Polaroid Camera Prints Photos Without Ink

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
Despite the ease and ubiquity of digital photography, there are some out there who still like the idea of prints, and this is where instant cameras come in. Polaroid’s new camera doesn’t even use ink; instead it produces prints by heating up a special kind of photo paper.

The Snap uses a technology that Polaroid calls Zink Zero Ink Printing which replaces traditional ink and photo paper with an advanced composite material that’s embedded with cyan, yellow and magenta dye crystals under a protective polymer overcoat. The Zink paper, which looks like a standard sheet of white photo paper before use, is heated up during printing to activate and colorize the crystals.
 
Now that's just cool. I won't be an early adopter, but this has my interest.
 
Sound like this and a carrier pigeon can keep some teens out of hot water.
 
Sounds interesting, but what happens when you put that polaroid print on a car dashboard in the sun during the middle of summer? Do you still have a photo or a mess?
 
LurkerLito said:
Sounds interesting, but what happens when you put that polaroid print on a car dashboard in the sun during the middle of summer? Do you still have a photo or a mess?
Click to expand...

Whether it turns black or fades, the sun is the enemy of all prints.
 
Soooo.. the old Polaroid pictures didn't use ink either. The whole not using ink is not a big whoop.

Dark rooms don't use ink to make a print either.

Guess it may be a big wow factor for those that were born after the original Polaroid cameras went away... so pre-teens might find it exciting.
 
That is what you call innovating, a company that owned the camera world but failed when it came to digital...now coming up with instant gratification products that the people of today like.
 
MrGuvernment said:
That is what you call innovating, a company that owned the camera world but failed when it came to digital...now coming up with instant gratification products that the people of today like.
Click to expand...

It remains to be seen if people will buy it, but I can see the appeal. Print one now, then d/l the image to your pc for FB or a wallpaper..whatever. At 100 bucks, it's going to be an impulse purchase for a lot of people.
 
Cost per photo is all that matters, and it'll probably be terribly expensive.
 
I'll pass. Besides I have a dedicated photo printer that I salvaged out of a Kodak picture kiosk.
 
Thermal printers making a comeback? The Ink Cartridge Gods will not be pleased.
 
This isn't entirely new and posed tons of problems in the past as longevity was a huge issue with this type of stuff.
 
MrGuvernment said:
That is what you call innovating, a company that owned the camera world but failed when it came to digital...now coming up with instant gratification products that the people of today like.
Click to expand...

Polaroid is just a name. The company does not exist at least in continuity with the original company.
 
Trimlock said:
This isn't entirely new and posed tons of problems in the past as longevity was a huge issue with this type of stuff.
Click to expand...

It is still essentially a digital camera, images can be sent by conventional means or printed by more conventional means. The lack of versatility killed the old instant polaroid being digital as well may make this more viable.
 
jpm100 said:
It is still essentially a digital camera, images can be sent by conventional means or printed by more conventional means. The lack of versatility killed the old instant polaroid being digital as well may make this more viable.
Click to expand...

Sure, I know that but the problem is this Polaroid trying to find a new niche that people want? Or is it something that will be seen as useless?
 
I purchased a Polaroid Z2300 for my daughter last Christmas. Looks like the new model cuts down on the bulk quite a bit and it is half the cost. She keeps it in her backpack and uses it on bus rides with her teammates. She enjoys it.
 
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
lilbabycat said:
Cost per photo is all that matters, and it'll probably be terribly expensive.
Click to expand...

As I recall, the cost works out to roughly 30 cents/picture. There are cheaper methods, but Polaroid was never cheap. As I recall, SX70 pics (the ones that developed in front of your eyes) cost about a buck/picture and that was in the 70s (roughly 4 bucks in current dollars).

I wouldn't consider 30 cents prohibitive for this device (if the print quality is good enough). I haven't printed at Walmart recently, but 20 years ago I occasionally did, and the quality was horrible. I believe including development, it ran about 10-15 cents/picture.
 
Trimlock said:
Sure, I know that but the problem is this Polaroid trying to find a new niche that people want? Or is it something that will be seen as useless?
Click to expand...

This is Polaroid trying to move into a bigger market. We have to see it to know if it's good, but on the surface I think this sounds pretty cool. I'm generally not into P/S cameras, but I'd consider this one. If the print colors are accurate, it could be useful for having a reference when you post process shots from your good camera. It'd also be good for holiday shots. you can print out pics and hand them out on the spot.

I'm often wrong on the consumer front, but this sounds interesting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top