Call us crazy, but we never had much faith in the power of The Impossible Project to bring back the legendary Polaroid
instant-print film camera. Despite our doubts (and those of the world),
that very group has evidently caused quite a stir in the offices of Summit Global, which has today announced that the film-based One Step Camera is on track for a mid-2010 release. The Impossible Project will be in charge of producing a limited number of Polaroid-branded color and B&W Instant Films along the way, and just in case film isn't really your bag, Summit is planning to issue a
Polaroid TWO -- described as the "digital version of the traditional camera that produces instant digital photos" -- sometime next year. It's all about bringing sexy back, y'all.
Read - Summit Global's release
Read - The Impossible Project's release
posted Oct 13th 2009 10:10PM
I wish they had created a replica SX-70 instead. It's such a nice camera.
Um, I thought "instant" digital photos already existed? Or is this a new way to bring back the "modeling sessions" by tricking dimwits into naked pictures by saying: "Hey, don't worry, these are Polaroids, and I have the only copy."
Smart! Good idea, now they're going for the retro market.
My Nokia N90 has a 2MP camera, costs less, actually takes video (compared to non-S), expandable memory, no expensive monthly, etc. etc.
.....no, just... no
(also, the iPhone isn't some kind of "God phone" that does everything, some things just need, touch and be real, in an age of photoshop and computer editing...)
Wanna know what I like about digital photography? I can take a picture to preserve the moment... and not have a piece of paper to carry around all day. I think we're so used to taking pictures and sharing them online... who would want to go back to creating a photograph on the spot?
What if you take a picture of 5 people? Do you print 5 copies of that photo to give to each person? And then they have to do something with it?
I think "instant photography" has already transitioned in recent years. You can now take a picture, post it online, and hundreds or thousands of people can see it... not just the people in the room.
I remember a time where photographers REALLY had to be skilled and good, in order to become successful.
Now a days, every picture you see is perfect, images can be photoshoped, so you can't tell if it was real, or not,
and photographers now a days just take few pictures, clean it up, and bam. perfect. theres no more feel in todays
photography, no effort to make an image say something.
and its not like the point of this is to overthrow digital photography, no, its just to give people a choice to remember and
have a less elegant, but real, photograph.
While I do agree to everything you have said, I don't think this has any practical value. It's more for nostalgic purposes, and is purely for the novelty of it. But yea, I haven't fully realized how cumbersome the pre-digital imaging was. It was only what, 7 years ago, we had film-based cameras and mom was telling me to get new rolls, lol.
>> "I remember a time where photographers REALLY had to be skilled and good, in order to become successful. Theres no more feel in todays photography, no effort to make an image say something."
I bet there are thousands of professional photographers who are 100% digital who would disagree...
imagine if your digital camera also printed the ones that you told it to, so you could give a copy to the relatives that you went on the vacation with. only if you wanted it to though.
sounds like a good idea to me.
>> "I bet there are thousands of professional photographers who are 100% digital who would disagree..."
ughh, duh!
People are always going to side on what they use!
thats like saying there are thousands of Mac users that would disagree that an zune is better then an iPod.
Im a proffessional photographer worked for various magazine, websites, tv shows etc
Most of the pictures ive taken are with a standard compact camera, with photos taken normally, then a little photoshop added then passed on as proffesional work for magazine, websites, tv shows etc,
Easy as done, I no longer use time consuming SLR cameras anymore!
belieave me anyone can do digital photography!
>> "People are always going to side on what they use!"
You said because people are digital they don't care about making good pictures anymore.
Digital is just a tool... just like film. Professional photographers take just as much time composing pictures as they did with film.
You can't fix everything in Photoshop.
It's not about taking one picture and sharing it with the world. It's about taking ONE picture, that's unique. Kinda like a personal letter or postcard, remember those?
"You can't fix everything in Photoshop."
If you have the expertise you can.
DATED anologue film and paper technology relaunching in 2010, in a digital camera world where every picture/photo is digital.
PAPER, a niche market for bills, depts, receipts, mags
FILM, a niche market for grandma and grandpa
Before you totally write off film and paper, you might want to read this article:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2002/mar/03/research.elearning
With all the different file formats and media in use today, I predict that in less than 50 years from now, most digital photography will be unreadable (unless we plan on actually migrating the media).
