a see if it works!

And it does! Ugly shots, but it works...and it has a leak. After messing about with a flashlight in the dark, I found a couple pinholes along the bellow edges. Easy fix, I just taped up the bellows. Much easier than messing about trying to find a mystery leak where I attached the back.
A couple notes on using the thing. Not sure what's up with the finder. I assume it is supposed to assist with focusing, but it stays exactly the same regardless of the focus setting. Everything is always in focus in the finder. And the finder is square, so it's not very good at all for framing. Trying to use the finder on top is difficult, as well. What you see in it is entirely dependent on how far away your eye is from the thing. So framing with the camera is a mixed bag. The shutter is super quiet, though. Quiet enough that sometimes I wasn't sure if it fired. It is a bit awkward to fire, as the shutter button is on the lens. It's tough to reach depending on how I'm holding the camera. Has decent depth of field, and seems to provide a very pinpoint focus, which makes it all the more difficult to use when I have to guess my distance. I will take it out next weekend and shoot some real stuff with it, see how it handles. Some shots of the final product!

A fun project, done "just because". I know some people have an attitude that I'm ruining a camera (I've actually had comments that I shouldn't have used really old film, that I should be saving it...what's the point in that?). I've taken a camera that has no use other than to hold some books up and given it a second life! Not an easy camera to use, but I will still have some fun with it. It would be interesting to convert a Foton someday. Until I write again, seeya!

UPDATE: A few photos taken with the Moment. The lens is quite sharp and if you can get the distance correct, provides a very nice image. This was Type 669 with the camera at about 125 and 11.

The leak is their occasionally, but I can't locate it. It may be the back itself, which has actually come a bit loose, so I will probably take it off and redo at some point. A couple more shots using 100 Sepia, with the camera at 200 and whatever was beyond 22, the smallest aperture setting. One print and a couple goop scans.

The biggest issue is framing. I can use the glass finder to make sure that whatever I'm aiming at is actually in the frame, but the sport finder is close to useless, it is so far off from what actually appears on the print. At some point I will check the aim with ground glass to compare. More updates to come, I'm sure!

Great Wall + Polaroid = Sweet!

2010-09-06T12:32:00.006-07:00

This is a project I've been meaning to do for awhile. I was just waiting for a cheap Great Wall and a cheap Polaroid back so I could combine the two! This was actually probably one of the less "fun" things I have done, but I will probably do it again sometime and correct some of the problems I had (and not trash so many useful parts).
We start with a Great Wall DF-2 camera...known for its "bokeh" heavy lens, and reviewed previously here.

Take off the back.

And take out some random bits I don't need. You can see that the film plane is actually quite a bit deep in the camera.

Putting the camera on the back, you see that I need to cut away a lot of metal.

My first worry was the 3-step shutter mechanism, as discussed in my Great Wall post. To put the back on, I would have to remove the first step, which is used to advance the film and release the shutter mechanism for cocking.

After taking it off, though, I realized that I could use the double-exposure switch, which does the same thing. It just releases the cocking mechanism (haha) so you can take another exposure. Cutting into the camera would not affect this part. So I measured and marked. It was I think 5/8" in + 3/16" to allow for the thickness of the Polaroid back. It has to be fairly precise as the Great Wall has pinpoint focusing.

And then I cut the rear part out using a hand saw and a hand-held jig saw. This is where I made my first mistake. I should have removed ALL the extra bits of metal. Sawing was not smooth at all, and the angles were awkward.

I should have taken off the outer cover plates, though they survived. And I should have removed the interior light-proofing parts, which I destroyed in the process. I didn't realize that they would be important until later. Here we see how the camera and back fit together...

I used a Hasselblad back because it was already precut for 120 film. I did make some adjustments to it, though, to try to make a larger image area.

I then had to take the old back and cut out the top and bottom to put back on the camera. I just used a hand saw for this part.

I had to deal with the holes left over from the film spool advance...

I retrospect (you will see why in a bit), I could have cut up another 1/4" inch. I also needed to seal up all the open areas. Old Spectra and Ace dark slides worked well.

At this point, all I really need to do is glue it together...

This is where it started to get ugly, and I have few pictures of the process. After letting it dry overnight, the shutter stopped working. I thought that maybe I got superglue on something and it was catching. It would fire, but stick halfway through. I did everything I could think of to avoid tearing the back off. I took the top off to see what I could do.

I messed around with this for far too long before I just gave up and tore the back off. It was a spring inside the wall that had come loose. It provides tension to make the shutter snap back. So I replaced it and put a bit of padding to keep it from popping out again. Then I glued the camera together again. Shutter was working great. Left it for a couple hours...shutter wasn't working again. After screwing around for another hour, I ended up tearing the back off again, and removing the double-exposure mechanism all together.

I have no idea why it was affecting the shutter, but taking it out fixed the camera. I can just turn the knob now to cock the shutter. On a side note, I opened up my other Great Wall to compare, and I did nothing to it except remove the knob, which involves one screw, and the cover plate...but now the double exposure mech doesn't work on that camera! It just lets me cock the shutter. I didn't change anything so I don't understand it at all. And, when I took apart the cameras, it is impossible to get the speed setting in the right place. So I can set the speed, but the indicator doesn't line up...so I just have to know that I am three clicks over so it is at 60. I tried like 5 times to get them to line up and they won't.
So...ANYway. At this point the shutter works so I glue it back together and check focus with ground glass. Seems to be perfect! But, another problem...I destroyed the interior parts of the camera when I was cutting. When you cock the shutter, it totally lets a bunch of light into the interior of the camera. There is a piece on top that block light, and a shield for the sides that blocks light, as well. In this shot, along the sides...light shines through that gap, so it has to be covered yet allow the shutter to slide.

