Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
Thread started 27 Apr 2013 (Saturday) 08:25
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Polaroid SOOC?

 
Bear ­ Dale
"I get 'em pregnant"
Avatar
4,868 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 744
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Australia
     
Apr 27, 2013 08:25 |  #1

Polaroids .... Would they be considered SOOC with no manipulation?


Cheers,
Bear Dale

Some of my photos featured on Flickr Bear Dale (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Foodguy
Goldmember
Avatar
1,324 posts
Likes: 217
Joined Mar 2012
Location: Having too much fun in the studio
     
Apr 27, 2013 08:42 |  #2

*If* they're straight out of the camera, with no manipulation.

There were a few post exposure Polaroid manipulating techniques.


My answer for most photography questions: "it depends...'

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Luxornv
Member
223 posts
Joined Nov 2012
     
Apr 27, 2013 12:19 |  #3

If you mean the instants, I was reading something that you could move the chemicals around a little bit while it's still developing and get different effects depending on how you do it and how much effort you put into it. I saw one example that made the photo look like an impressionist painting. I think this only with the Polaroid film and it won't work with the Impossible film since it's different chemistry.


Canon Rebel T3i - 18-55mm Kit lens- Canon 75-300mm f/4-5.6 - Rokinon 8mm Fish Eye - Canon 40mm f/2.8 Pancake - Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tzalman
Fatal attraction.
Avatar
13,491 posts
Likes: 205
Joined Apr 2005
Location: Gesher Haziv, Israel
     
Apr 27, 2013 17:04 |  #4

The Polaroids gained such a small market segment that in an effort to widen its appeal they developed a version that provided a negative as well as the instant positive. So apparently even some Polaroid users weren't satisfied with SOOC.


Elie / אלי

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Foodguy
Goldmember
Avatar
1,324 posts
Likes: 217
Joined Mar 2012
Location: Having too much fun in the studio
     
Apr 27, 2013 17:45 as a reply to  @ tzalman's post |  #5

^ Talking about Type 55 Positive/Negative? I can't speak to the reasons for it's development (no pun intended) but it was a staple in the commercial world for an instant 4X5 black and white negative that yielded beautiful prints.

Additionally, for the majority of my career in advertising, Polaroid had virtually 100% market share in the instant photography market and was continually developing new materials.


My answer for most photography questions: "it depends...'

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bear ­ Dale
THREAD ­ STARTER
"I get 'em pregnant"
Avatar
4,868 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 744
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Australia
     
Apr 27, 2013 17:50 |  #6

tzalman wrote in post #15873542 (external link)
The Polaroids gained such a small market segment

I remember every man and his dog had one.

I think on the whole that we agree that the images were about as SOOC as you could get though ?


Cheers,
Bear Dale

Some of my photos featured on Flickr Bear Dale (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
elrey2375
Thinks it's irresponsible
Avatar
4,992 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 276
Joined Nov 2011
     
Apr 27, 2013 20:06 |  #7

fotoworx wrote in post #15873634 (external link)
I remember every man and his dog had one.

I think on the whole that we agree that the images were about as SOOC as you could get though ?

Yeah, they're market share wasn't small. But would they be considered SOOC? No, there's no such thing. You can't view a RAW.


http://emjfotografi.co​m/ (external link)
http://500px.com/EMJFo​tografi (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bear ­ Dale
THREAD ­ STARTER
"I get 'em pregnant"
Avatar
4,868 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 744
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Australia
     
Apr 27, 2013 20:11 |  #8

elrey2375 wrote in post #15874028 (external link)
But would they be considered SOOC? No, there's no such thing. You can't view a RAW.

But photographically speaking....you don't think that they would be as close to possible as SOOC as there is?


Cheers,
Bear Dale

Some of my photos featured on Flickr Bear Dale (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Foodguy
Goldmember
Avatar
1,324 posts
Likes: 217
Joined Mar 2012
Location: Having too much fun in the studio
     
Apr 27, 2013 20:57 |  #9

fotoworx wrote in post #15874041 (external link)
But photographically speaking....you don't think that they would be as close to possible as SOOC as there is?

