It gives you two 35 mm imagesJoe
-- Original message --
From: Joseph McAllister
> Is yours the 90 degree version that gives about a 2 x 3 image, or the
> straight back version that is a strictly 35mm image?
>
> On Dec 27, 2008, at 09:19 , 27...@comcast.net
Is yours the 90 degree version that gives about a 2 x 3 image, or the
straight back version that is a strictly 35mm image?
On Dec 27, 2008, at 09:19 , 27...@comcast.net wrote:
Guess, I will not be able to get any more film for my Polaroid back
for my LX.. I will take a photo of it, so the li
ing clear. There was a Polaroid 35mm film that output
> >> similar images to cyanotpye. White image on a blue background. It was
> >> used to produce slides of writing for use in AV presentations. It was
> >> terrifyingly expensive and, before the days of TTL flash,
ar images to cyanotpye. White image on a blue background. It was
>> used to produce slides of writing for use in AV presentations. It was
>> terrifyingly expensive and, before the days of TTL flash, you had to
>> sacrifice a film in testing to obtin correct exposure.
>>
>>
was
> used to produce slides of writing for use in AV presentations. It was
> terrifyingly expensive and, before the days of TTL flash, you had to
> sacrifice a film in testing to obtin correct exposure.
>
> >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [
Perhaps they haven't gotten the news yet...
-Original Message-
>From: Steve Desjardins
>Sent: Dec 26, 2008 8:14 PM
>To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>Subject: RE: Another Casualty.
>
>Adorama has a really good price on a Polaroid camera.
>
>http://www.adorama.
world.com
> > Sent: Wednesday, 24 December 2008 9:20 PM
> > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> > Subject: Re: Another Casualty.
> >
> >
> > John Sessoms wrote:
> > > From: John Francis
> > > > I believe there was also Polaroid-branded 35mm rol
> > From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
> > m.9.wil...@ntlworld.com
> > Sent: Wednesday, 24 December 2008 9:20 PM
> > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> > Subject: Re: Another Casualty.
> >
> >
> > John Sessoms w
20 PM
> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> Subject: Re: Another Casualty.
>
>
> John Sessoms wrote:
> > From: John Francis
> > > I believe there was also Polaroid-branded 35mm roll film.
> >
> > They developed and marketed a 35mm instant film that didn'
They'll just have to digital, just like everbody else...
-Original Message-
>From: John Sessoms
>Sent: Dec 23, 2008 7:04 PM
>To: pdml@pdml.net
>Subject: Re: Another Casualty.
>
>From: "frank theriault"
>> On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 8:44 PM, Scott Lo
John Sessoms wrote:
> From: John Francis
> > I believe there was also Polaroid-branded 35mm roll film.
>
> They developed and marketed a 35mm instant film that didn't do very well
> in the market. IIRC, it was transparency film available in both color
> and B&W versions.
>
> Later they
Bob W wrote:
>
> > > I doubt they'll be missed much. Into the trash bin of
> > history they go!
> >
> > I know several artist types who are gutted that the film is no longer
> > being made.
> >
> > Once their stocks run out, there goes that particular form of
> > "expression".
> >
>
On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 07:42:51PM -0500, Scott Loveless wrote:
> On 12/23/08, John Sessoms wrote:
> > They developed and marketed a 35mm instant film that didn't do very well in
> > the market. IIRC, it was transparency film available in both color and B&W
> > versions.
>
> I think you needed o
David Savage wrote:
2008/12/24 frank theriault :
I doubt they'll be missed much. Into the trash bin of history they go!
I know several artist types who are gutted that the film is no longer
being made.
Once their stocks run out, there goes that particular form of "expression".
Cheer
-Original Message-
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
Scott Loveless
Sent: Wednesday, 24 December 2008 10:43 AM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Another Casualty.
On 12/23/08, John Sessoms wrote:
> They developed and marketed a 3
On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 7:42 PM, Scott Loveless wrote:
> On 12/23/08, John Sessoms wrote:
>> They developed and marketed a 35mm instant film that didn't do very well in
>> the market. IIRC, it was transparency film available in both color and B&W
>> versions.
>
> I think you needed one of their
On 12/23/08, John Sessoms wrote:
> They developed and marketed a 35mm instant film that didn't do very well in
> the market. IIRC, it was transparency film available in both color and B&W
> versions.
I think you needed one of their processing machines, a little hand
cranked device, to process yo
From: John Francis
I believe there was also Polaroid-branded 35mm roll film.