I had to reconstruct all of these parts with plastic. I don't have any photos of this process because by this time I wasn't having fun anymore and just wanted to be done with it. So, yeah, I did finish it...

Ugly! Did I forget to mention that I dropped the camera on the floor, bending the front of the lens? Doesn't affect anything other than the looks. And I lost the front skin...must have thrown it away, or it became a cat toy and is under the couch. But....does it work better than it looks? My first test shot with 664:

Leaky! I took it inside and shined a flashlight all around the inside and couldn't find any leaks. I figured it was my baffling system I built out of plastic, but it seemed to be light proof. Put some Fuji FP-100C in and took another shot...

Still leaky! Looks better cropped, of course.

So...it works! Focus seems to be spot on. Just that pesky lightleak. Another shot with ID-UV.

It was at this point that I painted the camera black in hopes that it would fix the mysterious leak. This morning, I took it out again for a few more test shots.

Argh! Leaks! After looking at it in the dark multiple times and finding nothing, I realized that it couldn't be the camera...it had to be the Polaroid back. And it was...leaking from the dark slide slot. So a piece of tape over the opening fixed the problem. No more leaks!

So, it works. A few thoughts. The bottom is cut off (which is actually the top of the Polaroid). I had this figured out pretty exactly, but when I made the plastic mask, it moved the back down just enough to cut off the edge of the shot. And the ugly edges from my baffling and tape. If I do this again, I will try to keep as much of the original camera intact as possible. I probably spent 20 hours on this total, but that included redoing things, etc. I could probably make another in six hours or so. Not sure if it's worth the time, money and hassle though. But that probably won't keep me from trying again. I'll call this the prototype. GRP.v01!

Adios until whenever!

Fuji and Kodak, together again!

2010-09-05T21:23:00.006-07:00

I haven't done a post for awhile, busy writing papers for school and all that. I do have more than one project in mind and in progress. Something I've been wanting to talk about for awhile is Fuji integral instant film, and my experiments with Kodak integral film. I've been trying to work out the best way to talk about this since my experience is my own and probably minimal at best...but it may be interesting by the time I finish writing this up!
So, okay, we've all heard of Polaroid film, and most people think of 600 integral film when they think of Polaroid. It looks like this:

There is also the older Time Zero film that looks the "same" as 600...as in it is the same shape. And the newer Impossible Project films, PX 70, PX600 and PX100, that are based on the 600 format. Polaroid made another integral format know as Spectra film. It does not work with 600 style cameras, using...Spectra cameras. It looks like this:

A wider format than 600. The Impossible Project makes a film for these Spectra cameras called PZ 600 Image. While Polaroid films have all been discontinued, these Impossible Project films are available, though finicky and experimental at this early stage. Polaroid also made four more integral formats: Captiva, i-Zone, mio, and Type 300. I haven't used any of these formats, so I don't have anything to say about them!
There are other options for integral films...Fuji films. Fuji does make integral film, and some are readily available in the US, while others are available overseas. I'll talk about those that I have experience with, and a couple of the cameras. There are many, many more camera models available in Japan, but generally only a few available elsewhere.
The easiest to obtain is Instax Mini. The cameras typically look something like this, or sillier depending on the model.

Or you can use a back made by Lomography for the Diana+ or LC-A, or hack one for the Fujipet or Banner like I did. The film is small and looks like this:

Jumping on the bandwagon, Polaroid has licensed Instax Mini and stamped Polaroid 300 on the Instax Mini camera. Pretty lazy, but good for Fuji, I'm sure. I love this shot of the camera because it has a photo of Lady Gaga ejecting from the top, and it's not even the actual film type for the camera. Looks more like Spectra shrunk down small, or most likely something done in Photoshop.

The other relatively easy Fuji format to find is Instax Wide. I don't believe this is officially sold in the US, but I see them from sellers on Amazon and eBay.The Wide cameras usually look like this if you are lucky...

Though this ugly thing is the most commonly available model:

This format is kind of a cross between 600 and Spectra. The entire sheet is about the same size as 600, but the image is landscape like Spectra and wider, though not as tall as the Spectra Image. A couple examples:

Sooo...those are the most common Fuji integral films. There are a couple other formats that are available in Japan. Well, they were until June 2010 when they were discontinued. These are the Ace and FI-800GT films.

These are actually the same film, but the packs are different. And they are both the same format as the old Kodak PR film, though the ISO is different.

There are too many Ace and 800GT cameras to show here, but here is an FI-800GT camera:

So I nabbed this stash of Ace and FI-800GT film...

I wanted to try the "use Fuji film in a Kodak camera" trick, as described here. So I bought this:

The film eject isn't motor driven...the camera has a crank on the side to push the film through the development rollers.
So, like I said, Fuji and Kodak films are basically the same.

