>>4317939Pictures of someone else's friend are shit photos, but photos of MY friend are great. It's like a crutch, but it only works for people who know the guy in the photo. Instant photos on modern Instax film are technically kind of shitty, but they have soul and they're fun. I use Instax primarily for snapshitting people when I'm out at events or hanging out. It's comfy and it's fun. It's also a perfect wallet-sized print.
>>4318163>the fact that more and more people are getting into film in 2024 will never make me madsame here (for the most part)
>>4318324I would love to use a polaroid but when I decided to get an Instax mini I had good reasons. Instax was (maybe still is) a better emulsion than polaroid, AND it's multiple times cheaper. I get my mini film for about 60 to 70 cents per shot. Polaroid is closer to like, $2. That's a big difference.
If I could mod a polaroid 600 to spit out Instax prints and add some sort of mask to the viewfinder that'd be cool.
