Kodak Instant Cameras: a Failed Gamble

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 4 гру 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 115

  • @PaulMcKenna-p5h
    @PaulMcKenna-p5h 10 місяців тому +14

    I worked at Target in the 1970's when the Kodak instant camera came out. We carried Polaroid and Kodak in the camera dept, so I played with both systems a lot. We had a lot of film to use as demo product. The difference between the 2 camera systems was night and day. Kodak was vastly superior to the Polaroid in its image quality. I saved up my minimum wage earnings and bought a Kodak Handle. 45 years later, the prints still look pretty damn good!

    • @robertknight4672
      @robertknight4672 10 місяців тому +1

      I have some polaroid pictures I recently found from my childhood that still look pretty decent. Those photos are from the 80s and I think they were taken with some of that more higher-end Polaroids. When was the Polaroid Spectra and a few of the others I believe were taken with the sun 660 what time does sonar autofocus.

    • @areallyrealisticguyd4333
      @areallyrealisticguyd4333 4 місяці тому

      I feel like Polaroid didn't really perfect their chemistry until the late 80's into the 90's. Fuji ACE and Kodak definitely had better science behind their products but unfortunately we'll never see what Kodak would've been.

    • @therhett17
      @therhett17 3 місяці тому

      @@areallyrealisticguyd4333 Technically we do see what Kodak would've been when looking at Fuji Instax. It's the same exact process as Kodak instant film. They licensed the process to Fujifilm back in the 90s

    • @toonman361
      @toonman361 18 днів тому

      I am 63 and always thought that Polaroid photos looked washed out. Back in the day, when instant meant exclusively Polaroid, they were a miracle. But as competition came along, they look pretty bad. I don't really get their resurgence.

  • @bradlevantis913
    @bradlevantis913 10 місяців тому +8

    The colour burst 250 was the one we had.
    My parents got it as a gift for attending a timeshare presentation in Florida. When they lost the case Kodiac had to recall all of them. I was young but my dad put me in charge of dealing with it so I called the number, and they sent out a recall package. It was a shipping bag with their address on it. You filled out your address and what you wanted as a replacement. We choose a Disk Camera.
    You wrote everything right on the bag, put the camera in and dropped it off in a mail box (it was all pre paid). I have vivid memories of dropping that bag in to the box wondering if I should have kept it…. About 6 weeks later a brand new Kodiac disk camera arrived in the mail.
    All the memories….

  • @onometre
    @onometre 10 місяців тому +17

    My grandfather worked for Kodak at the time. He was a real follow-the-rules kind of guy so he did follow through on the recall and returned all my family's instant cameras

    • @robertknight4672
      @robertknight4672 10 місяців тому +4

      Someone in my family must have owned one of these for a brief time. I find it interesting that Kodak offered a matte finish instant film. I was recently given a picture from Kodak instant camera at first I thought it was just a really bad scan of a Polaroid Spectra picture until I turned it over in saw Kodak written on it and it had the typical pods you'd find in an instant film bulging out.

  • @bpark10001
    @bpark10001 10 місяців тому +4

    The Polaroid photo, after drying for several days, CAN be split by cutting around the edge. What you get is a "color slide" from the front & a chalk-white back. You can lay the front part of the photo face down & spray the back with flat white paint. After drying, you can trim it anyway you want. I used to take portrait photo & use the picture on a badge.
    Old Polaroid photos will often delaminate & bulge like a pillow, only being held together around the edges.

  • @HennerZeller
    @HennerZeller 10 місяців тому +18

    My parents had such a Kodak camera when I was a kid. The quality of these pictures were miles ahead of the Polaroid. It is a difference of an actual good-quality picture you'd get from a lab and the, well, crappy quality Polaroids with shiny surface and off-colors we all know.
    The patent ruling meant that the Kodak-camera became useless and started my life-long opposition of the patent system: if such a clearly better and different product that out-innovated Polaroid can be sued out of existence then not only the other company looses but the customers. With the shield of the patent system, Polaroid continued to _not_ innovate and kept selling their low-quality product until the end.
    These days, patents are written so vague so that they can be used to manifest non-innovating monopolies instead of what they were meant to be: stimulating innovation.

