To Crop or Not To Crop...

A Sunday morning before leaving for work, thinking I might upload some more Polaroids from a Paris trip I took in November 2009 (I'm quite behind with my uploading...) There is a set of three images of the Pyramid at the louvre, but the composition of one is just slightly off centre. This annoys me, so I reach for the crop tool to correct this, and find that this produces a strange, uncomfortable feeling in me which opens up into...

The Great Polaroid Cropping Debate 2010

Now with my scanned Polaroid images I tend to trim off the frame (I will get on to why later), but crop in as close as possible to the edges to get as much of the original image as taken. But not this time. It felt slightly like crossing some kind of line, so, in the modern way, I put the question out to the world via Twitter:

"Here's an important ethical question: is it OK to crop a Polaroid when posting (I mean the image, not just frame/no frame)? See? Important!"

I was being deliberately pompous with the ethics thing, although the feeling I got as I cropped in (and as you will see it's a fairly minor crop) made me feel that this was something worth discussing. While I generally try to compose to the whole frame in other formats, and don't really like cropping too much, I've never felt squeamish before.


Here are some of the responses from Twitter:

redlomo Don't think it's unethical (no more than Photoshop on a digital shot). Yet, I never do it as it just doesn't seem right...

flovephoto It's tough, I mean, I don't think it's 'unethical', but in a sense you are 'de-polaroiding' the image, you know?

poopoorama I do it all the time. I don't care what format the image is. I will crop if needed.

ElliotXtreme I also vote "No". Polaroids are not like any other kind of image.

SanderBeenen thou shall never crop a Polaroid said mr. Land

amnesiak1978 Depends on the type of Polaroid. but I prefer the with frame.

mohler Surely it's some form of unethical? Postproduction of a Polaroid

theotherpete I think cropping is a last resort just as a rule, so a Polaroid would be no exception. Not that I don't, but I'd rather not.

catherinebuca Of course it is. No point being prissy, it's the final image that matters. Always.

blueperez I think it's fine to crop a Polaroid as for me, the Polaroid image is the starting point, I shoot for the quality of image. I crop mine to square, every time. I just prefer them like that.

roidrage It's all freedom of artistic expression, so what's the point arguing about it?

ElliotXtreme I've decided to change my vote to "yes". First time was emotional, second thought was pragmatic.

jeffrawdon I won't alter a Polaroid's composition by cropping, but I will alter contrast (frequently) or color (occasionally). My thoughts: Your image and your art, ergo your choice. Follow your heart and vision and you can't go wrong.

photoeditornyc photography and ethics DON'T MIX. Photographs are a lie wrapped in a fake fantasy under a cloud of falsehood.

richburroughs Crop it, modify it in Photoshop, whatever. It's just a tool.

joiebutter I almost always crop mine first it was bc Jen (of @shopbando ) always does hers http://u.nu/3p2k4

Moonsweetie I almost always crop the frame when I post polas taken w/my Hasselblad because the image never fills up the entire pola. Many times I will leave the frame on Integral film shots but I will crop all of them if I plan to layer many into a new final image. It is a type of film & a tool & just like her films and other tools it can be used however fits your needs and how you want the end result to look. :)

So it seemed there were three main camps:

1. Keep it sacrosanct - do not touch the frame, or it loses what makes it special
2. You can lose the frame, but don't crop in to the image. It's the image made by a Polaroid that's important.
3. What's the fuss about? If you need to crop, then crop! It's just another photographic technique.

So I created a poll. Here are some of the comments:

anniebee: .people crop images taken with every other analog film type so why not polaroid? I think we tend to see the image within the white border as sacrosanct but if the medium gets in the way of the message the end result can just be bleh. THAT being said, I don't think I've cropped any of my polaroids but now I want to reexamine some of my of my less than perfect shots to see if there's not a gem hidden within ;)

Jeff: I agree with anniebee. It's the photographer's art, and theirs to do with as they see fit.

