>Is this even the right place for this
>There isn't much info on sticky/wiki
>Why are there like 2 manufacturers
>Why is instant photography so complicated
>Recommendations/tips for getting into it
Instant film is pure shit. The reason why it is so expensive is due there only being 2 producers of the film. Shits not worth it senpai
My tip for getting into is to manage your expectations. And ask yourself why you are interested.
Many shots will be garbage. The film is expensive and the cameras aren't very good. But it has a certain appeal I can't put my finger on.
I think the instant, physical nature of the format makes the images seem more real to people who are used to digital photos.
What is complicated about it though, what are you struggling with?
>>2776771
>Instant film is pure shit.
Well, at least it's better than m43.
Yeah, I figured that it won't be the best possible thing and I'm prepared for that.
The appeal for me is compound, it's physical, it's instant (no hassle of going to a shop), they are sticker-sized and appear to be like an over-sized post stamp or something like that, but it's still a photo you've taken. The defects are what give it's quirks, I guess. Again, you are not going for fidelity but memorability.
Anyone can whip out a smartphone with a mediocre camera and take a selfie/group photo, an instant would make this more of a moment for the event. I was at a random party (I go to random places at a short notice a lot) and in retrospect, I would've loved having that type of camera with me.
>What is complicated about it though, what are you struggling with?
Sorry, I meant that it's very obfuscated and not a lot of people talk about it, and as it's mentioned not a lot of companies produce cameras/film, so prices are insane.
After some more research I've started looking at pic related, looks decent quality for a reasonable price and it also saves on digital.
>>2776797
Have you considered getting a good camera compatible with one of the printers? Obviously an x70 or x100 would be a waste if all you did was print on an Instax, but the side benefit would be that you also have a legitimate camera assuming you dont already have one.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS 6D Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.3 (Windows) Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.4 Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2015:06:13 18:14:20 Exposure Time 1/100 sec F-Number f/2.8 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 800 Lens Aperture f/2.8 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Center Weighted Average Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 35.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard
Camera
Express Darkroom
Shinko Printer
Wa La
>>2776830
>instant
Go back to the gearthread
>>2776835
<30 sec for an 8x10 is pretty instant
>>2776836
I imagine most people want an instant camera so they can take pictures of people and then hand them a print. Have fun lugging around your gear dumbfuck.
>buy an instax mini 90
>cheap film from china
>go nuts
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi
>>2776852
You've posted this before.
Are you actually proud of it?
>>2776869
yep
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi
Why hasn't anyone made a camera that both snaps a physical photo and a digital one?
That would be pretty neat I believe
>>2776875
That's fine. I don't want you to feel bad about yourself.
Can you help me understand the why of it, though?
>>2776880
you have zero impact on how I feel about myself
and I just like the shot. not for any particular reason I can explain to you.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.1.1 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2016:02:25 16:59:26
>>2776878
just duct tape an instax to a x100 or something
I have an instant mini 90 and love it. I don't treat it like a normal camera because it's just not on the same level and you shouldn't expect it to be.
I think of the snaps of people and places as my own personal collector cards. I keep them in a little wooden box and leave it on the coffee table for people to rifle through.
I like to write little messages on the photos and give them to friends. Sometimes just the time and place, or names, sometimes a little quote to remember that day. It makes people happy to receive a one of a kind photo.
As you can tell, the reasons I like instant film have little to do with the quality of the image or the technical proficiency. It's like when /v/ tells you that "fun" is a buzzword. /p/ would probably say the same about instant film.
I can't say much about old polaroid cameras because I don't have one. But I know the film being made by impossible project is very expensive and you should only consider it you have money to burn or are really interested and proficient with those cameras.
Stick to the instax brand, which is slightly cheaper but still a rort and you can find the film in lots of places. My advice is to avoid the mini film, the pictures are just too damn small. Go for the wide format.
>>2776852
just got a instax mini 8, didn't realize you could get film so cheap from ebay
>>2776852
Where do you get this stuff and whats it called. fuck its so shit its good
>>2777076
cheapest I have found is on aliexpress. rougly 50p a shot.
>>2777108
I remove the borders
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.1.1 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2016:02:25 23:06:58
Rather than be that guy at parties, I usually just bring an instax and let people go crazy with it.
They're fun.
>>2776709
it's a very social film and I think it's great for memories or something friends keep on dressers
My gf owns an instax, and she was also a hipster back in like 2007 and collected old instant cameras, because of that she owns over 20 sx-70s and a variety of other instant cameras.
She shoots instax because it's more affordable
The sharpness is bad but that's okay because if you wanted sharp photos, you wouldn't use instant cameras.
It's expensive film, that sucks
if you're looking to save money you could look for those instant Polaroid or Fuji printers that print photos from a digital camera into the same aspect ratio and size of instant film, that way you can impress your friends without them knowing it was printed
I have a great sx70 shot of my gf and I at an andy Warhol exhibition, I keep it on my desk
I would just use a modern Fuji or Polaroid unless you're interested in instant film manipulation, but you can do double exposures on instax cameras too!
>>2777877
in fact I think I'll get myself one of those cheap digital Polaroid things to show my gf up with my cooler and more economically sensible camera
>>2776878
Why hasn't anybody made a phone that can capture film photos
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 585 Image Height 513 Scene Capture Type Standard
>>2776852
Yep. After some more research and consideration I think the mini 90 is the best option (quality & control + cheap). I had my heart set on the Polaroid Snap but it's not really an instant film camera, just instant print and really lacks the effect they have. I maybe missing out on digital copies and other related stuff, but I guess I should stop being an attention whore and this is a good thing.
>>2776875
>>2776882
>>2777076
>>2777133
Thank you for your contribution to this thread.
>>2778383
Think hard about whether you can live with the small film size. If you want to do more than just portraits, you may want to go with the wide format. There's a Fuji Instax 300 or a Lomo Instant Wide. The Lomo has more options, exposure control, multiple exposures, changeable lenses.
This is coming from someone who has the Mini 90. I love the camera, but feel limited by the small film size.
how are instax colors so based? like holy shit
I have a mini 50S. I bought it for a trip to the virgin islands with my wife. I didn't want to lug my a7 around with me and vacation photos are snapshits anyway. It wound up being perfect. It's fun to have the photos in your hand right away and the camera costs less than $100 so if it gets stolen or you drop it in the ocean who gives a fuck.
>>2778397
Small film? It's actually (slightly) bigger than 6x4.5 medium format film. Almost twice the size of full frame.
>>2778520
These are prints, not negatives...
>>2778711
What was the point of your post?
>>2778738
Did I give you permission to reply to me?
>>2778532
you can salvage negs from fp100c
>>2778778
They're more expensive though and not compatible with instax cameras, which was what anon was looking to buy.
>>2778778
You can't load it in an instax mini though so that's irrelevant
