polaroid originals

not thrilled with my scan, but still wanted to post. hope you don't mind - the original is clearer, but this is close. GOING ON VACATION - BE BACK IN ABOUT 3 WEEKS (MAYBE SOONER). HAPPY PHOTOGRAPHING!

will post this without the frame tomorrow.

printed off my phone with the Polaroid Lab. So much fun to use. [I hesitate to post scans of my polaroids because my system isn't as good as Robert Frank's! I got the color fairly close to what it is, but the border is completely wrong. Should be very dark purple. Ah well. It is what it is.]

Polaroid Lab print of phone photo.

Polaroid Lab print of phone photo.

Polaroid Lab print of phone photo.

Polaroid SX-70 photo.

polaroid sx-70 camera. low light, thus the blur. i don't mind blur photos - but there needs to be a reason for the blur, does it add something to the photo? does it change the feeling of the photo? would it be a stronger or weaker photo if it was in sharp focus? PLEASE FEEL FREE TO COMMENT ON YOUR THOUGHTS AROUND THIS IMAGE'S BLUR! ---------------------------------- personally, i thought the blur worked well here. i don't think it would have worked if part of the photo had been in focus because the composition doesn't have a strong focal point, it is more flowing in compositional style. it feels less like a photo of something in particular and more like a feeling, more of an abstraction. i felt it was enough of a success to post here, but not sure if it is as good as my better photos.

polaroid print of a samsung phone photo - using the polaroid lab. metalic border. i-type film. If you can ignore the colored border - compare to the SX-70 version of these scene: www.ipernity.com/doc/raingirl/50890732 My question is, which is a stronger photo? The blur or the sharp? (Ignoring the border - sorry) I find them to be both enjoyable, but do they both really stand strong enough to be considered art? Maybe one is just pretty, and the other art?