For me personally though, I never crop one, and don't even crop out the frame on a peel-apart. I think (only my personal opinion for my own photos) it takes away some of the essence of what makes a Polaroid magical, but then I am a nostalgic purist. I also like that my approach encourages me to take my time before I press the shutter button knowing I'll expect to utilize the entire image. If I did crop one, it would more likely be a peel-apart than an integral film shot.

Rhiannon: I don't think I've cropped any - but that is probably because the film is so rare and precious that every shot is very considered. ( And even before it was rare it was already expensive)

Ultimately though, for me, its about the image - always in the first instance. Film, digital, photoshopping, polaroid..its about the image..not about maintaining the "integrity". Where do you draw the line ? Should you even scan them and tweak the colours to achieve a satisfactory print ??

Jess: It's not sacred ... It's just a polaroid. :-) As far as cropping is concerned, I just try to do what's best for the image. When I post photos online, I include as much info about the shot so (1) viewers don't feel like they've been misled about the format and any manipulation I've done and (2) others can learn if they're interested. The only time manipulation really bothers me is when people try to pass it off as something it's not.

Slimeface: Never really thought about it. I too don't believe the Polaroid to be sacred and suppose if one desires to cut, trim, color or alter their own prints, it's all good. I'm no purist. I probably did some adolescent hacking with scissors in the 1960's on my family's Polaroids now that I think about it.....

law7355: I'm not a purist in the strictest sense of the word, coming to photography from a Graphic Design and photoshop retoucher's point of view. With that in mind, for me at least, Polaroids tend to be that frustratingly inconsistent process, using often outdated film and a camera that cannot zoom and decides itself how long it wants to take, the epitome of 'analogue'. A Polaroid then tends to be the picture that was *wrestled* from the moment, and this is what makes a great shot magical. To reduce it to the same level of image-making/manipulation as everything else I do, commercial or for fun, means I may as well have shot on my Leica digital and cropped, adjusted, saturated and vignetted.

Those times I have used a Polaroid image in a design layout that's required it to be manipulated I've simply not thought of it as a polaroid image anymore; but that's really just me...

And (to make this look scientific) here are the results as of 20th January 2010:

(I put "other" in there for a laugh. I'm now intrigued...)

----


So my feelings:

Well actually my feelings on this solidified while reading through the comments that trapac made on one of her images for 'Roid Week last spring:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/teepee1/3509233939/

For me also, once it's scanned, it becomes a different thing. It becomes about the image. I want to be truthful to the original, and try to get the colour matched correctly, adjust the levels. But, unless it is, the frame isn't part of the image. Part of the process, sure, but it can detract from the picture, and make it about the object. Which is fine, if that's the point being made:

... but mostly the quality of the picture I've made is what I want to be the focus, the colours and composition. I don't want to get hung up on fetishising the physical Polaroid in a scan. Although I'm happy to change my mind, depending on circumstances.

However, as I try to compose as much as possible through the lens, I also dislike cropping too much in other formats (except cropping square...) And because the Polaroid comes out framed, it doesn't feel right to play with the perfection of that. Until I had an image that needed cropping to make it what I had intended when shooting.

"So Jake! Stop whittering on, and show us the image that caused all this fuss! Jeez!"

Okay. But promise you won't think less of me...

Here's the original, framed:

Here's the original without the frame:

Aaaargh! It's off centre! And slightly askew! Nooooo! So finally:

When I look at it like that, it's such a minor crop, I feel a bit foolish. But The frame/no frame issue is interesting - what makes it a Polaroid? Is it the physical object? Is it the nature of the chemicals, and how they make the image look? Is it the process, the experience? Is it just a way of making images, no greater or lesser than others? Discuss...

Spelling this out makes it feel slightly precious to me, but I am somewhat precious about the original Polas. I can't imagine selling them, let alone giving them away as Jeff Hutton has done!

So to summarise my philosophy: crop out the frame (unless I don't) and don't crop the image (unless I do).

Please comment!