    • @SeekingTheLoveThatGodMeans7648
      @SeekingTheLoveThatGodMeans7648 10 місяців тому +6

      I would have hoped the two companies would have come to a technology sharing and cross licensing accommodation. It seemed that Polaroid managed to get a de facto monopoly on instant photography, and another American government might have frowned more deeply on this. But eventually digital photography came and both companies took a bath. In the end greed swallows itself.

    • @robertknight4672
      @robertknight4672 10 місяців тому

      @@SeekingTheLoveThatGodMeans7648 and now instant photography is more of a hobby.

    • @zeeclone
      @zeeclone 10 місяців тому

      I was part of a design team that got shut down by a patent troll. We had to gut all of the redeployability and standalone operation capability of our design. Said trolls never deployed a God damned thing. Our lobotomised design operated for the 5 years it was originally intended, but the longer term capabilities were removed entirely and all the units were scrapped at the end of the contract. That experience along with the massive rise in DIWAC patents around the same time also soured my view of the patent system

  • @frogz
    @frogz 10 місяців тому +5

    i am SO glad i found your channel, way better than simon rambling on about some random topic, you always put out pure gold!

  • @HindProto
    @HindProto 10 місяців тому +1

    Gosh I'm so glad someone finally made a video on these things. I found my mom's old EK4 in its box while going through a closet and she let me keep it, such an interesting looking thing that I've never really seen much info on. And yet, this all makes sense, my mom's EK4 looks like it was barely ever used, I remember she would talk about how she was barely ever able to afford film for it which, yeah it makes sense now. A few little neat points about it specifically: The EK4 features the circular rangefinder mentioned at 11:00, which itself sits inside of a rectangular reticle like that of the EK2. It's almost a copper color and gathers light from a small window just above the viewfinder. The focusing system on it is also interesting in that it has 2 notches around the lens housing, and as the focus slider is adjusted the lens will rotate and the notches will line up with distances given in both meters and feet.
    Honestly such a shame that there's no film for these things floating around, I remember tracking down the battery it used and hoping to find some film I could use before I realized it would be impossible. Part of me really hopes that one day It will get a similar treatment to Polaroid where a company starts reproducing film packs but, with how different it is from Polaroid film and how much more expensive it was the realist part of my head says that will never happen.

  • @Ayelmar
    @Ayelmar 10 місяців тому +4

    I had The Handle as a young teen, and absolutely loved it. The prints were much nicer than the Polaroid prints from my brother's One Step, with a more pleasing rectangular image, and the prints seem to more resistent to fading.
    I was deeply saddened when they were forced to discontinue the sale of the film....
    That camera really helped cement my lifelong love of photography.

  • @AstraLee-Investigator_Sapling-
    @AstraLee-Investigator_Sapling- 10 місяців тому +3

    Just got home from work, time to sit down with a comfy new video

  • @bltvd
    @bltvd 10 місяців тому +9

    It seems crazy that Kodak went out of their way to not infringe on the Polaroid patents but they were still able to convince a court otherwise.

    • @robertknight4672
      @robertknight4672 10 місяців тому +5

      Kodak eliminated the mirror which is the reason the Polaroid cameras are shaped the way they are.

  • @CHEsnproductions
    @CHEsnproductions 10 місяців тому +14

    Would like to correct you that the first kodak instant film was ISO 160 not 150, as it says on the packaging. The later HS144 and trimprint was iso 320. The Fujifilm integral film (FI-10) was completely compatible with kodak cameras until the release of FI-800, which could be modified to fit. The Japanese lawsuit was not developed further because Polaroid did not have a significant market in Japan unlike in the US, they did however settle for r&d sharing with magnetic tape as you mentioned but also film technology. Later polaroid films used dyes Fujifilm developed. The whole story of Fotorama is quite interesting. It was arguably superior to polaroid in almost everyway. Another follow up video on Fotorama and instax would be amazing.