I used to do a lot of work for Polaroid; advertising, brochures, etc. We went to great lengths to create exposures with the cameras that *looked* like they came straight out of the camera, but the behind the scenes 'pre-exposure' involved a few tricks.

Other than what we did before the exposure though, the images were what the camera produced.


My answer for most photography questions: "it depends...'

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scatterbrained
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,506 posts
Gallery: 263 photos
Best ofs: 12
Likes: 4530
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Yomitan, Okinawa, Japan
     
Apr 27, 2013 21:19 |  #10

fotoworx wrote in post #15874041 (external link)
But photographically speaking....you don't think that they would be as close to possible as SOOC as there is?

I would think so. honestly, I think some people go a bit too far with these SOOC vs processed semantics.


VanillaImaging.com (external link)"Vacuous images for the Vapid consumer"
500px (external link)
flickr (external link)
1x (external link)
instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bear ­ Dale
THREAD ­ STARTER
"I get 'em pregnant"
Avatar
4,868 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 744
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Australia
     
Apr 27, 2013 22:53 |  #11

Scatterbrained wrote in post #15874178 (external link)
I would think so. honestly, I think some people go a bit too far with these SOOC vs processed semantics.

I agree, I don't have a problem with any amount of post processing.

I just posted this because a friend and I were discussing Polaroids (we were both born in '62 and Polaroids were big in our life) and this ongoing debate re; purists and PP'ers.


Cheers,
Bear Dale

Some of my photos featured on Flickr Bear Dale (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LowriderS10
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,170 posts
Likes: 10
Joined Mar 2008
Location: South Korea / Canada
     
Apr 27, 2013 23:08 |  #12

'62? Cool! Did you take pictures of dinosaurs with your Polaroids?? What a magical time to be alive!!!


:D :D :D


-=Prints For Sale at PIXELS=- (external link)
-=Facebook=- (external link)
-=Flickr=- (external link)

-=Gear=-

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bear ­ Dale
THREAD ­ STARTER
"I get 'em pregnant"
Avatar
4,868 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 744
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Australia
     
Apr 27, 2013 23:16 |  #13

LowriderS10 wrote in post #15874391 (external link)
'62? Cool! Did you take pictures of dinosaurs with your Polaroids?? What a magical time to be alive!!!

:D :D :D

Nah Mum and Dad didn't trust me enough ;)


Cheers,
Bear Dale

Some of my photos featured on Flickr Bear Dale (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LowriderS10
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,170 posts
Likes: 10
Joined Mar 2008
Location: South Korea / Canada
     
Apr 28, 2013 07:45 |  #14

Haha well played. :)


-=Prints For Sale at PIXELS=- (external link)
-=Facebook=- (external link)
-=Flickr=- (external link)

-=Gear=-

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JeffreyG
"my bits and pieces are all hard"
Avatar
15,540 posts
Gallery: 42 photos
Likes: 614
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Detroit, MI
     
Apr 28, 2013 08:02 |  #15

Well, some people took the shots SOOC, but other people would shake the picture while it developed. That changed everything. ;)

My buddy had one of these in the late 70's, and we knew a few other families with them as well. My recollection of the instant cameras was that every shot was low contrast, and the camera gave all the control you would expect from a cheap medium format camera with a slow lens and 100% automation.

I mention all of that to wonder just why we care if the polaroid was 'SOOC'. The medium and cameras themselves dictated a lot of what the final result was going to look like, and the inability to manipulate the shot was probably the least important thing about it.


My personal stuff:http://www.flickr.com/​photos/jngirbach/sets/ (external link)
I use a Canon 5DIII and a Sony A7rIII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

1,609 views & 0 likes for this thread
Polaroid SOOC?
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Big_coelho
940 guests, 266 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.