 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Film Photography / Medium format / February 2008R.I.P. -- an essential tool for celeb's personal lives dies
R.I.P. Filed under: R.I.P. http://img.perezhilton.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/polaroid__oPt.jpg This is a sad day. An essential part of our childhood is going into extinction. Polaroid has announced that they will stop making Polaroid instant cameras and film. For reals! Instead, the company is going to focus on making digital cameras and manufacturing TVs. Buy your Polaroids and film on eBay. They're gonna be a thing of the past real soon! Such a bummer. Posted: February 12, 2008 at 6:11 pm http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2008/02/08/polaroid_shutting_ 2_mass_facilities_laying_off_150/ ___________________________________________________________________ http://www.icgi.org/2007/04/medicalization-of-circumcision-an-online-slide-show/ > R.I.P. > Filed under: R.I.P. [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > Such a bummer. --- I don't get it. The digital camera now is what Polaroid used to be, only better. Where's the loss? > Posted: February 12, 2008 at 6:11 pm > > http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2008/02/08/polaroi... > > ___________________________________________________________________http://www.icgi.org/2007/04/medicalization-of-circumcision-an-online-... >> R.I.P. >> Filed under: R.I.P. [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > --- I don't get it. The digital camera now is what Polaroid used to > be, only better. Where's the loss? Well for one you get a hard print in a minute. No need for memory cards, a pc, ink, paper. Besides, the digital camera world is flooded right now. Why bother enetering it? >> Posted: February 12, 2008 at 6:11 pm >> >> http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2008/02/08/polaroi... >> >> ___________________________________________________________________http://www.icgi.org/2007/04/medicalization-of-circumcision-an-online-... FDR <nospam@asdfkdskkl.com> wrote in news:47b22202$0$16691 $4c368faf@roadrunner.com: > Besides, the digital camera world is flooded > right now. Why bother enetering it? They're not "Just entering it" I have a Poloroid camera from oh probably 3-5 years ago on my desk right now. PCD 640,it's max resolution is 640x480 > > R.I.P. > > Filed under: R.I.P. [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > --- I don't get it. The digital camera now is what Polaroid used to > be, only better. Where's the loss? Well, the computer is now what typewriters use to be. So, it's just the way of life. When my 11-year-old cousin looks at a rotary dial phone and asks how do you use it, you know life is going forward, and I guess, getting better. > > Posted: February 12, 2008 at 6:11 pm > > >http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2008/02/08/polaroi... >>R.I.P. >>Filed under: R.I.P. [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > --- I don't get it. The digital camera now is what Polaroid used to > be, only better. Where's the loss? That's what I was thinking. And these home printing processes are getting better all the time. I saw a photo printed the other day, and I couldn't tell that it was done at home. And think of the creative freedom you have with photoshop, how you can fix the errors.  Signature_________________ Alric Knebel http://www.ironeyefortress.com/C-SPAN_loon.html http://www.ironeyefortress.com > > --- I don't get it. The digital camera now is what Polaroid used to > > be, only better. Where's the loss? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > couldn't tell that it was done at home. And think of the creative > freedom you have with photoshop, how you can fix the errors. I agree. What someone has to come up with is a digital camera with a built in printer, so you can give a physical photo to a third person instantly... SignatureChris Mack "Refugee, total sh.t. That's how I've always seen us. 