Technically, Polaroid Type 55 film was a B&W peel-apart film which produced a usable 4x5" negative as well as the instant positive print. For users of large format cameras designed around single sheet film it was much more than that, becoming almost a cult object, and its discontinuation due to the company's bankruptcy was much deplored. The negatives were fine grained, of extremely high resolution and a wide tonal range, so they could be used to produce very large prints. What was most characteristic, however, was the unmistakable "Polaroid frame look", the irregular frame surrounding the proper image due to the mechanical constraints of the film cassette. The positive prints were usually thrown out as left-over artifacts or kept as proof sheets in order to aid in the selection of negatives from which to make artwork prints.
Artur Coleman Danto, an American art critic and philosopher, says that “the distinction between art and reality, like the distinction between artwork and artifact is absolute”, and “to extract it [an artifact] from the system in which it has its function and display it for itself is to treat a means as though it were and end.” In this age of uncertainty and change, we are less inclined to believe in absolute distinctions, and more open to appreciating the value of art found in artifacts, “the esthetic of chance”. And we don't even need to seek absolution too far, as Danto himself secured it for us: “The prevailing wisdom […] was that there can be no definition of art, since no single property or set of properties was exhibited by the class of artworks, as can be verified when we try to find it. But neither is a definition really needed - for we all are able to pick the artworks out of a set of objects, leaving the non-artworks behind.” This series of proofs attempts to prove the validity of this premise.