Home » News » Printer News » Polaroid Develops Ink-free Portable Printer » Comments

Comments for Polaroid Develops Ink-free Portable Printer

Comments

Please wait while we process your request

Please wait while we retrieve the user's information

Bio

Your bio is currently empty. Now is a great time to fill in your profile.

This profile is private.

This profile is only shared with friends.

This profile is under review.

We were unable to request friendship with this user.

We were unable to request friendship with this user. Are you logged in?

Your friendship request has been sent to this user.

We were unable to terminate friendship with this user.

We were unable to terminate friendship with this user. Are you logged in?

You are no longer friends with this user.

We were unable to ignore this user.

We were unable to ignore this user. Are you logged in?

This user is now ignored.

We were unable to stop ignoring this user.

We were unable to stop ignoring this user. Are you logged in?

This user is no longer ignored.

pluck_user_mp-abuse_too_long_err

Name withheld

Hans Gruber

2:29 AM on 10 July, 2008

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Hans Gruber. Show Details Hide Details

Genius! I love it already. My family used to have a Polaroid camera and the film was very expensive - you have to currently pay some £22 (600film) for 20 exposures so 30 for £7 seems a pretty good deal in comparison (despite the smaller size). In more ways than one, it's like they've turned themselves back around as a traditional photographic company embracing the new portable digital age. All they need now is a larger print size (and better battery) for more serious photographers, together with Pictbridge or whatnot capability so SLR users can print the odd shot off. Seems a shame to limit it to pairing with a mobile phone.

Score:

Name withheld

Beaky69

10:56 AM on 10 July, 2008

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Beaky69. Show Details Hide Details

An SD card slot would be handy :o)

Score:

Name withheld

JonCook

12:17 PM on 10 July, 2008

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore JonCook. Show Details Hide Details

It looks like a great idea and hopefully will develop into something bigger and better. 60 secs for a very small print is a little excessive and the 3 inch by 2 inch size is a little, well, gimmicky in my view. However, if it can get up to 6 by 4 or even 7 by 5 in future it will be a product with some commercial possibility.

Score:

Name withheld

ilovethemonkeyhead

1:40 PM on 10 July, 2008

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore ilovethemonkeyhead. Show Details Hide Details

hmm, i don't know - you need specific paper, so it's pretty much passing the cost from one medium to another. plus i guess the paper can only be used with that printer (like inks, then).

Score:

Name withheld

lifeisagame

8:00 AM on 11 July, 2008

This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore lifeisagame. Show Details Hide Details

hm... i didn't know anyone was still printing photos. i know about 30 people that use digital cameras an non of them is printing them...

Score:

Please wait while we file your abuse report.

We're sorry. We were unable to report abuse at this time.

We limit the number of reactions an individual user can submit over a given period for quality reasons. You have currently reached that limit. Please try resubmitting your abuse report again later.

Comment is too long. Enter 500 characters or less.