Going Gaga

Here is the news:

"Lady Gaga named Creative Director for Speciality Line of Polaroid Imaging Products"

More subdued, was the uncovering of the new instant film cameras designed by Polaroid, referencing the old One-Step design, but this time with fake wood finish. Fake wood! I need one! (Not really). Also announced was a new digital camera with a built-in printer, allowing the best of the old and the new. Possibly.

Gaga's statement in the press release seems to emphasise the digital side of things, which suggests to me that she's going to be all about branding on new digital devices. Although, canny marketeer that she is, I can imagine she would want to be in with whatever seems trendy/popular. I wouldn't necessarily worry too much about an iconic company getting in to bed with the latest thing.

Polaroid's statement in the same release seems somewhat more alarming:

The partnership with Lady Gaga is the most recent in a string of partner announcements by PLR IP Holdings, LLC (PLR), the new owner of the Polaroid brand. In the past six months, PLR has assembled a family of Polaroid partners for product development, marketing distribution and licensing. Building upon Polaroid's rich history, the Polaroid partner network will support fans and users of classic Polaroid products and deliver new Polaroid products to a new generation of Polaroid customers while staying true to Polaroid's long-standing values of fun and simplicity.

(my emphasis)

What makes me uneasy about all this is very well put by @jeffrawdon over at his Existentialmonkey blog. (Such a good blog post, that I've scrapped my first draft of this one, because he put it so much better than my ramblings)

But I do want to emphasise a few points, because they can't be emphasised enough. Polaroid is an iconic brand, based on iconic products and ideas. Edwin Land's astonishing development of instant photography, was mainly due to the implementation of hard work, passion for photography, experimentation, and magic. The instant, peel apart films were his first miracle, and the integral packs and design of the SX-70 were his crowning achievement in my eyes. Seriously, the SX-70 system is just astonishing.

Sadly the company lost focus, didn't modernise, and seemingly went the way of other well loved companies who couldn't keep up. Various bad things happened to the company, and all it ended up as was just the name associated with the iconic products of the past, tainted with mediocre products of the present. And when every modern camera creates an image you can see instantly, who cares about smelly, messy chemical processes that are expensive with large factories to run? So the new Polaroid owners shuttered the factories and took apart the machines.

Except...

But that's not the whole story. Again to summarise (read an excellent version on Wired UK's site): the Polaroid factory in the Netherlands is about to close, an incredibly enthusiastic Austrian called Florian Kaps persuades the factory manager Andre Bosman to keep it running, and the pair set up The Impossible Project to restart the factory and create new film for Polaroid lovers.

In parallel, a number of enthusiasts led by Sean Tubridy and Dave Bias, along with Anne Bowerman and others, became Polaroid evangelists, setting up the website Save Polaroid to do just that. Anne and Dave then became a part of the Impossible Project as the American wing of PolaPremium, a venture set up by Kaps to sell remaining stocks of old Polaroid film, raise money for the new film, and sell that when it comes out this year. Next month should see the opening of the New York store.

All this activity is absolutely incredible, and The Impossible Project is built up by people passionate about Polaroid photography, a photography made of chemicals and magic. But magic isn't going to pay the bills, and the film needs to be bought in sufficient quantities to make the enterprise a worthwhile one. One way to ensure that's a reasonable possibility is to build up the buzz needed to seep into public consciousness, so that people know that something is coming, that instant film is NOT dead. And the Impossible Project has done an incredible job of this! (See their site of last year's activity to find links to world media coverage)

This has woken the sleeping Polaroid to the awareness that people are still wanting to use the products with its name on! Except, they're only wanting to use the OLD products, the ones they no longer make, THE ONES THEY NO LONGER MAKE ANY MONEY ON. Well that can't be right for the owner of an iconic name, to have someone else make money off the back of it. Even if it was something they had thrown away. So they make will new instant cameras! Hooray!

And then they will announce those cameras without any reference to the people who are actually making the film those cameras will run on. Without mentioning that the passion of Florian, André, Anne and Dave, as well as all those at the factory which Polaroid had actually closed, working to make The Impossible Project possible is what is getting those cameras made in the first place.

