I tend towards ambiguity before I tell anyone the exact location. Usually they’ll give you a clue if you let the conversation continue without giving exact details. :c)

I’m not completely opposed to digital. My little digital camera came in handy for documenting the craziness on Mass. St. this past weekend. I even took a couple of short videos of all the woohooing. Digital was perfect for this setting. I could shoot away and not have to worry about wasting film. Of course, none of those photos will win any awards, but digital definitely worked in that setting.

Rock chalk Jayhawk!

I’ve spent 5 years perfecting my Polaroid technique, really getting to know the film and how to get good transfers everytime I print. The thought of having to re-learn all these things on new film that doesn’t work or look the same way, just doesn’t appeal to me. Something about switching horses in mid-stream.

That being said, I’d love to see how your Fuji transfers turn out. If anyone can master this process, it’s Mr. Young, king of analog photography.

But they aren’t Polaroid so why worry about making them LOOK like Polaroid. Square peg, round hole and all that (although that does work, its called “extrusion”). They do what they do, so just learn to appreciate the Fuji transfer process for what it is. Beating on it to make it look different means you didn’t get to see what it looked like in its own right.

And by the way, you don’t need 100% dark. You can work with a dim safelight while placing the “negative” on the receptor sheet. And you should be able to roll the print with the safe light on. After all, you can leave the prints to develop on the counter top and it doesn’t matter which side faces up. That means the back of the negative sheet is lightproof. The safelight can be a simple red gel over a flashlight or some battery powered bike tail lights are bright enough. Red LED bulbs with Edison bases are pretty cheap too.