arrow10 Comments
  1. [...] Polaroid 300 [Polaroid via Photography Bay] [...]

  2. Moochie
    Apr 29 - 1:11 pm

    Wow, what crummy reportage. I won’t say there’s a specific digital only agenda in this report but it does ignore facts & info pertinent to any such discussion.

    If one is looking at this from an informed, factual point of view, 10 bucks a pack is cheap! SX-70 film debuted in 1972 at $6.90. Adjusted for inflation, that would cost $34.99 today! Now, THAT’s not cost effective! A $2.10 (31%) increase in nearly 40 years is practically negligible, considering other things we frequently buy. Remember what gas cost back then? Right around 35 cents, depending on your region of the US. Adjusted for inflation, we should only be paying $1.77 right now! I just paid $2.93 yesterday. That’s over 800% increase in 40 years! Sucha deal.

    So, I’ll be OK paying $10 for film that is superior in every way to the old stuff, thanks. Fuji’s various instant films are spectacular, both Instax & pack film. If you haven’t used them, you’re missing out! I can’t wait to see what the Impossible Project comes up with for color film. And I’ll be among the first to check out new Polaroid SX-70 or 600 film, too.

    Compare $10 per 10 pack of instant film to medium format film. I save money by developing my own B&W MF film & having color & slide rolls developed only, no prints, & scan it all myself. But to have MF film developed with prints works out to about $4 (average) for the film & $5 for developing & 4X4 prints @ Dwayne’s Photo (one of the cheapest around) & with shipping, that’s over $10 per roll. For 12-16 shots per roll, that’s just about the same price as instant film. That’s a wash. See how facts work?

    So, if one were looking at actual, real fact, one would find that instant film is quite cost effective.

  3. jon
    Apr 29 - 3:26 pm

    thanks moochie, it wasn’t just me. instant integral film is ridiculously expensive at the moment, $10/10pack is a bargain for such.

    kudos to polaroid, even though i am annoyed they’re only doing it because of the demand for similar fuji products after they killed their other integral films.


  4. Jan Andersson
    Apr 30 - 2:41 am

    Not all of us is shooting for the fun of it; most shots I make is in my job. And I welcome any system that will eliminate the time lap from the shooting moment to the showing moment, i.e. unload the digital camera to the PC, open and edit the picture files, rename, (compact and email), print, store and backup. Someone is paying for this time, and often waiting for the prints, counting the minutes. So until we have a 10” display PhotoPad with internal lens and full area LED floodlight and flashes on the other side, and which can be handed over to my employers instantly, the Polaroid will be useful.

  5. [...] Despite that, the newly revived firm has introduced an updated version of the OneStep camera (the Polaroid PIC 300) that, yes, uses instant film. That trip down memory lane will set you back $90 for the [...]

  6. Fiveby Tuesday
    Jul 09 - 4:24 pm

    Wow, congrats Polaroid! – Now if it only saved the images to a flash drive and printed them! That would be the BOMB! – Lets go Polaroid! -

  7. Dave
    Aug 09 - 10:08 am

    Fiveby Tuesday – You’d have to build a scanner into the camera and probably have it hold them until they were fully developed before it scanned and sent them out.. which would be a useless feature anyhow considering you’d have the physical medium within seconds and could feed it through a scanner later on. Not every device needs to be digital.

    I’d love to see how small they could make these cameras with the smaller film. I had an old instant camera that would print out stickers of the photographs you took back that was fairly compact but I imagine they could still do better than that.

  8. Yabai.Youth
    Aug 30 - 4:36 am

    Are you kidding me Polaroid? A rebranded “Fujifilm Instax Mini 7″ is the best you can do? For an entire century, Polaroid has been the leader in instant photography, and now after discontinuing their entire camera and film line-up, their claim to a comeback is a rebranded, price-inflated (I got mine for only fourty bucks Canadian), sub-par image quality camera.
    I’m sorry for the negative comment, but really, I love Polaroid and there is nothing more I would love to see then a revival of instant films, but as I see it, this is not the way to revive a dying medium.

  9. coley
    Sep 09 - 6:47 pm

    i would like to hear pros and cons comparing the polaroid pic-300 to fuji instax mini……………..please…………anybody??? image quality? user friendly? film costs?

    thank you!!!

  10. colorbroken
    Sep 09 - 9:20 pm

    COLEY: There probably isn’t any difference at all. Best guess is that THE POLAROID HOLDING CORP is just having them rebrand the Fuji stuff… They’ve been producing it for a while, nobody is going back to the drawing board here. You want progress, go to Impossible Project.

Mobile Theme