Nicely played, Polaroid.

Lady Gaga almost seems like a diversion. We don't know what (if at all) her involvement will be in the new Polaroid cameras. I'm not really in her target audience. I would be more in line for a Medeski Martin and Wood instant camera (holy crap, that's a great idea!). In fact, I would be much more the target audience for The Impossible Project's planned camera. I don't know any details about it, but I know I want one.

Which again goes back to the passion about the process of instant photography. It's not trendy. It's not a trend. Lady Gaga is trendy, but unless she's adaptable, she won't have the longevity of the Madonna brand. Whereas people like me want to keep making images with this unique technology, for the pleasure of the process and the results, and want to keep doing it for years to come. Hopefully some of the Gaga fans will get drawn in and this is what turns them into photographers. Who knows? How many Spice Girls fans got turned onto photography through the SpiceCam?

Hopefully Polaroid's new-found interest in instant film won't overload The Impossible Project, but will allow it to grow and develop. Selling more film should be a good thing, as long as there's enough for me. So I'm going to keep one eye on Polaroid's actions, but not my serious eye, as that is looking straight at the more important work of The Impossible Project.

Florian, Andre, Sean, Anne, Dave and the others: keep doing what you're doing. There's a passionate community that cares desperately about your work, and who will look back years in the future at the photographs taken with the film you are making happen. And who will look up and as one say the now immortal words of the spirit of Edwin Land on Twitter:

@edwinland: "Who the hell is Lady Gaga?"

EDIT: 09 Jan 2010 - added info about Sean Tubridy in origins of "Save Polaroid" site.

2009 in film

So then, that was 2009, eh? How to summarise it?

Um...

Oh yes - in general, photography, and specifically, POLAROID!

At the beginning of the year I had a few cameras: a Nikon D50 was my main workhorse, with my iPhone with me at all times. In a couple of cupboards I had my dad's Nikon FM, unused for years, my first generation Mamiya 646, also unused. No need to use film - digital is where it's at!

Brendan Dawes on twitter mentioned this online store called PolaPremium which seemed to be selling Polaroid film and cameras, and also about The Impossible Project who were working on a plan to bring back instant film. Sounded interesting.

Then I went to the new Photographers' Gallery on Ramillies Street in London, just around the corner from where I work, and saw all the delicious film cameras in their shop, and a wall with Polaroid film for sale. Interesting. Didn't my dad have an old SX-70 lying on a shelf?

And so it began. In the spring I visited my parents in France, with a cartridge of Artistic TZ in my bag. The camera worked fine, and the obsession took hold. He let me take it back with me, just in time for 'Roid Week! (Here are my pictures from Spring 'Roid Week 09)

I'd already been on Twitter for a bit, mainly just tweeting amongst friends. 'Roid Week opened that right up introducing me to the Polaroid focal point which is Anne Bowerman. Anne and her partner Dave Bias were behind Save Polaroid. They are the American wing of PolaPremium and The Impossible Project. (Dave also designed the Medeski Martin and Wood website. My. Favourite. Band. Ever). Anne's tireless work, enthusiasm and encouragement through Twitter and flickr is the glue which joins the new Polaroid community together.

Also through 'Roid Week I found out about Etsy, again through Anne, but also through the fantastic work of the fantastic Nancy Stockdale and Lauren Beacham. I set up a store, and while sales have been slow, it's great to have an outlet for prints. One of my aims for 2010 is to push my store a bit harder.

So in brief, the world of analogue photography re-opened for me. And this resulted in accumulations... I'm now the proud owner of:

1. SX-70
2. SX-70 Sonar
3. Polaroid Land 250 Automatic
4. Polaroid 3000
5. Polaroid ProCam
6. Lubitel (which I don't like and will sell)
7. Holga
8. Polaroid back for the Holga
9. Vivitar Ultra Wide and Slim (thanks to Jess Hibbard for being my enabler with that one!)
10. Vivitar 3D camera
11. Digital Harinezumi
12. Olympus Trip 35 waiting to be picked up from the post office. 