The two fuji films are the same with different packs...one doesn't have gears. The 800GT and Kodak films are basically the same pack except for a tab, but the film is a different ISO, so the camera needs a filter so it doesn't overexpose the GT800.
Before trying the Fuji film, I had some Kodak instant film to try. Results?

Not much to see here! Moving on, I did the modification to use the FI-GT800. And...a positive result!

But...expired film! So mostly rotten shots. I was thinking that maybe the light was leaking through the bottom of the camera, given that many are white but you can still see the developer.

After wasting so many shots, I gave up for awhile. Recently, I picked up an Ace camera to put some more film to use.

Furthering the Kodak and Fuji connection, check out this similar Kodak camera:

After obtaining batteries and putting a film pack in it, I took it out for a spin. Definitely expired film, but not sure how old or how it was stored. But the first couple shots look decent.

But then all the shots came out blank, so I guess the film was dry...

So it was somewhat successful, though I wouldn't rely on it. No taking a shot and leaving without checking to see if actually develops.
So, in conclusion? No real conclusion...just a bit of rambling about my experience with integral films! Here is a shot to compare the sizes of the various films:

I see I haven't added very many posts to my blog this year. Quality over quantity, I guess. I have been writing a paper every week for the past year, but that will be over in November. Planned? I made a Polaroid back for a Great Wall camera, so that will probably be next. And I have an integral SX-70 back to fix up to use on my Mamiya Universal. I also should talk about my Crown Graphic. Using the Type 50 I have without so much vignette! All that and more in the near and distant future. Until then!

Polaroid peel-apart instant film types: Examples galore!

2010-06-02T17:20:00.071-07:00

Okay, previously I've done posts about peel-apart film, and integral film, and the cameras that can be used with whatever film. Since then I've used many types and had much more experience with the different film types. I figure it's time to make a big list of film types, with examples, that I can update as I find out and try new types. I haven't been doing much recently, so this will make a good filler post that is, with luck, informative! If there isn't a photo, I haven't used it and don't have an example (yet). This post is for peel-apart pack films only.

Type 100 Peel-apart Films, 3.25 x 4.25

Type 105 (ISO 75 BW - print and negative) - Became 665. I haven't encountered a working pack. Polaroid states that "this film produces within 30 seconds a brilliant positive and a negative for high quality prints."

***

Type 107 (ISO 3000 BW) - Became 107c and then 667, though Type 107 has much more contrast, without the sepia tones that 667 sometimes exhibits.

Type 107c (ISO 3000 BW). The same as 107, but does not require fixer. The "c" stands for coaterless.

***

Type 084 (ISO 3000 BW) - I haven't ever seen a box of this, but it's a professional version of Type 107.

***

Type 108 (ISO 75 color) - Became 669. It has the same blue qualities as 669 when it expires.

Type 108 Polacolor 2 - Basically the same as Type 108, probably with improved color. Polaroid described the film as having "special metallized dyes that produce vivid, fade-resistant colors".

***

Type 125i (ISO 125) - Described by Polaroid as a "medium-speed, medium-contrast, medium-grain, daylight and electronic flash balanced (5500°K) color print film. It’s easy to use photo document film with true-to-life colors, for sharp, bright, portrait quality images, anytime, everytime."

***

Type 125i Silk (ISO 125 color) - 125i with a textured/matte surface.

***

Studio 125 (ISO 125 color) - Probably the same thing as 125i, though not sold in the U.S. market. Described by Polaroid as a "medium-speed, medium-contrast, medium-grain, daylight and electronic flash balanced (5500°K) color print film. This film features accurate colors and bright whites; sharp, vibrant, saturated proofs and final art; lower contrast for greater detail when compared to Polaroid Pro 100 film; improved reciprocity characteristics, and fast clearing and drying."

***

Type 606 (ISO 200 sepia) - Probably super rare. Described by Polaroid as "a panchromatic, medium-contrast pack film producing sepia-tone prints with excellent gradation and tonal range."

***

Type 611 (ISO 200 BW) - For ultrasound photography, described by Polaroid as "medium-speed, low-contrast, medium-grain, black and white coaterless print film."

***

Type 612 (ISO 20,000 BW) - Designed for CRT recording.

***

Type 661 (ISO 80 color) - Marketed as "Special Program Film." The ISO states 80, but it is much slower than Type 669, though it seems to have the same tones.

Type 663 (ISO 800 BW) - Sold by Impossible Project for a short time. I'm not sure if this was an official Polaroid product or a custom film.

***

Type 664 (ISO 100 BW) - Described by Polaroid as "medium-speed, medium-contrast sheet film for black and white prints. Coaterless, wide tonal range, intended for exposures of 1/10 second or faster, matches speed of ISO 100 chrome films."

Polaroid Pro 100 (ISO 100 BW) - Repackaged Type 664, described as "medium-speed, medium-contrast sheet film for black and white prints. Coaterless, wide tonal range, intended for exposures of 1/10 second or faster, matches speed of ISO 100 chrome films."

***

Type 665 (ISO 80 BW - print and negative) - Described by Polaroid as "medium-speed, medium-contrast, fine-grain film which produces high quality black and white prints and negatives suitable for enlarging."

Type 667 (ISO 3000 BW) - What came from Type 107c, though with warmer tones than 107 and 107c. Polaroid described it as "high-speed, medium-contrast, medium-grain, general purpose black & white coaterless print film."