So I love shooting digital for instant gratification, but I've got enough IT background to know how hard drives crash, CD's can become unreadable over a short period of time (surprisingly under 2 years), and media cards become corrupt (had all three happen with my images).
Fortunately there still some of us that shoot analogue formats (Fuji Velvia in my case) and scan them for current uses. So the fact that slides/film and photos can last without requiring much effort to view them or maintain them is worth the increased costs to me.
Well I happen to think this is amazing.
I have fond memories of going on photo walks with my schoolmates and snapping a few candids along the way.
I still have a working Polaroid One, but obviously haven't been able to get film for ages.
Kudos to the Impossible Project, and to Polaroid for actually listening.
IIRC, Poloroid has nothing to do with this. Also, will the availability of a resurrected high-priced (I'm sure it will cost more than it used to) instant film, make you dredge that old Poloroid camera out of the closet? I doubt it. Maybe a few people will buy a pack for the novelty of it, and then they'll remember what a PIA it is compared to digital. I don't think I could imagine, in my wildest dreams, a more futile and pointless endeavor than "The Impossible Project". It's not impossible, it's just a waste of time. It can only be justified as some sort of "art" project, but certainly not as a business. Even if someone does, for some inexplicable reason, want instant film, Fuji still makes it.
what does the iphone have anything to do with this?
also other phones have much better camera's, and are much more portable too.
and waste resources by printing? what?
im sure this doesn't force print every picture,
just the ones you tell it to.
I miss the ol' polaroids, its kinda nice to have a picture of the moment at the moment
but only way I'd consider buying a next gen version is to have it also store them digitally as well as print the picture.
Who buys these? Guys were buying them to take nude pictures of their wives and girfriends decades before Steve Jobs "invented" photography.
Why would I paint when I can take a photo?
Why would I draw with a pencil when I can do it on the computer?
Why would I... etc.
Those arguments just don't stand up and neither do the comments in this thread. If you don't get it, you never will.
Sound Good..
I still got my 1995 One step camera..
Only got 2 pack of film left.
Now they are relaunching it again..
i hope the films will fit my older model..
um...why? its all digital now. the only idea i think of in a polaroid-esque scheme is a 3G connected camera that auto uploads to your picasa, flikr, etc
Why did it take them so long to make a digital camera that ALSO prints pictures? The best of both worlds.
It didn't take them this long. I remember seeing a digital camera that optically printed onto Polaroid 600 film years ago! Also, there is already a Polaroid-branded camera that can print to ZINK paper on demand.
Also, the Polaroid Mio can accept Fujifilm Instax Mini film with no modifications. The film is high quality, and only costs about $15 for a twin pack of 10 shots each (check Adorama or B&H Photo). Just make sure you buy the MINI film, not the Wide.
I love these cameras, everyone takes digital photos, no one prints them , and its expensive, this is instant. Also the photo quality is not so great , so it can remind me of the 1970s
LOL, you said everything that I was thinking, LOL
The photo quality can be great and razor sharp. It's not the film, but the cheap plastic lenses on many common cameras.
shshshshake it, shake it like a polaroid pikcha!
I'm not a photog pro. but I carry around a instant camera to supplement a digital camera where ever I go. I feel that instant photography is different enough compared to traditional film and digital camera that warrant the return of the most popular instant film format the Polaroid 600 series.
I'm currently using a Fuji Instax series as well as an old Polaroid 100 series that uses peel apart film. I enjoy using instant cameras more because a majority of the portrait photos I take can be given away to the happy subjects. I also find that people seem to be more open to photos being taken if they also get an instant photo. Creating a print in as little as 15 seconds (Fuji FP-3000b) to give away is very rewarding. That is compared to wasting time screwing with computers and portable printers on site.
Digital is here to stay, no doubt. A majority of traditional analog film, I see some use, most dont. It's advantages are getting smaller as digital products are getting better as it's still advancing and improving. I feel instant film should not be lumped into traditional analog film and can be used in different ways that the majority of digital and traditional photography still cannot accomplish in a similar fashion.
The Polaroid TWO is a digital camera that gives instant prints. Seeing as how vogue tiny portable photo printers are, this should do just fine. It is the best of all worlds: digital, instant prints, nostalgic.