    • @paulsylvester1394
      @paulsylvester1394 10 місяців тому +1

      Polaroid integral film was ASA 150 but the newer film was ASA 600, a big improvement given the film size. Polaroid had done some work on integral film @ ASA 2000.

  • @petebeatminister
    @petebeatminister 10 місяців тому +28

    Winning the law suit for 909 million was probably a much better deal than having to sell cameras and film to earn the same amount.

    • @Curt_Sampson
      @Curt_Sampson 10 місяців тому +7

      Not really. Polaroid was already selling cameras and film anyway, so that would have been just more of the same. To win the lawsuit they instead had to have employees figure out how Kodak's cameras and film worked, determine what parts infringed their patents, hire lawyers, go through discovery, and so on, spending ten years at the whole job.

  • @Otokichi786
    @Otokichi786 10 місяців тому +2

    Note: Am Eastman Kodak Kodamatic 940 is used by a kid to photograph Sarah Connor at the end of "The Terminator" (1984).

  • @cabbelos
    @cabbelos 10 місяців тому +4

    Great series so far! I was thinking of the Fujifilm products while watching this video, and seeing as you mentioned them in the end, hope you cover them in the next part. They had several instant camera and film lines nearly completely unknown to western consumers, and therefore not many people talk about them like Polaroid. They were the last ones to produce packfilm (up to 2016 or so) and singlehandedly kept the instant photography market alive with Instax while Polaroid and Kodak were going through their respective bankruptcies.

    • @MeteorMark
      @MeteorMark 10 місяців тому

      Fuji Instant Cameras are still Big in Japan as we saw when recently in Tokyo, but often referred to as Polaroids 😂
      Polaroid even has customers there 😉

  • @PixelSchnitzel
    @PixelSchnitzel 10 місяців тому +3

    Thanks for covering this aspect. What a terrific and interesting series this has been! I had a Colorburst and loved that camera. I was so sad when Polaroid screwed over Kodak.

  • @svgalene465
    @svgalene465 10 місяців тому +2

    I had one of those Kodak instant cameras. The color reproduction was far superior to Polaroid’s, which always had a greenish cast.

  • @yellowcrescent
    @yellowcrescent 7 місяців тому +2

    Would have been interesting if the Kodak film were allowed to survive-- I didn't know it was similar to FP-100 (RIP Fotorama). I do wish Fuji or the new Polaroid company would bring back peel-apart 100 Series film... I saw a full unopened case (20 packs) of FP-100C on eBay recently with a Buy It Now price of almost $3k... And it "only" expired in 2008! lol. Sadly, most of the late-date packs have long been snatched up or are still sitting in the back of somebody's film freezer, so most of the stuff for sale now has expiration dates from the early 2000s. I think the last batch produced bore expiration dates of 2018/2019.

    • @analogwisdom
      @analogwisdom 4 місяці тому

      Fujifilm Instax is basically what Kodak film might've become if it was never discontinued. Instax is the most advanced film (chemically) ever made and is very excellent, even if held back by cheap cameras.
      Kodak, on the other hand, was actively doing a ton of instant film R&D. Before the lawsuit, they were close to releasing to market a 3200 ISO (!!!) instant integral color film. It's really a shame how much innovation the lawsuit killed.

  • @jonathanreedpike
    @jonathanreedpike 10 місяців тому +1

    I worked in a large, Boston based, camera store in the EK instant film era. We sold way (way) more Polaroid than EK film. In fact it wasn't until the film was no longer available that a demand appeared. People got mad at us because in their minds an instant camera was a Polaroid and they figured we were lying to them about the lawsuit (karens are not a new development).
    I think that the EK film was superior, and more adaptable than Polaroid film because it was exposed from the back. I had a 4x5 camera back that was able to use the EK product directly, with Polaroid , adapting the sx70 style film was not possible without many compromises.

