Comments on: Just shoot ... and shake!

Just shoot ... and shake!

dobbs — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 07:10:41 -0800

Polanoid "We are building the biggest Polaroid-picture-collection of the planet to celebrate the magic of instant photography." {stolen from notcot

By: Horken Bazooka

Horken Bazooka — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 07:17:04 -0800

...and then we'll shake it.

By: Dukebloo

Dukebloo — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 08:22:15 -0800

Don't forget Poland!

By: maxwelton

maxwelton — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 08:31:47 -0800

Cool! I love how the collection includes the genital shots which I imagine were an inevitable part of any Polaroid camera's oeuvre.

By: weapons-grade pandemonium

weapons-grade pandemonium — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 08:38:06 -0800

Don't forget Ed Land.

By: nickyskye

nickyskye — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 08:45:58 -0800

Many seem photoshopped, like this one of the giraffes or this woman in a bag (?).

By: Jezztek

Jezztek — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 08:53:49 -0800

Ooooh, time for a shameless plug of my meager Polanoid page.

By: Dukebloo

Dukebloo — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 09:03:53 -0800

Nickyskye, I think those may actually be polaroid photos of "set-ups," be they collages or 3-D assemblies.

By: nickyskye

nickyskye — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 11:53:20 -0800

Dukebloo, Just cannot imagine polaroids looking like this. Guess he fiddles with the process in really fancy ways or there're some extraordinary polaroid cameras out there.

By: InnocentBystander

InnocentBystander — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 12:02:48 -0800

"Cool! I love how the collection includes the genital shots which I imagine were an inevitable part of any Polaroid camera's oeuvre." First, I read this comment. Then I went to the link and saw a button marked "show all members." Uh, no thanks.

By: wendell

wendell — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 12:10:58 -0800

...why does this make me feel paranoid?

By: bondcliff

bondcliff — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 13:30:18 -0800

I've been going through my family's old pictures, 99.9% of which are Polaroids since my dad did 30 years there. As a kid I thought they were the coolest things ever, the way the picture came right out the front. In retrospect, the pictures themselves are crap. Grainy, blurry, cracked, etc.

By: jack_mo

jack_mo — Mon, 03 Dec 2007 06:01:20 -0800

Wonderful. It's such a shame that using a Polaroid is so ridiculously expensive - I used to have a bit of an obsession (20-odd cameras, all from charity shops and jumble sales) but had to give up when I realised that the emptiness of my bank account was down to the thirty quid a week spent on Polaroid film. (I was so attached to the format that I once found myself staggering around in a hospital toilet repeatedly slurring 'It'll make a great Polaroid!' to the nurse who caught me, out of my mind on morphine, aiming a camera at the tube coming out of my chest - the result was cool, I think, but the withering nurse-look made me realise I was maybe a wee bit too obsessed with instant photos!) Just cannot imagine polaroids looking like this. Guess he fiddles with the process in really fancy ways or there're some extraordinary polaroid cameras out there. What do you mean, nickyskye? To my eyes, that looks like a 'classic' Polaroid - slightly skew-whiff colours, a wee bit out of focus, etc. I'd put money on it being taken with a consumer-level camera, rather than, say, a medium format job with a Polaroid back, with no tampering with the process, either.

By: sebastionjacksongallery

sebastionjacksongallery — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 06:45:46 -0800

What a cool site, There still is beauty in the classics