Giving Modern Polaroid Film a Shot

Polaroid manufactured its last pack of film in 2008, an analog casualty of the digital revolution. Smartphones weren't nearly as advanced as they are today, and nobody knew what an Instagram was in 2008, but inexpensive compact digital cameras and D-SLRs just didn't leave enough room in the marketplace for Polaroid to continue selling expensive instant film.

It didn't take long for a group to form in an attempt to revive Polaroid instant film. Dubbed The Impossible Project, after a quote by Polaroid founder Edwin Land, it took over the lease on the last manufacturing plant making Polaroid film just a few months later and started work on bringing the classic instant film back to market.

Impossible had to reverse-engineer Polaroid recipes from the ground up, and didn't bring its first film to market until 2010. Early efforts didn't prove to be as refined as the original Polaroid film—development times were long, and the film had to be shielded from light during that process. In the four full years that have passed since, the company has released Generation 2.0 of its film. It improves development time, but still has some issues. The company outlined many of the challenges of improving the film at Photokina, and plans to bring Generation 3.0 to market later this year.

I picked up an old Autofocus 660 camera on eBay at a decent price—a little under $50, shipping included. Impossible supplied a few packs of film—including Poison Paradise, a color stock with floral print borders, black-and-white in a circular frame, and a cyanotype monochrome. Stated development time varies—the color stock requires 30 minutes to fully realize, the cyanotype about 40 minutes, and black-and-white about 10 minutes. But in reality I found that even longer times were necessary for the image to look its best—closer to an hour.

Let's make it clear—the Autofocus 660 camera isn't the best one that Polaroid ever made. Its lens is plastic, and while it does have an autofocus system, it's not the equal of other models that used multi-element glass lenses. If you're more serious about shooting instant film than I am, it's worth it to pay for a better camera—with each frame approaching $3 in terms of cost, it doesn't make sense to skimp on the camera.

My first outing with the 660 was a Halloween party, attended mostly by folks in their mid-30s. I used the camera much like it would have been in its heyday, capturing family snapshots at the informal gathering. The adults at the party were shocked that instant film was still available; their young kids wanted to see the pictures as they ejected from the camera. And therein lies an issue with Impossible's current film. The party trick aspect is gone; you can't watch it develop in front of your eyes. And no, despite what Outkast says, shaking won't speed things up—don't shake your Polaroids.

Once developing is finished, you do have a genuine, physical photograph that you can hand off to your friends. It's a lot more tangible than posting an image on Facebook. Even if photos are destined for the fridge, that's a memento most digital cameras can't produce. It's not the only way to do it. The Polaroid Socialmatic digital camera has an integrated printer, and the Fujifilm Instax Share ($244.00 at Amazon) printer produce small photos on Instax instant film; it can print directly from a smartphone or a Fujifilm camera with Wi-Fi. I've yet to see the output from the Socialmatic in person, but the Instax film is very small compared with the classic Polaroid stock Impossible produces. Fujifiilm makes an Instax Wide format that is a bit bigger, but you'll need to buy an Instax Wide camera to use it, as there's no printer option for the wide format film.

The output from the color film isn't as true to life as you get with Fuji Instax. The finished photo looks a bit like a filtered Instagram image. For my color film pack I was quickly turning the images over after they ejected from the camera, which was fine for shooting in relatively dim indoor conditions. But if you're shooting outdoors, you absolutely need to get a Frog Tongue. This oddly named accessory replaces the plastic roller that sits at the mouth of a Polaroid camera. It completely covers the picture as it ejects, so you can shield it from light and tuck it away in darkness so it can develop.

I thought that the black-and-white stock was a bit stronger in quality. It develops fairly quickly, and there are no color fidelity issues to worry about. The images I captured had a bit of a classic, low-contrast look. The cyan monochrome film was my least favorite of what I shot. The colorcast doesn't really mesh with my eye. A shot of a friend's pug made the poor pup look a bit like an alien creature. Impossible also has a magenta monochrome film available if you prefer to cast the world in a reddish hue.

Having gone through a few packs of film, I walk away with the opinion that shooting with old Polaroid cameras isn't something you'll want to do on a whim. At current prices—about $23.50 for an 8-shot pack of film—it's just too expensive to recommend for casual use. The Generation 2.0 product is a step up from Impossible's first efforts, but you'll still need to keep images shielded from light as they develop.

But if you're really in love with instant film—and its chemical-based analog charm is a refreshing change of pace from the digital landscape—shooting with Polaroid hardware and Impossible Project film has a certain appeal. The output is a lot bigger than the Instax and Instax Wide formats, and I truly do love the way the black-and-white film draws images. The color stock doesn't offer the same fidelity or clarity as Instax, but it naturally shows some of the faded effects that Instagram attempts to digitally fake using filters, which can be appealing. The Generation 3.0 film product promises to capture a more faithful image in color; we'll see if that's the case when it hits the shelves.