  • @Miata822
    @Miata822 10 місяців тому +5

    Yes, I got $40, if I recall correctly, for the nameplate from a Handle that I picked up at a garage sale for almost free since the film was already unavailable.

  • @charleshendrix3820
    @charleshendrix3820 10 місяців тому +4

    Also the trim prints could be cut after you removed the processing pack off the back.

  • @harryragland7840
    @harryragland7840 10 місяців тому +2

    Kodak also had a darkroom version of this. In the early 80s, it was very difficult to do your own color prints from negative. Their system let you expose the paper with a simple enlarger and then you passed the paper into a tank of sodium hydroxide solution. I still have some of the prints I did in college.

    • @11THEFEZMAN11
      @11THEFEZMAN11 10 місяців тому

      I remember that, I worked in a camera shop in the late 80’s ilford also had a “system” cibachrom (sp) and there was the “day lab” i lusted after the day lab, I ended up getting a bunch of darkroom equipment from a relative, I just recently tossed the Bessler 23c duel dichro, enlarger, I still have prints I made off of it hanging in my home close to 30 years later

    • @11THEFEZMAN11
      @11THEFEZMAN11 10 місяців тому

      I had the crank one, when I was a kid, but the film was too expensive for me to buy when I was 12, ended up getting my check for $40

    • @ilmago5291
      @ilmago5291 7 місяців тому +1

      yes,a mini lab called ektaflex

  • @charlesurrea1451
    @charlesurrea1451 10 місяців тому +4

    Please don't take my Kodachrome away.

  • @haywoodyoudome
    @haywoodyoudome 10 місяців тому

    One of the very few UA-camrs that actually puts the links in the description when they mention it in the video.

  • @hattree
    @hattree 10 місяців тому +2

    My grandmother had one of those, I can remember her cranking the photos out.

  • @adrianohaha7659
    @adrianohaha7659 10 місяців тому +2

    Simply put: corporate greed, once again, prevented humanity from having something that worked.
    ,,this is why we can't have nice things"...

  • @Allan_aka_RocKITEman
    @Allan_aka_RocKITEman 10 місяців тому +1

    There is a _"photo-finish"_ joke here somewhere, but I have not yet had enough coffee this morning to try to make one...😉
    {Great video, Gilles...👍}

  • @RCAvhstape
    @RCAvhstape 10 місяців тому +1

    Hopefully you can do a follow up video on the latest line of Fujifilm instant camera systems, and maybe compare them to the Polaroid Originals reissued One Step cameras.

  • @FirstnameLastname-gn6kz
    @FirstnameLastname-gn6kz 10 місяців тому +1

    Used to own the Kodak EK6 and exchanged it for a Kodak ColorDisc camera in the mail back in mid-1980s.

  • @johncantrell614
    @johncantrell614 10 місяців тому +1

    I had one of those color burst cameras. Compared to the little instamatic I had before that, this thing was high tech. Had a nice case and stuff for it. Really bummed me out when I got the little card in the mail about a year later saying that they were discontinuing making film for it, it took pretty sharp pictures………

  • @AutistCat
    @AutistCat 10 місяців тому +2

    Hi there, Ginnes Messier! I love this channel, you’re one of the most knowledgeable and diligent people I’ve seen so far on UA-cam. This will be a channel I’m subscribed to going forward, very impressive stuff.