They developed and marketed a 35mm instant film that didn't do very well
in the market. IIRC, it was transparency film available in both color
and B&W versions.
Later they offered Polaroid brand C-41 process 35mm f
From: "frank theriault"
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 8:44 PM, Scott Loveless wrote:
> On 12/22/08, Bruce Dayton wrote:
>> I never felt like that brand name was all that special. My
>> experience over the years was that they did well with instant films,
>> but the image quality was always medioc
On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 4:04 PM, Ken Waller wrote:
. It turned out to be a great way it illustrate
> issues to plant management -
See Bruce's latest PESO.
Dave
>
> Kenneth Waller
> http://www.tinyurl.com/272u2f
>
> - Original Message - From: "David J Bro
: "David J Brooks"
Subject: Re: Another Casualty.
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 8:15 PM, Bruce Dayton
wrote:
I never felt like that brand name was all that special. My
experience over the years was that they did well with instant films,
but the image quality was always mediocre at best. It
- Original Message -
From: "Bob W"
Subject: RE: Another Casualty.
I've been a bit upset since the demise of wet collodion.
Photography has just never been the same since they banned mercury chromate.
William Robb
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
Bob W wrote:
I doubt they'll be missed much. Into the trash bin of
history they go!
I know several artist types who are gutted that the film is no longer
being made.
Once their stocks run out, there goes that particular form of
"expression".
Cheers,
Dave
I've been a bit upse
> > I doubt they'll be missed much. Into the trash bin of
> history they go!
>
> I know several artist types who are gutted that the film is no longer
> being made.
>
> Once their stocks run out, there goes that particular form of
> "expression".
>
> Cheers,
>
> Dave
I've been a bit upset
Some of my first forays into digital imaging were with Polaroid.
We had a number of film output devices when I was at Apollo.
Some of them (like the Matrox film recorder) used interchangeable
camera modules. Apart from the standard 35mm camera back there
was also an Oxberry animation camera (16mm
On 12/23/08, David Savage wrote:
> I know several artist types...
It's best not to spend too much time with those people.
--
Scott Loveless
New Cumberland, Pennsylvania, USA
http://www.twosixteen.com/fivetoedsloth/
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo
2008/12/24 frank theriault :
> I doubt they'll be missed much. Into the trash bin of history they go!
I know several artist types who are gutted that the film is no longer
being made.
Once their stocks run out, there goes that particular form of "expression".
Cheers,
Dave
--
PDML Pentax-Discu
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 8:44 PM, Scott Loveless wrote:
> On 12/22/08, Bruce Dayton wrote:
>> I never felt like that brand name was all that special. My
>> experience over the years was that they did well with instant films,
>> but the image quality was always mediocre at best. It had a use, b
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 8:15 PM, Bruce Dayton wrote:
> I never felt like that brand name was all that special. My
> experience over the years was that they did well with instant films,
> but the image quality was always mediocre at best. It had a use, but
> a quality brand name it was not.
I ha
cuss Mail List
>Subject: Re: Another Casualty.
>
>Not exactly news I'm afraid, they basicly stopped doing business about
>6-8 months ago and announced the end of all of their real product
>lines. I guess the transition from manufacturer to mere brand failed
>(as expected)
>
&
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 8:44 PM, Scott Loveless wrote:
> On 12/22/08, Bruce Dayton wrote:
>> I never felt like that brand name was all that special. My
>> experience over the years was that they did well with instant films,
>> but the image quality was always mediocre at best. It had a use, b
On 12/22/08, Bruce Dayton wrote:
> I never felt like that brand name was all that special. My
> experience over the years was that they did well with instant films,
> but the image quality was always mediocre at best. It had a use, but
> a quality brand name it was not.
I like Karen Nakamura
I never felt like that brand name was all that special. My
experience over the years was that they did well with instant films,
but the image quality was always mediocre at best. It had a use, but
a quality brand name it was not.
--
Best regards,
Bruce
Monday, December 22, 2008, 4:18:35 PM, y
From: "William Robb"
This time it's Polaroid.
http://www.imaginginfo.com/web/online/News/Polaroid-in-Bankruptcy/3$4589
William Robb
Seems like there's more to it than just the demise of film though.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.ne
Not exactly news I'm afraid, they basicly stopped doing business about
6-8 months ago and announced the end of all of their real product
lines. I guess the transition from manufacturer to mere brand failed
(as expected)
-Adam
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 4:29 PM, William Robb wrote:
> This time it's
35 matches
Mail list logo
