Digital Polaroid photo frame concept brings it all rushing back

Polaroid film may be gone, but for some of us with fond memories of the format -- for no discernible reason, Polaroids were slow, blurry and expensive -- this digital picture frame concept seems a fitting tribute. There's a dry erase portion on the bottom, and the frame can stand on its own or be pinned to a cork board for added realism. "Standard" mode emulates a regular digital frame, while "Classic" mode slowly fades the picture into view. Yeah, maybe a little too cute for its own good, but maybe we like it that way.

[Via Gadget Lab]

[tom @ Feb 28th 2008 10:36AM]

To Polaroid - sue em'

[Khris @ Feb 28th 2008 10:39AM]

Why is this the first thought that people always have?

Perhaps I should patent the whole process of making stupid comments on forums and then sue you for infringing on my patent!

[Don @ Feb 28th 2008 10:42AM]

@Khris

I think that's one of the most intelligent things ever said on this forum...

[E71 @ Feb 28th 2008 1:49PM]

Dry erase portion?! That's SO high tech...
None of that for me, I won't be able to afford it. How about something more affordable like a low-tech e-Ink or something.

[Khris @ Feb 28th 2008 6:27PM]

@E71

Sometimes it doesn't have to be high-tech. If you don't understand that, no one is going to be able to explain it to you.

[Nule @ Feb 28th 2008 10:48AM]

Yes, but can you shake it?

[E71 @ Feb 28th 2008 1:50PM]

I'm so glad you didn't say blend... uh... uh oh... *puts gun in his mouth*

[Baz @ Feb 28th 2008 10:52AM]

Do i have to pick it up and wave it around to make the picture show up on the screen. Any notes in the specs about an acellerometer? That would be a fun transition effect.

[Kiwi616 @ Feb 28th 2008 11:00AM]

Wasn't it determined that shaking the picture didn't decrease the amount of time for the photo to appear. Although, I remember still shaking all Polaroids.

[Baz @ Feb 28th 2008 12:31PM]

the instructions specifically said NOT to shake/fan the picture. It could cause the chemicals to smear and mess up the image.

[Bobfantastic @ Feb 28th 2008 10:58AM]

This was just begging for a seamless e-ink display, instead of dry-wipe section for the titles.
But nevermind.

[Anthony @ Feb 28th 2008 11:06AM]

I was just about the comment the same thing. Dry erase is odd because you'd have to either have it on the same photo all the time or just sit next to it while you show people your trip to Crete or whatever & keep writing on the bottom.

[BrettB @ Feb 28th 2008 11:01AM]

I would buy this. Make it.

[ccweems @ Feb 28th 2008 11:02AM]

I think the picture should reveal faster if you just put the frame under you armpit to be really authentic.

[NHAnimator @ Feb 28th 2008 11:44AM]

I..... never tried that.

[Michael @ Feb 28th 2008 11:06AM]

Very cool! Why didn't someone think of this before? Unfortunately, as the article mentions, it is only a concept and will probably not be produced.

[Hannes @ Feb 28th 2008 11:20AM]

I like it. I think it is a very creative idea to combine old (polaroid) with new (digital picture frame).

http://www.digital-photo-frame-market.info

[BigBloke @ Feb 28th 2008 11:11AM]

Notice how it is Ma & Pa in the photo from the era gone by...

Wonder if it fades when you leave in the sun?

[Mike @ Feb 28th 2008 11:11AM]

Ok I think this gets a "cute idea", but I think it's ugly. Sorry.

[CraigJ @ Feb 28th 2008 11:25AM]

but will it infect my system with a nasty virus? That's the question...

[h8rain @ Feb 28th 2008 11:28AM]

Its such a simple idea, but I think it is kinda cool.

[alphabeta @ Feb 28th 2008 11:41AM]

Perhaps you could create "enConcept" for people who care about stuff that doesn't actually exist.

[tony @ Feb 28th 2008 11:53AM]

I can't let this one go. You say "Polaroids were slow...". Umm, about 1 minute as opposed to sending film off to a lab?!
In case you don't remember, that was the alternative until not too many years ago.

[Joss @ Feb 28th 2008 3:31PM]

Hey all,
I like this idea a lot but it has been explored a little bit before...
http://www.core77.com/challenge/memory/
check out the LCD movie polaroid at the top...

[Jake @ Feb 28th 2008 12:38PM]

Nicely put. 'Slow' is relative. My daughter (4) gets so annoyed when she can't look at the results of Papa's picture taking because it's a 35mm. She thinks he's intentionally not showing her the review image.

It really was an amazing technology and it's still the only real all-in-one (I think). If you don't have a printer handy you still have take your camera somewhere.

[Bad Beaver @ Feb 28th 2008 12:14PM]

Now that's one appealing digiframe. Make it! And be sure to make one that is the size of a real Polaroid. And put a magnet on the back so one can stick it onto stuff.

[Jeebus @ Feb 28th 2008 12:48PM]

I never realized there's only one letter's difference between blurry and bluray. I'm surprised the HD DVD fanboys haven't used that line before. They must not be that clever (well, they did buy into a failed format).

(Yeah, I had to turn this into HD DVD vs Blu-ray).

[JeffM @ Feb 28th 2008 2:17PM]

Save this post - it will be the source for the next gen iPod Photoshop scandal!

[linda_pro @ Feb 28th 2008 3:11PM]

This is cute! (And surprisingly not too clunky looking.) Upload this rehash of the F***ing Ben Affleck video and I'd go weak at the knees. Link: http://www.overlay.tv/overlay/1367

[Ian @ Feb 28th 2008 4:22PM]

What's cooler than bein' cool?

[Kyle @ Feb 28th 2008 5:13PM]

Ice cold!

Oh yes, that's right--I went there.

[peterjohndean1 @ Feb 28th 2008 6:34PM]

Nice... for all who have terminal nostalgia

[DrunkenCP @ Feb 29th 2008 9:37AM]

Setting aside the "looks like a Polariod" concept, I like that design more than most digital frames because it doesn't have a big old plastic bezel or fake frame around the screen. It's a bit more minimal and takes away some of the "It's a digital picture frame, see, because it's in a picture frame and all..."

[mark @ Feb 29th 2008 6:36PM]

Cute idea! The fading-in is probably my favorite part. Now if they could do an e-paper display and a digital camera that would set the display and then spit it out...

Like previously mentioned, it's not really fair to call Polaroid 'slow' because there is no other option. Preview on an LCD is not really getting the picture; you can't pin it on a wall, you can't stick it in a book, you can't toss it in the mail, you can't hand it to someone on the street.

Engadget, you only got blurry pictures cos you used crap cameras—which, in your defense, Polaroid did make a lot of in the 90s, but the film is capable of some really sharp image resolution.

Petters is an idiot.

[FFairlane @ Mar 1st 2008 12:29PM]

I would like someone to make this also. I think I would buy one.

The actual article does mention shaking the frame while waiting for the picture.

[http:intimleksaker.com @ Apr 5th 2008 12:28PM]

ok

[Sexleksaker @ Apr 5th 2008 12:29PM]

http://intimleksaker.com
http://intimleksaker.se