'Invid Fan' Not a help, you'll admit, to agreement between us." -'Deal/No Deal', CHESS Recently, Invid Fan <invid@localnet.com> posted: >>> --- I don't get it. The digital camera now is what Polaroid used to >>> be, only better. Where's the loss? [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > built in printer, so you can give a physical photo to a third person > instantly... Hmmm... that sounds a lot like... a Polaroid! Neil >> I agree. What someone has to come up with is a digital camera with a >> built in printer, so you can give a physical photo to a third person >> instantly... >> > Hmmm... that sounds a lot like... a Polaroid! Not only that, but it is almost exactly what Polaroid is planning to do next. On 2/13/2008 8:00 AM Q.G. de Bakker spake thus: >>> I agree. What someone has to come up with is a digital camera with a >>> built in printer, so you can give a physical photo to a third person [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Not only that, but it is almost exactly what Polaroid is planning to do > next. Which will be, what? a six-pound device the size of an inkjet printer? That's a *great* idea. Oughta sell like hotcakes. To bring this on-topic at least to r.p.e.large-format, that sounds like a good argument in favor of large format cameras ... I'll miss 55 P/N though to be honest I haven't used much in the last 7~8 years. It was a remarkable film though. JD >>>R.I.P. >>>Filed under: R.I.P. [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] >couldn't tell that it was done at home. And think of the creative >freedom you have with photoshop, how you can fix the errors. You mean the errors that genetics made in not giving you the perfect nose or face, or the kind bust you really wanted? >>>>R.I.P. >>>>Filed under: R.I.P. [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > You mean the errors that genetics made in not giving you the perfect > nose or face, or the kind bust you really wanted? No, I mean when I get caught putting my dick in your mouth, and I realized that being drunk wasn't an excuse. Signature_________________ Alric Knebel http://www.ironeyefortress.com/C-SPAN_loon.html http://www.ironeyefortress.com >>> R.I.P. >>> Filed under: R.I.P. [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > I couldn't tell that it was done at home. And think of the creative > freedom you have with photoshop, how you can fix the errors. I just went through a box of old photos. The slides are perfect at 20+ years. The Kodacolors are pretty good at 20+ years. The Polaroids are uniformly and universally awful, faded and almost invisible. Polaroid can RIP and good riddance. I think the old old black and whites that had to be "coated" have lasted, but that's about it. SignatureMichael > >>> R.I.P. > >>> Filed under: R.I.P. [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > can RIP and good riddance. I think the old old black and whites that > had to be "coated" have lasted, but that's about it. My experience: Slides perfect at 35 years. Kodacolor prints also perfect at 35 years. Polaroid color prints at 41 years look like Civil War daguerreotypes left out in the sun since Appomattox. Coated Polaroid b&w prints okay; I recall the lack of contrast in them was there when the prints were developed. These shots were taken with the Model 100. Am I remembering correctly that Polaroid b&w film ca. 1968 was ASA 3000? Can that be right? On Feb 15, 7:43 am, Audie Murphy's Ghost <takebackamer...@2008.com> wrote: > In article <2008021500155675249-adunc79617@mypacksnet>, Michael > [quoted text clipped - 47 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Yes, absolutely correct from type 42 onward, the polaroid 110B having a pinhole in the lens cover to make use of this astounding speed. David >>>>> R.I.P. >>>>> Filed under: R.I.P. [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] > Am I remembering correctly that Polaroid b&w film ca. 1968 was ASA > 3000? Can that be right? Yes that is right. Polaroid 3000 used a special flash called a "winklight" to expose it indoors. Grain was no issue for the large formatl contact print. SignatureMichael > R.I.P. > Filed under: R.I.P. [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2008/02/08/polaroid_shutting_ 2_mass_facilities_laying_off_150/ Well, buying a camera and film would be a waste of money, wouldn't it? I mean, where would you buy the film once used up what you have? Signature_________________ Alric Knebel http://www.ironeyefortress.com/C-SPAN_loon.html http://www.ironeyefortress.com >> R.I.P. >> Filed under: R.I.P. [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > Well, buying a camera and film would be a waste of money, wouldn't it? > I mean, where would you buy the film once used up what you have? Fuji. >>>R.I.P. >>>Filed under: R.I.P. [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > Fuji. Does Fuji sell the self-processing film? Signature_________________ Alric Knebel http://www.ironeyefortress.com/C-SPAN_loon.html http://www.ironeyefortress.com >>>>R.I.P. >>>>Filed under: R.I.P. [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > > Does Fuji sell the self-processing film? Yes. They also sell the cameras. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.