  • @kirksway1
    @kirksway1 10 місяців тому +1

    My parents have a "Handle" camera in all black. I found it in a cupboard and assumed it was from the Nineties. I never would have guess it was this old. My Dad said that they never used it and that it was a "sales award gift" and he thought it was something special. Little did he know 😆

  • @richiehoyt8487
    @richiehoyt8487 10 місяців тому +3

    I don't want to libel Kodak, but I don't think they bothered with a recall/compensation scheme in Europe, or at any rate in the Rep. of Ireland. All's I know is my little sis got stiffed with her 'handle', which she'd only had for less than 6 months. Maybe it was for the best, the film was unfeasibly expensive for a working class schoolgirl in a country deep in recession. To be fair though, when you look at the insane complexity of the technology and the chemistry that went into it, you can hardly blame 'em for charging so much..!

    • @SeekingTheLoveThatGodMeans7648
      @SeekingTheLoveThatGodMeans7648 10 місяців тому +1

      Kodak seemed to be hoping people would pay more for the quality.

    • @richiehoyt8487
      @richiehoyt8487 10 місяців тому

      @@SeekingTheLoveThatGodMeans7648 Yeah, that would make -since- sense. If I'm being entirely honest, I don't think my sister cared whether she got a Polaroid or a Kodak, it was just the 'gimmick' factor of an 'Instant Camera'. Of course, Polaroid cameras had been around for a couple of decades by the mid~'80's, so 'gimmick' probably wasn't the most accurate term, but you get what I mean. For a little girl, the 'Wowee!' element was high!

  • @analogemma
    @analogemma 10 місяців тому +3

    I cannot stop watching your channel. If you ever want to feature an electromechanical keyboard or keyboard instrument on your channel I would be more than happy to lend you something-I always get weird shit in the shop

  • @Kumimono
    @Kumimono 10 місяців тому +1

    Well I think they look neat, hmph! I have one of those handle-types, though it's not labeled as such, just Kodak EK-2. Been wondering about, retrofitting a small digital camera inside. Plenty of room.

  • @AtheistOrphan
    @AtheistOrphan 4 місяці тому

    Working in the retail photo trade for many years, I recall people coming into my shop and asking for film for these right up until the mid-2000s.

  • @analogwisdom
    @analogwisdom 4 місяці тому

    Great video. The Polaroid lawsuit really stifled instant film innovation and was another thing that led to their downfall - though the nearly $1 billion was a historical amount, it was still not as much as Polaroid was expecting to get and they weren't prepared for that. That, combined with the lack of competition in the instant film market, were really two of the final nails in the proverbial coffin.
    The initial lawsuit victory was actually a surprise to everyone - the main Polaroid patent they focused on Kodak infringing had never even had a product based on it brought to market. It was the first ever major patent case like this that the plantiff won. Part of the reason Polaroid and Fujifilm made their agreement was that Japanese law explicity states that patents that are claimed to be infringed upon must have a product on the market to be brought to court. They both agreed that it was better to settle and make an agreement rather than have a drawn-out court battle.
    We all know how that story went! Great video, thanks again.

  • @Mephistopholies
    @Mephistopholies 10 місяців тому +1

    I like being told stuff by people wearing bow ties...
    The design of these is an excellent example of high Kitch.

  • @achaycock
    @achaycock 10 місяців тому

    That's really interesting and useful as I happened to pick up one of these Kodak cameras before I had any notion of what it was. Although it's not boxed, it does have the nameplate and the little indentations do indeed have someone's initials.

  • @P_RO_
    @P_RO_ 10 місяців тому

    Sad when a superior product gets stopped being offered for sale to the public, but patents and copyrights are necessary for the orderly business and legal functions of society. And a hint: Some recalled products become high-value collectors item's later on but know the legal ramifications of what you're doing because it may have a cost to ignore the recall even years later.

  • @TexDrinkwater
    @TexDrinkwater 10 місяців тому

    I remember these, and remember how much better the photos turned out than Polaroid. Thanks!

    • @paulsylvester1394
      @paulsylvester1394 10 місяців тому

      Sorry to say that the 600 series Polaroid cameras with the built in electronic flash took far superior photos than any Kodak camera.