Type 3200B (ISO 3000 BW) - This is the same thing as 667, probably renamed for professional use. 3200 is probably the specific ISO of Type 667, as some literature states "approximately 3000" for the ISO.

***

Type 668 (ISO 80 color) - Probably a precursor to Type 669, after Type 108 Polacolor 2.

***

Type 669 (ISO 80 color) - The next evolutionary step from Type 108. Described by Polaroid as "medium-contrast, medium-speed, daylight (5500°K), (electronic flash) balanced color print film with extended dynamic range." This is (was) the most popular peel-apart film.

Type 669 Silk (ISO 80 color) - I've never seen this, but I assume it's the same as Type 669 with a textured/matte surface.

***

Polacolor 100 (ISO 100) - For passport photo use. I don't know much about it, except it seems to have similar blue tones as Type 669.

***

Polacolor 100 Silk (ISO 100) - The same as above, except with a textured/matte surface, for passport photo use. I don't know much about it, except it seems to have similar blue tones as Type 669.

***

Type 672 (ISO 400 BW) - Described by Polaroid as a "panchromatic, medium-contrast film producing fine grain prints with excellent gradation and tonal range."

Polapan Pro 400 - Repackaged Type 672. Described by Polaroid as a "panchromatic, medium-contrast film producing fine grain prints with excellent gradation and tonal range."

***

Type 679 (ISO 100 color) - This is probably the precursor to Type 690, as it has similar yellow tones and the developer paste is blue and yellow. Described by Polaroid as "medium-speed, medium-contrast, medium-grain, daylight and electronic flash balanced (5500°K) color print film. This film features accurate colors and bright whites; sharp, vibrant, saturated proofs and final art; lower contrast for greater detail when compared to Polaroid Pro 100 film; improved reciprocity characteristics, and fast clearing and drying."

Type 681 (ISO 80 color) - A film created for ID photography, it has plastic base instead of paper for durability.

***

Type 689/ProVivid (ISO 100 color) - This might be the same base film that Fuji uses for FP-100C. Described by Polaroid as "medium-speed, medium-contrast, medium-grain, daylight and electronic flash balanced (5500° K) color print film."

Type 690 (ASA 100 color) - Probably followed 679, as it has similar yellow tones. Polaroid describes it as "medium-speed, medium-contrast, medium-grain, daylight and electronic flash balanced (5500°K) color print film. It’s easy to use, professional quality instant film, with sharp, bright, well-saturated colors, anytime, every time."

Type 690 (ASA 125 color) - Some have mentioned this. I assume it is a non-U.S. market version of Type 690.

***

Type 691 (ASA 80) - Described by Polaroid as a film that "provides a full-color positive transparency suitable for projection. The transparency is processed and ready for use within minutes".

64 Tungsten (ASA 64 color) - Described by Polaroid as "special tungsten (3200°K) balanced film for rich, saturated color prints, in 31/4 x 41/4 pack format. Color-balanced for tungsten lighting, rich and saturated colors, excellent image sharpness and clarity, designed for long exposures (ideal @ 1/2 to 30 seconds)."

ID-UV (ISO 80 color) - Most likely the same as 669, with an ultraviolet coating. Described by Polaroid as a "medium-speed, medium-contrast, medium-grain, daylight (electronic flash) balanced color print film with security features."

PC ID-UV 100 (ISO 100 color) - Sold only in Europe, this is probably the same thing as 690 with an ultraviolet coating. Described by Polaroid as a medium-speed, medium-contrast, medium-grain, daylight (electronic flash) balanced color print film with security features."

***

100 Blue (ISO 80) - This film, as described by Impossible Project "features gentle monochromatic blue tones ranging from lilac to deep blue". It has a textured/matte surface.

100 Chocolate (ISO 80) - Described by Impossible Project as "medium-speed and medium-contrast coaterless, Chocolate print film". This is the same formula as the original square Chocolate film.

100 Sepia (ISO 1500) - According to Impossible Project, this film provides "sharp clear detail, smoother, more consistent backgrounds. Balanced for average daylight (5500°K)."

Fuji FP-100C

Fuji FP-100C Silk

Fuji FP-100B

Fuji FP-400B

Fuji FP-3000B

Type 80 Peel-apart Films, 3.25 x 3.375

Type 84 (ISO 100 BW) - The square equivalent of Type 664. Described by Polaroid as "medium-speed, medium-contrast sheet film for black and white prints. Coaterless, wide tonal range, intended for exposures of 1/10 second or faster, matches speed of ISO 100 chrome films."

Type 85 (ISO 80 BW - print and negative) - The square version of Type 665. Described by Polaroid as "medium-speed, medium-contrast, fine-grain film which produces high quality black and white prints and negatives suitable for enlarging."

Type 87 (ISO 3000 BW) - The square version of Type 667. Described by Polaroid as "high-speed, black and white coaterless print film. Designed for low-level ambient lighting conditions and high-speed events that require a fast film."

Type 88 (ISO 75 color) - The square equivalent of Type 108.

***

Type 88 Polacolor 2 (ISO 75 color) - Described by Polaroid as "a new, improved color film. Its dyes have greater stability and pictures made with this film will have deeper, richer colors".