(click on the links to see the pictures I took)

I may have forgotten one or two cameras in there. Oh, yes, I also upgraded my D50 to a D90, and got a lovely 50mm lens for it. That will do for now, although a Hasselblad and Polaroid 600SE are needed, of course.

As the year went on, I found a wonderful subject for my cameras in Thetford Forest. Shot it with 600 film:



I shot it on Time Zero:



I shot it with Blue Polaroid film:



And on my Vivitar UWS:



And on my Holga:



(Forest shots here)

I went to France three times:



(more France shots here)

There was another 'Roid Week in November...

And it was a year of getting to know many great people through Twitter and Flickr, many fantastic photographers, too many to single out, although special mention goes to Jeff Hutton who devised his brilliant and generous Polaroid Giveaway Project, which saw him sending out originals on the condition that recipients posted an image of the Polaroid. I went out on Christmas day to the forest with his image of the Rockefeller Center in New York (taken on Chocolate film for 'Roid Week in November):



So there you have it! Happy 2010, everybody. May your year be full of exciting and interesting photographs. May mine be full of Impossible Project film!

'Roid Week November 09 - Day 5

And so, the last day. So many great pictures! I've put together two galleries of my favourites, so you can see my top 36: Gallery 1, Gallery 2.

My last three pictures were taken in early September using the rest of the pack of expired Time Zero I'd had in the forest (see day two). My bike had a puncture, so I walked to King's Cross station in the beautiful sun.

Little Argyll Street is directly across from where I work. The colours on this film proved unbelievable. Pinks greens and blues. Lovely.



A bit further north, on the junction of Great and Little Titchfield Streets, the light on this building was fantastic:



By this point, I only had two shots left in the pack, and I really didn't want to waste them; when might I ever use a film with these qualities again? (the other Time Zero I used in France (one here) came out quite different, leaky glowy. Very nice, but different). So the camera went up to my eye many more times than I pressed the shutter. I'm glad I waited. Off Gower Street, in the complex of UCL buildings, is this amazing place:



Some more 'Roid Week reflections to follow.

'Roid Week November 09 - Day 4

Sad to miss day 3 due to being in hospital, but I had day 4 ready to go when I got back on Thursday evening...

Back to the forest, and what felt like the end of a season. It was the day the clocks had changed, so it got dark early, but thankfully there was some lovely light still. This was some 779 film from a Polapremium promotion, and it had managed to get a bit of frost on it in the fridge. No adverse effects though...

This is lens flare. Or wood-spirits:

'Roid Week November 09 - Day 2

It's day 2! (Well I'm actually writing this on day 3, but if I lived in Hawaii, there would still be an hour and a half to go...)

The theme seemed to be back in the forest, this time using some 2003 expired Time Zero film. It was the first time using Time Zero, and it was lovely: amazing colours and feel - there's some urban ones for later in the week. This was another film sent by the inestimable Anne Bowerman (flickr & etsy)

Anyway, here they are. And yes, I wish I'd had a tripod for the third one...

'Roid Week November 09 - Day 1

I've been looking forward to this second 'Roid Week since it was announced a couple of months back. I knew I would be at work, so may not have many opportunities to take pictures, so I kept some in reserve, just in case.

Lucky I did.

On Saturday night (Halloween) while preparing a pumpkin, my knife slipped, and my left hand is now bound up, awaiting surgery! Ouch! So no new photos at all...

However, as I say, there was a reserve. Here is day one, Monochrome Monday:



This was my first attempt at using the close-up attachment with my Land 250. It's great because it allows a closer shot, but frustrating because with the lens a good few inches away and down from the viewfinder, the composition is a combination of guesswork and testing. I also racked the exposure to its lightest position, because it was producing dark results.





These two were taken on expired B+W 600 film in my SX-70 (with ND sheet from mypolastore). The film was sent to me by the ever-amazing Anne Bowerman. Thank you Annie!

Do check out the 'Roid Week Pool. I'm loving so much of what is up already, and it's only day one!