  • @robertknight4672
    @robertknight4672 10 місяців тому +1

    A lot of Kodak cameras have those indentations for initials on them even outside of instant photography. I occasionally shoot 110 film and I have a Kodak extralight 10 that has those three indentations on the back of it.

    • @olddisneylandtickets
      @olddisneylandtickets 10 місяців тому +2

      When I was a kid in the 70's we took the extra letter stickers and spelled inappropriate things on the back of the closet door!!!

  • @photonik-luminescence
    @photonik-luminescence 10 місяців тому +1

    I happen to also have a ek kodak camera type. Honestly it looks pretty cool, it's sad i may never take any images with it. The adjustable focus is in my opinion a pretty good design (although hard to say that the ultra sound focus of Polaroid was less better, but the adjustable focus is pretty nice).

  • @paulsylvester1394
    @paulsylvester1394 10 місяців тому +3

    You are incorrect about camera size. Polaroid cameras with their single mirror allow the light path to be folded while Kodak cameras needed either a full straight path or required two mirrors to fold the light path.
    Polaroid did develop both systems and chose the advantages of the single mirror system.
    What really sank Kodak was film processing. Spreading the reagent required some key things to be done to spread evenly with no bubbles and Polaroid had that patented. Kodak knew this all along and wrote tons of cover your ass memos about violating Polaroid patents. Those memos helped sink Kodak.

  • @arieldavid20
    @arieldavid20 7 місяців тому

    Thanks for a great video 💫

  • @MCW1955
    @MCW1955 10 місяців тому +1

    Great video. I had the handle, took nice photos and good colors. Fun camera, but alas, thanks Polaroid.

  • @boowiebear
    @boowiebear 10 місяців тому

    Polaroid riding those patents into the dirt. I am fine with patents but this is a good example of winning the battle and losing the war.

  • @paulhellawell5920
    @paulhellawell5920 10 місяців тому

    I had the later Kodak with the electronic flash. It took very good pictures. It was very annoying to have to return it.

  • @JasonBelcher-c1z
    @JasonBelcher-c1z 2 місяці тому

    There are actually two mirrors in the Kodak Colorburst, so it is not more compact than the SX-70 box style cameras.

  • @tonytfuntek3262
    @tonytfuntek3262 10 місяців тому

    If memory serves me well I remember the Keystone camera company also manufacturing an instant camera. Not sure which film format it utilized. Thank you

    • @ilmago5291
      @ilmago5291 7 місяців тому

      2 keystone both whit integated electronic flash:one use peel apart rectangular film like 669 and one other model used sx 70 film;both very uncommon at time but relatively easy to find on line used

  • @asadabdulqaabir4006
    @asadabdulqaabir4006 10 місяців тому

    I remember my father owned a Colorburst 50, but maybe in Mexico was sold under another model name, I'm not sure. The camera was huge and clumsy but the photos passed the proof of time. 40+ years after and they still look well. As a kid, It always amazed me the odd sensation of the slider shutter in this camera 😂.

  • @deltacx1059
    @deltacx1059 10 місяців тому +1

    Couldn't make a better product so they had to play dirty.

  • @williamwood528
    @williamwood528 10 місяців тому

    In addition to a check or gift certificate, in the US at least, you could choose to receive one share of Kodak stock. At the time it was worth about $60 if I recall correctly.

  • @SchardtCinematic
    @SchardtCinematic 10 місяців тому

    Any old camera is a collectors item to me. It doesn't have to be worth much. I just live old camera and computer tech.

  • @adnamamedia
    @adnamamedia 10 місяців тому +1

    I really wanna know how that Colorburst camera works... the lens is not directly in line at all with the film plane! I can't find anything online about it. Is there a reflector in the hump on the back? It's truly puzzling me.

    • @analogwisdom
      @analogwisdom 4 місяці тому

      The lens image circle is directly in line with the film plane. the film is exposed through the rear.