***

Type 88 (ISO 80 color) - The square version of Type 669. Described by Polaroid as "medium-contrast, medium-speed, daylight (5500°K), (electronic flash) balanced color print film with extended dynamic range."

Type 89 (ISO 100 color) - The square version of Type 690. Polaroid described it as "Medium-speed, medium-contrast, medium-grain, daylight and electronic flash balanced (5500°K) color print film. It’s easy to use, professional quality instant film, with sharp, bright, well-saturated colors, anytime, every time."

Viva (ISO 80 color) - Not sold in the U.S., described by Polaroid as "medium-contrast, medium-speed, daylight (5500°K), (electronic flash) balanced color print film with extended dynamic range."

***

Viva (ISO 80 color) - Not sold in the U.S. The same as Viva with a textured/matte surface, described by Polaroid as "medium-contrast, medium-speed, daylight (5500°K), (electronic flash) balanced color print film with extended dynamic range."

***

Viva (ISO 125 color) - Not sold in the U.S. market, probably the square version of Studio 125 or 125i.

Viva 3000 (ISO 3000 black and white) - The same film as Type 87.

***

Chocolate (ISO 100) - The precursor to 100 Chocolate.

A guide to using peel-apart pack film can be found here in pdf format.
Looking at this list, I actually have quite a few types in the fridge that I haven't used before. Time to stop sitting on them and shoot! This list will be updated with examples and new film types, if any more exist.

Type 50s and the Mamiya Universal...heaven!

2010-04-14T16:53:00.011-07:00

Up until now, I have had zero experience with the larger format peel-apart film, generally known as Type 50. This differs from the Type 100s in that it is larger, of course, and each sheet is loaded individually as opposed to an entire pack at once. There are three basic backs that were made by Polaroid to take this film type: 545, 545i and 545 Pro. There may be others, but I'm still figuring all of this out. The 545 was the original back, the 545i was an updated version (basically the same, just prettier), and the Pro has a built in timer and thermometer, I believe. The caveat is that you only have a back...you need to provide the camera, typically a large format camera. Which I don't have. For that reason, and because the film tends to be much more expensive, I've been avoiding it. Until now.
First, let's get to know the different Type 50 films that were available. There is actually an interesting variety...most likely because this was regarded as professional film. This info is from The Land List.

Type 51 - BW, ASA 320, print + negative
Type 52 - BW, ASA 200
Type 53 (old) - BW, ASA 200, acetate negative
Type 53 (new) - BW, ASA 800
Type 54 - BW, ASA 100
Type 55 - BW, ASA 50, print + negative
Type 56 - Sepia, ASA 400
Type 57 - BW, ASA 3000
Type 58 - Color, ASA 75
Type 59 - Color, ASA 80
Type 64, Color, ASA 64 (tungsten)
Type 72 - Color, ASA 400
Type 79 - Color, ASA 100

Lots of choices! So...I wanted to be able to use some of this film. I've seen backs for the 600SE before, and figured I could make one for my Mamiya Universal! I stuck with the basic 545 back because it was only $10, as opposed to the 545i that usually sells for at least $50, and the Pro for even more. I didn't want to spend a lot of money on something that might not work. Here is the back I used.

As you see, there is no way to connect the mount to my camera. I think most large format cameras use clamps of sorts...but I'm not all that familiar with how that works. So...I needed to make a mount so I can attach this thing to my Universal. I needed a Polaroid mount, and I didn't want to spend a lot of money on something I was just going to destroy. I was offered this beauty for a low price. This is on old-style Polaroid back for the Universal.

I just had to get the mount off of that beast...

So...one of the issues here is that Type 100 is obviously smaller than Type 50. That open area is about the size of the image on Type 100.

You can see that the entire print fits in the 545 opening, with room to spare.

I didn't want to end up just exposing 100 sized images onto Type 50 film...not much point and the cost is much higher. I needed to make the exposed area larger and to do that I needed to cut out the extra stuff inside the mount. I just used a jigsaw and file.

This allows for a much larger exposure area. One other issue was that the 545 back is a bit thicker than a 100 back, so the film plane is about 3/8 of an inch or so further away. I remedied this by grinding down the back surface of the mount. I don't have many tools, so Skorj suggested using the sidewalk...and that's exactly what I did! Poured some water on the sidewalk, sat down, and ground away for about 30 minutes. I removed the metal to almost the inside metal flanges. I actually did this before the cutting...but here you can see the thickness of an original mount compared to my ground mount, as well as the side that I ground.

For those planning on doing this themselves for a Mamiya or 600SE, note that I removed the "teeth" before working on the mount to prevent accidental snapping or something equally annoying.

The mount is now the same size as the opening on the Mamiya Universal...so I have maximum exposure for this camera. There isn't any way to get more from it!

The next task is to attach the mount to the 545. I used Liquid Nails Adhesive. I also plugged up the old screw holes in case they might be a source of light leaks. But before I did that, I had to shave off the small lip on the 545 back so the mount would be flush with the back.

Overnight to dry. But that white is a bit ugly, and white isn't known to be particularly lightproof (verified with a flashlight). So I bought some matte black paint and gave it five or six coats. Pretty it up and keep out stray light particles.

Looks almost professional! Let's get this bad boy on the Mamiya...

