I like the shapes in the first and the colors are interesting, but I can't recall having a polaroid that vignetted as badly or had such crisp and clean images borders.
Given I don't really recall the exact look of Polaroids, other than what they look like today, I like the images - especially the first of your second post.
The thumb prints are touchstones: I remember being warned more than several times "Don't touch!" when my grandfather pulled the top paper from a BW, film pack version that preceded the color models that ejected the print from the bottom. Pull the tab (dragged packet through rollers that applied developer and stop bath, wait for a minute(?), and then remove the perforated backing to reveal sheer magic.
Ah, it's coming back - the fixer was in a squeegee in a black plastic cylindrical case - now carefully, very carefully, evenly apply the fixer to the print and allow to dry. Uneven application resulted in areas streaked with faded image. Then - always holding only by the edges- pass among the assembled subjects for moments of admiration and awe.
I like 2 and 3 for composition and interest and although I am old, I missed the polaroid era because I lived beyond the roads in the north when I was young, so can't provide feedback on polaroid look. However, I like the softer edges and finger prints and feel they make it more authentic. Although for me the 4th goes too far with the finger print on the image.
You have an impressive amount of creativity and energy in pursuing the art of photography. Good job. Scott
Really like that third image, Kaden. The only polaroid stuff I really remember was out of The Swinger (was that the name?). What I recall were some streakiness to the development squeegeed on after the image popped out of the camera. So, if you are looking for low end Polaroid, I'd say the images appear a bit too "clean" and even in the processing.
Thanks for the feedback folks. I actually get most of the time, with the real
thing, consistent edge to edge development. I put it inside my shirt for heat
or on sunlight during day light while developing. Maybe that's the explanation.
Still it has a very unique look.
I will later on post some of those for you to see what I mean.
Back in the day I had a polaroid back for my view camera, one for my 'blads and three different polaroid cameras. I admit I never had one of the series that started with the SX-70 and used a different type of instant media. Despite the tacky chemicals, I was always careful enough, with images I wanted to save, to never leave fingerprints. OTOH, I mostly used polaroid shots to check lighting for for quick snapshots. I didn't consider it for serious images. Maybe I was too serious.
...I am with you AuntiPode when it comes to gear. I still own the following
Polaroid gear: A polaroid 1 step camera, a polaroid spectra system camera,
polaroid backs for the Hasselblad, polaroid back for the 4x5 camera and the
fujifilm back for 4x5 as well. Too much crappola and not enough time.
Anyways, these images are faux polaroids done via software and so are the
fake prints.
...I am with you AuntiPode when it comes to gear. I still own the following