  • @Alexfieldmusicofficial
    @Alexfieldmusicofficial 9 місяців тому

    Hello, my friend gave me a Kodak handle instant camera as a gift. Is there any other filmstock compatible that I can find?

    • @AtheistOrphan
      @AtheistOrphan 4 місяці тому

      Unfortunately no. All long-gone. Makes an interesting display item though!

  • @christopherflouton4525
    @christopherflouton4525 10 місяців тому

    Something you may find interesting...
    When Kodak was forced to stop selling their instant cameras they offered owners a "buy back" of sorts. If you mailed your camera back to Kodak you would receive your choice of a $25 gift certificate for any Kodak products, a free disc camera, or one share of Kodak stock. I had 2 different models. And I still think they produced much better photos than Polaroid ever did.

  • @moonsattic
    @moonsattic 5 місяців тому

    Polaroid type 300 black and white film , specificly 331, also shot though the back of the film and the manual for my microcams warn that the images will be mirrored.

    • @analogwisdom
      @analogwisdom 4 місяці тому

      Type 331 and its related films were just like every other Polaroid integral film, shot through the front. The reason it was mirrored is because the microcam had no mirror.

    • @moonsattic
      @moonsattic 4 місяці тому

      @@analogwisdom I own two micro cams, the manual states that 331/337 b&w films only will be reversed, when I opened up my old pack of 331 film it infect was loaded upside down compared to the 339 color film.

    • @ilmago5291
      @ilmago5291 3 місяці тому

      @@moonsattic very interesting; probably professional black white autofilm 300 series was a kodak version that expose from the rear because kodak working on a 3200 iso integral black white film

  • @KristianWontroba
    @KristianWontroba 10 місяців тому

    “The Handle” might make a fun band name. 😊 I think Kodak was trying to tap into the CB craze with the that name? 😅

  • @1987productions
    @1987productions 6 місяців тому

    there are adapters for this camera.

  • @jeffclark2725
    @jeffclark2725 10 місяців тому

    So that is what happened to Kodak great video learning something from all these video's

  • @kk4pqr
    @kk4pqr 10 місяців тому

    How did the lost?

  • @juslitor
    @juslitor 10 місяців тому

    Would be neat if Polaroid started making film for Kodaks wee beasties too.

  • @joehopfield
    @joehopfield 10 місяців тому

    I recently acquired a Kodak handle to use its rollers with an Instax box camera project. It is ... hideous.

  • @HuggieBear39
    @HuggieBear39 10 місяців тому

    My dad had a Handle camera. He bought it while we were stationed in Germany. He must have taken 1000s of pictures with it

  • @petercarlisle2927
    @petercarlisle2927 10 місяців тому

    Oh Yea!

  • @ClimateScepticSceptic-ub2rg
    @ClimateScepticSceptic-ub2rg 9 місяців тому

    This victory didn't save Polaroid from collapsing into bankruptcy in 2001. Kodak followed it in 2012, but it emerged in 2013 again and still exixts today, a shadow of its former self. Polaroid film materials are now produced by another company that bought the rights.
    The moral of this story is that ten year patent battles are ruinous for both sides.

  • @geophizz
    @geophizz 10 місяців тому

    Ironically, Instax is primarily Kodak technology and is going strong, while Polaroid is much less popular.

  • @Je_QzcY3mN0
    @Je_QzcY3mN0 10 місяців тому

    Do Fuji next

  • @SuV33358
    @SuV33358 7 місяців тому

    I was raised by Kodak 😊

  • @gasmaskery
    @gasmaskery 10 місяців тому

    I prefer your old intro

  • @mcb187
    @mcb187 10 місяців тому

    Oh how giants have fallen… today, you can pick up 20 exposures of Instax Mini (which I use in my RB67) for $10-15. Or, you can get 8 exposures of Polaroid for… $18-20… no contest.