Doesn't exactly make the camera any more portable! Weight isn't all that bad, though. Now for the best part...to test it! I've never used the film before, so I had to read the instructions. Each sheet of film is individually packed.

I stuck it in the camera, followed the instructions (push film in, slide covering out, take shot, slide covering back, push down roller lock, pull film, develop and peel!). Oooh the anticipation!

And a backwards peel for me, of course...and it works!!!

This was with the 50mm lens. For comparison, here is basically the same shot with the same lens on ID-UV (Type 100).

Big difference! And...I have almost full coverage on the Type 50! Just lost about 3/16" on each end. Not bad, as I think all of the similar works I've seen have a black border on all sides of the image. Kind of funny that you can see my shadow with the camera...will have to watch that when shooting!
This was my only test shot. I've verified that it works, and this isn't the kind of film I want to waste screwing around...need to plan each shot and all that. But I think this is one of my favorite projects so far, and certainly something I will use as often as I can.
Until next time! I'll see what else I can cook up...

Video update

2010-03-25T09:19:00.013-07:00

Just a couple interesting photography-related videos worth watching. The first comes from Mijonju, who runs Circle Rectangle, as well as the Mijonju Show. Worth watching is an appearance by the famous Skorj and his famous 600SE, talking about street shots. Sorry the entire screen doesn't show here...seems to be cut off on the right. You can watch on YouTube for the full effect.

It's all true...most common phrase I used in Japan (besides sumimasen)? "Shashin o totemo ii desu ka?" Most common response: "Watashi? Hayako!" At least from the ojisan.
A good scene of Skorj breaking down his 600SE (and wasting what might be a precious 665 shot?). And Artsyken gets instant notoriety as his name falls from Skorj's lips. Check out the other Mijonju vids, as well...all good stuff. \

Second we have a Filmwasters video podcast that includes my backwards-peeled polaroid video from an earlier post, plus some other interesting stuff by some other interesting people. I didn't realize how bored I sound until I rewatched this...but that's probably how I always sound. Too cool for school.

02: Drum 'n Bassman - March 2010 from filmwasters on Vimeo.

And we also have the Impossible Project press conference, announcing the new PX film.

At one point, Doc mentions that they are the only company in the world capable of producing new instant film or something along those lines, which isn't true. But I'll chalk it up to excitement and marketing. Interesting times ahead! You can now order PX100 First Flush for $21 a pack.

And, in the same vein, here is an incredibly long SX-70 promo video from the 1970s. The volume is very low, but worth a watch. Explains how the camera works...

And, just because, here is the new Caribou video. You might want to turn the volume back down after the SX-70 video. Or, better yet, don't!

And I've been on a Ned's Atomic Dustbin kick recently.

We'll see what's cooking for my next post. Plan on fixing a 545 back for my Mamiya Universal. I have some Type 50 film to use and don't have a large format camera...sounds like a good use for it! And, I will grab a couple packs of the new PX film and let you all know what I think of it.
Seeya.

Impossible? Not anymore!

2010-03-22T20:52:00.003-07:00

This post is for the three Polaroid lovers that haven't heard, but the Impossible Project had their press conference on March 22, 2010, and showed off the new Silver Shade PX100 film for SX-70 cameras.

Also to be sold is a 600 version of the monochrome integral film (same film, I assume, with a filter on the SX-70 packs?).

Eight shots for $21 is the initial U.S. price, available on March 25, 2010. Not cheap, and 10 shots would have been nice, but still...pretty sweet. A color version is planned for the summer, as well.
I wasn't part of the test team, so I don't have any experience with the film, but there is plenty of information at the Impossible Project Web site. But, quickly described by what I've read and seen: It's integral, like Time Zero and 600 film. When the print is ejected, it is blue until it develops. It is very sensitive to light and temperature until it develops (should be fun in the Arizona desert in the summer). The finished print has a soft black/brown cast, and it can be manipulated like Time Zero.

See the site for more examples of output. The first packs are labeled "First Flush". My guess is that they will work on the formulas and the film will change over time.
On a side note, Polaroid is trying to make some money from this venture by using Lady Gaga as a spokesperson and there are plans to release new (ugly) Polaroid cameras. Unfortunately, and not very forward thinking, these cameras are updates to the One600, the most basic of integral cameras...fixed focus with the flash always on.

I'm sure the plan is to make a quick buck from young, hip, "impulse buyers". But, it can't do anything but help sales of the new Impossible films. I would just buy an SX-70 on eBay or something instead of buying what is basically a point-and-shoot. Though I wouldn't be surprised if the SX-70 prices skyrocket for a bit. Just don't buy the "Model 3". All the others are generally equal...mostly just style differences and the addition of a tripod mount or strap to some.

You can read an earlier post of mine on the SX-70.

On a completely unrelated note, here is a new toy for me to play with...a 50mm lens for my Mamiya Universal! Should be crazy wide with Polaroid film...40mm or so?

Until next time. Oh, and thanks everyone. Really. Almost 250,000 individual page views on my blog. May not be big numbers for real Web sites, but for some dumbass that just rambles about cameras, it's pretty nice.

Avida zane...not sure what I'll write about next. Been slacking this year with other life things going on.