The quality of the Polaroid inkless printers/cameras from these models is currently not very good. There is an odd looking and an inconstant digital pixel structure on the images. There are many times that the print has printing errors with missing lines. I've had better results from an old battery powered portable inkjet printer with consistent quality, quicker printing (when already set up), and larger images. While you can queue up the photos to print at the end, I think the worst thing I think is that you have to wait for the photos to finish printing and eject before you can capture photos comfortably with the camera. I find that a system similar to Fujifilm's portable Pivi printing system that uses instant film would be better imo. But Fujifilm does not make a camera that can print.
MUST HAVE! NOW
Thumbs up!
@Kamil
".....no, just... no
(also, the iPhone isn't some kind of "God phone" that does everything, some things just need, touch and be real, in an age of photoshop and computer editing...)"
What? Like the poloroid's of your favorite peeler's genitals? ;) Nice...
Oh and igorning i Kurt X's flame bate comment regarding the iPhone and reading the rest of his post, he does make a good point about not wasting resources (wrappers, paper backing, packaging)
lol 2MP means NOTHING when its got cell phone camera optics
and if your trying to play the megapixel game ... film has infinite resolution...
Thank Jebus. I was afraid my kids wouldn't know what a Polaroid is, considering my kids haven't been born yet.
Quality of the photograph isn't alwways the point. Sometimes, a slightly blurry, slightly less colorful picture is part of the experience. Don't get me wrong, I have two digital cameras that I use all the time, but multiple megapixels isn't the absolute name of the game when it comes to photography. Sometimes character is just as important.
As soon as they release something, I'll add it to the collection.
Talking about Polaroid in front of digital dudes is not fun...just like talking fashion :P
Honestly..it's more about fashionable item rather than really big big advantage in front of all your digital devices...but...it does present photos in not so digital point of view...I think whoever are serious on photography would understand...
New Coke anyone?
Wow, I'm really surprised by some of these comments. Some of you might not understand what the appeal of Polaroid is, but I do. It's the tactile physical object, it's the developing in front of your eyes, the smell of the chemicals, it's the artistic form, it's having one chance to get that shot. Understand it or not, Polaroid revolutionised the world with film cameras from the early 1900's. They also created the lovely polarized lens that many of digital lovers use quite frequently.
Some people like myself were trying to save the memory of Polaroid and all that Edwin Land created in his cameras. We didn't understand Polaroid destroying what gave them their image in the first place. Love instant film or not (and it's not everyone's cup of tea), please understand that there are photographers out there who love what the film and cameras have to offer. Take a look at my photos and really tell me a digital camera can create exactly the same atmosphere http://www.flickr.com/photos/kath_white/. I think not.
If you try to turn this into a digital vs. analog discussion, you're completely missing the point! Nobody uses Polaroid to replace a digital camera! Most people I know who take a lot of Polaroids also own a digital camera. Instead, Polaroid is used by artists and amateurs who love the colors, like to manipulate the development process, and do all sorts of amazing stuff with the material, producing absolutely mind-boggling results (check polanoid.net for some examples).
Polaroid isn't a mass product anymore - that's why they went bankrupt. It's a niche product, but a very successful one. The scale that Polaroid was producing the film and cameras is not sustainable, but The Impossible Project is doing something completely different here: a much smaller volume of production, aimed at a specific market segment that is willing to spend a lot of money on these products. Since The Impossible Project was launched, close to 10,000 people have contacted them - and that was before yesterday's announcement.
I'm pretty confident that The Impossible Project will succeed. Nearly 6000 Polaroid photographers on polanoid.net and sales where 150 packs of film sell in under 5 minutes are are a good sign.
Just my 2 cents.
Woot woot!
Can't wait. I love polaroid film.
Only BW Pics ??????????
Ive been saying this for years, its not that hard to make a digital camera that takes a photo, you review it, and if you like it you can have an internal projector similar to the one on the Nikon S1000P and have it expose a piece of instant film inside the housing, sure it might be bulky at first, but look at the Polaroid cameras, they're not exactly small, especially the mio i have that i cant find film for.
Fuji Instax Mini works perfectly in the Mio. Taking Mio pictures (and handing them out) in public is a great way to make people happy.