  • @robjanusch2874
    @robjanusch2874 10 місяців тому +1

    I owned them both. The Kodak pictures were FAR SUPERIOR to the Polaroid and had more dynamic colors!!

  • @garavin
    @garavin 10 місяців тому

    It's too bad Kodak didn't just make a deal to pay royalties, license fees, or enter a technology sharing agreement with Polaroid. Kodak's color reproduction and quality of the finished image was always superior to Polaroid.

  • @ericdixon2898
    @ericdixon2898 10 місяців тому +1

    You know Dick Van Dyke is old when he had gray hair back then.

  • @markrix
    @markrix 10 місяців тому

    That unused film u have likely costs as much as the camera, today of course 😊

  • @GrocMax
    @GrocMax 10 місяців тому

    Gilles-
    Do a deep dive on the the midline and DEW line radar systems.

  • @simonstergaard
    @simonstergaard 10 місяців тому +1

    never liked the polaroid quality...its horrible

  • @nickademuss42
    @nickademuss42 10 місяців тому +1

    hoping the company you stole the design from doesnt get mad when you rip them off...........

  • @SidecarBob
    @SidecarBob 10 місяців тому

    When we were newly married my wife made 2 mistakes: The first was buying a Kodak instant camera. While the image quality may have been slightly better than Polaroid, the images still faded pretty quickly (seems to me they weren't quite as bad as my friend's Polaroid) and with no negative there was no option to have them re-printed. Or to get copies for friends & family.
    The second mistake was accepting the voucher from Kodak instead of the cash and choosing the Disc camera instead of the coupon book or (my preference) the share of stock. I think we still have the camera around here somewhere but we only used it a few times because it was terrible.

  • @Nifylau
    @Nifylau 10 місяців тому +1

    Its ISO not I.S.O.
    Its not an acronym, its short for the greek work "Isos", meaning "equal".
    My photography professor hates when people say it like an acronym

    • @analogwisdom
      @analogwisdom 4 місяці тому +1

      ISO stands for International Standards Organization, that's what the name is from, not a Greek word.

  • @Subgunman
    @Subgunman 10 місяців тому

    I don’t see a patent infringement there was more than 10% difference as to how the film worked. The camera portion was irrelevant to the lawsuit. Polaroid quite obviously paid off key people in the courts. Look what happened to them, karma hit Polaroid. From what I have seen on YT there is a group of individuals who have purchased a Polaroid factory in Europe. They had no info as to the chemistry used in the original films. They have a group of chemists working on developing more films. Film from them runs at one dollar per photo. Quite expensive by todays standards.

    • @paulsylvester1394
      @paulsylvester1394 10 місяців тому

      Clearly, you don’t understand the lawsuit or the patents. Polaroid showed it had developed the equivalent Kodak system first, patented key elements, and decided the single mirror system was better. Polaroid demonstrated their version of the through the back system in court. The big key was in spreading the reagent. There are special things you must do to make that work with no defects or bubbles. Polaroid had that protected by patents. Kodak could not get around that and tons of internal memos were written indicating that Kodak was violating Polaroid patents. Those memos, all recorded and cataloged by Kodak, caused them to lose the lawsuit!

  • @imark7777777
    @imark7777777 10 місяців тому

    Monopoly no, showing a different way to create the same thing that the patent shows no that's not acceptable, competition on your market no we don't want innovation. I actually think the separate battery is the better approach. Oh yeah let's not forget they had a better method.
    Similar to what zackscom is doing now.

  • @Fruhmple
    @Fruhmple 10 місяців тому +1

    First!

  • @throwawayacount8838
    @throwawayacount8838 10 місяців тому

    Polaroid? Kodak? Aren't these cheap android phones?🤣🤣🤣

  • @JCWren
    @JCWren 10 місяців тому +1

    I see your collection has gotten so large that you're having to use inventory control stickers :) TR 944369. That's be building 94, isle 43, bay 69, correct?