Mamiya Universal VS Polaroid 600SE

2010-02-16T19:29:00.050-07:00

I originally chose my Polaroid 600SE over the Mamiya Press cameras because it was "easier". The system has fewer options, and, thanks to Skorj, there is ample information on the Web about the 600SE. So...a year later I have a Mamiya Universal. Why? What are the differences? Is one really better than the other? Is it worth having both? There is some good info on the Mamiya Universal on the Web, but there isn't really a comparison of the two...an explanation of the specific differences. That part is up to me, I guess!
Overall, I will be focusing on the use of Polaroid film in both, though I make mention of film here and there. Also, I will be comparing the Polaroid 600SE and what is sometimes referred to as the Mamiya Press Black, because the original Mamiya Universal was silver and black. I have both and will show you the original in a bit, but let's start with the Black.
Side by side, they look pretty much alike...

Some superficial difference include the name, of course, and the skin, which is mottled on the Universal and smooth on the 600SE.

When we break down the camera, we begin to see the differences.
The button on the grip is green on the 600SE...not sure if this is the norm for all 600SEs. As I go along, I keep the 600SE on the left and Universal on the right.

The grip on the 600SE is attached to the body. It may be removable by taking out some screws, but it's not an "easy" job. The Universal grip, on the other hand, is removable. You just unscrew the mount. Also note the small button at the bottom right on the 600SE. This is the release for the lens mount...you press the button and twist the lens off. The universal doesn't have a lock. You can just twist the mount to remove the lens, which has a fixed position.
Take off the lenses and we see different lens mounts....big difference here and an indication that parts are not interchangeable between the two.

And this is true and one reason you have to choose between the two...the lenses cannot be swapped and there are different options for both. Looking at the viewfinder settings, we see two options for the 600SE, and three for the Universal.

The differences give you some clue that maybe there are different lenses available for both...more on that later.
Looking at the back of the camera, and we see the other main difference between the two...the mounting mechanism for the film backs.

To make up for the front, the Universal has release buttons for the back mount and the 600SE does not. Notice the Universal back prongs feature a single, unbroken bar, while the 600SE has a split in the prong. The size is different as well, so they are not interchangeable at all. One doesn't even fit on the other camera body, let alone let you slide the mount clasp over the prongs. This can be a huge variable when deciding which camera to buy...depending on what you plan to do with it. If you want to shoot primarily Polaroid, the 600SE is an okay choice. If you want to get a film back for the 600SE, prepare to shell out quite a bit of money -- upwards of $300 for just the mount. The Universal film backs are readily available for around $50, and a Polaroid back can be bought for around the same. So if you are primarily shooting film, the Universal is the better choice.
Here are some of the film backs available. The gray back is actually from a Mamiya 23, but they are interchangeable.

Those are the differences between the two. One of the advantages to using either system is the use of interchangeable backs.

Both the Polaroid and film backs come with dark slides, allowing you to swap backs mid-roll or pack. So You can even shoot film and instant in the same outing with one camera.
And, on a side note, here is the original Universal body...

The choice between the two Universal bodies is purely aesthetic. They are the same in every way except for the color. One possible advantage the silver has over black is that there isn't any paint to chip off on the silver, so if it is in nice shape, and you use it a lot, chances are it will look less dinged up after frequent use. But it's just a personal choice. I think the silver looks a bit more vintage, while the black looks a bit classier. From what I've seen, the black usually costs more.
So which do you want...the 600SE or the Universal? Both are obviously made by Mamiya. Why does the 600SE even exist? The way I understand it, Polaroid commissioned Mamiya to make a proprietary system for whatever reason, I don't really know. Probably to make money! Anyway, Let's start with the 600SE, because there is less to talk about.
Probably one of the main reasons to choose the 600SE over the Universal is that it was made to use Polaroid film. Everything is designed to work with instant film. But, because of this, there is a much smaller selection of lenses. Three, to be exact. Each is linked to an example on Flickr.

127mm 4.7 -- This is the standard lens.
75mm 5.6 -- A wide angle that uses an external viewfinder.
150mm 5.6 -- A portrait lens.

If you look above at the viewfinder switch, you see settings for 127 and 150. So the 75mm uses the attachment...

It, of course, features a wider view, as well as parallax correction via a dial. The only issue I've ever had with it is the difficulty in keeping horizons straight.
But that is it for lenses...though they are all designed to be used with Polaroid film, and provide complete coverage for Type 100 films. Something that can't be said for all Universal lenses...but more on that soon.
I only have the 75mm lens for my system. It came with a broken 127mm lens, and I haven't really had any desire to get another since the 190/195 cameras sport the 114mm 3.8 lens. The portrait lens is probably nice, but not my thing either.
There are other accessories for the 600SE...but Skorj covers that quite well in his article and I don't want to steal his thunder (and why repeat what has already been said by a 600SE expert). But...suffice to say the Polaroid 600SE is designed specifically for use with instant film, and so everything works as it should for instant film...lens coverage, viewfinder, etc. On a short aside, when I say instant film, I mean Type 100 peel-apart for the most part, though you can modify to fit Type 50s, and I once saw an SX-70 back on eBay for use with the system...though it may have been meant to be used with the Universal given the age of Time Zero. I don't remember.
Anyway, on to the Universal. The most obvious advantage the Universal has over the 600SE is the lens selection. This comes with a caveat, though...most of these lenses were designed for 120 film. The area of Polaroid film is larger than the largest 120 back available (6x9). This means that some of these lenses have falloff beyond the normal area for 120. That's vignette to you and me. Now I, personally, don't take this as a negative. But, depending in the lens, it's kind of like having an expensive, super-sharp toy camera! Here is an illustration of the different exposure sizes with the 100mm lens for the Mamiya Universal.

Also, when looking through the viewfinder...it isn't accurate for Polaroid film. Looking above, we saw that the Universal has a switch for 100, 150 and 250. The framing visible in the viewfinder is smaller than what you see on the Polaroid print. So it does take some adjustment on the user's part. I've found that for the 100mm lens I have, the actual edge of the viewfinder is pretty close to accurate.
There is an option for some of the available lenses...an external finder. This is the same thing as the 75mm finder for the 600SE, except this one is for the Universal and covers three lenses - 75mm, 100mm and 127mm. With this finder you get relatively accurate frame edges, as well as parallax compensation via a distance dial.

I think what this also means that each lens is actually wider than what it is labeled as. So the 100mm is probably closer to 80mm. That's just my guess, but you get a much wider angle of view with these lenses using Polaroid. There is one lens made for the Universal that was meant to be used with Polaroid film...and some of the lenses work as is without vignette. So here is the list of available lenses for the Universal that I know of. Some of these lenses were designed for the Super 23 (which has rear bellows) but can all be used with the Universal. Conversely, some of these lenses can only be used by the Universal and not the Super 23. If I could find examples with Polaroid film, I provided links.

50mm 6.3 Mamiya-Sekor (with viewfinder)
65mm 6.3 Mamiya-Sekor (with viewfinder)
75mm 5.6 Mamiya-Sekor (with viewfinder)
90mm 3.5 Mamiya-Sekor
90mm 3.5 Mamiya-Sekor (collapsible)
100mm 3.5 Mamiya-Sekor
100mm 3.5 Mamiya-Sekor E
100mm 2.8 Mamiya-Sekor
127mm 4.7 Mamiya-Sekor
127mm 4.7 Mamiya-Sekor P (Designed for use with Polaroid film)
150mm 5.6 Mamiya-Sekor
250mm 8.0 Mamiya-Sekor (not rangfinder coupled)
250mm 5.0 Mamiya-Sekor

That's all that I know of. A couple of these lenses have different versions that probably don't really make a difference to you and me. You wouldn't be able to tell except by using the serial number. Prices vary, but typically the wider the lens, the more expensive. I'm not going to explain how to use the Universal or all of the other acessories and features. That is very handily provided by Mamiya here. And here is the system map provided by Mamiya, which actually features fewer lenses that what is available.

So, back to the question...which is better? I still can't really answer that. They are similar, yet very different tools. There is a decent set of accessories available for the 600SE...but be prepared to pay a price. Some of these items, such as macro spacers, aren't cheap for the Universal, and cost even more for the 600SE. Generally, the 600SE will sell for about the same as a Universal "Black", while the silver universal body will be much cheaper. You do have more lens options with the Universal, but you have to deal with a system that isn't designed to be used with Polaroid film. Fewer options with the 600SE, but you know what you are getting and that it will work "as advertised" with Polaroid film.
If you want the ability to use 120 roll film, you can so so with either, but the cost will be much higher for the 600SE. I do see people selling adapters for the Universal for the price of an entire camera with lens, adapter and back. But the adapter for the 600SE is a separate item, and it usually sells for no less than $300. And you can only use the three available lenses with your 120.
One isn't really better than the other. Which you want is really up to you.
I hope this is useful! Sorry, lots of text and not many pictures at the end. A couple group shots to end this...

I will have a follow-up to this article. I want to shoot a couple rolls of film and more Polaroid, and grab a few more lenses for comparison...then I will go into some more specific details about output and use of the Mamiya Universal! As mentioned previously, check out Skorj's 600SE article for more info on that camera!
One last shot...Mamiya Universal 100mm 2.8 and ND5 filter. I can't end this without one of my own!

Like I said...expensive, super-sharp toy camera!
Seeya next time.

The Backwards Peeled Polaroid

2009-12-22T15:24:00.016-07:00

Many people want to know how to leave the paper "frame" on a Polaroid when peeling it. Very simple, so I've made a short video explaining the process. This was using Type 669, expired 12-2003.

The final print...

You can also peel straight from the "open" end, but it tends to stick more towards the pull end and rips off the frame. So I start with this difficult end. All peel-apart Polaroid and Fuji film can be peeled as such.

Type 689

Type 690

Chocolate

Fuji FP-100C Silk

ID-UV

Type 88

Type 107

Though some don't have particularly interesting frames, as with the Fuji FP-3000B.

And sometimes they tear, or can be torn if you want to do it on purpose, to leave just parts of the frame.

And sometimes the goop burns spots onto the print if you aren't being careful...but this doesn't bother me me much.

You can also scan the entire paper area if it turns you on, but I never do.

I peel pretty much every Polaroid like this. They can be removed at any time, even after drying...so if I don't like it, I take it off. Some prints are so dry that the frame just falls off while peeling. Some are so goopy that they practically disintegrate.
Some people like the frames, some don't...but it is another presentation option, and one that doesn't take much extra work.
Have fun!