Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,880   Posts: 1,520,470   Online: 980
      
Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 66
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,530
    I recall seeing a few of the Kodak cameras in use in the UK, but i don't think that they took-off to any great degree before the patent problems came up.

    When the film was discontinued, Kodak offered a "trade-in" allowance on the instant cameras against a new "conventional" camera...can't recall the details, but I remember that it seemed quite generous.

  2. #12
    Aurum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Landrover Central UK
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    923
    IIRC when they lost the case, they had to make best efforts to withdraw the cameras from circulation. I remember that they were offering trade in against new point and shoots and possibly disc cameras.
    "Flatter Me, and I May Not Believe You. Criticize Me, and I May Not like You. Ignore Me, and I May Not Forgive You. Encourage Me, and I Will Not Forget You."

  3. #13
    Aurum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Landrover Central UK
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    923
    Quote Originally Posted by nickrapak View Post
    Fuji also has a product that is compatible with Kodak instant cameras, except for the speed. I forget what it is called, GT-800 or something like that.

    AFAIK there are only two types of fuji product. The FB / FC series, which is compatible with 100 series polaroid packfilm, and the instax product which is sold for use with the fuji branded cameras. If Instax is backwards compatible with the kodak cameras, it would be a surprise

    Edit : I can see where you got the info from Wikipedia but I'm not sure of the veracity, as the rest of the article seems a bit, well lacking in correct details to put it politely
    Last edited by Aurum; 06-18-2009 at 12:47 PM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: Added wiki link
    "Flatter Me, and I May Not Believe You. Criticize Me, and I May Not like You. Ignore Me, and I May Not Forgive You. Encourage Me, and I Will Not Forget You."

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    284
    It appears that Fuji integral materials utilize Kodak methods and technology (expose from the rear, etc).
    Here is a link: http://island.geocities.jp/sihohigari/jp/tip/fi800.html

    The Instax line is similar in technology but different in size.

  5. #15
    Prest_400's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Spain
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    526
    Quote Originally Posted by Aurum View Post
    If Instax is backwards compatible with the kodak cameras, it would be a surprise
    As far as I can tell, instax and the kodak's system have the chemicals on the same side. But sizes seem to be a bit different; they might be compatible.
    Got some of kodak's instant snaps from my father, but they are in my grandma's house. Only can compare it with instax from what I remember the last weekend when I seen some of them. I do have an instax shot here in my house. I was surprised at it, I thought it would be a polaroid.

  6. #16
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    22,912
    Images
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by amuderick View Post
    It appears that Fuji integral materials utilize Kodak methods and technology (expose from the rear, etc).
    Here is a link: http://island.geocities.jp/sihohigari/jp/tip/fi800.html

    The Instax line is similar in technology but different in size.
    This reference indicates that the material made by Fuji can be used in a Kodak camera by modification of the pack (removing a tab) and using a neutral density filter to adjust for the speed difference in the Fuji product.

    The Kodak chemistries (there were 2) involved heavily patented materials and the patents awarded to Kodak were not voided by the lawsuit.

    One material required direct positive emulsions and the other used negative emulsions, metallized dyes and achieved a camera speed of ISO 3000. This latter product was never sold.

    PE

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    257
    Quote Originally Posted by marsbars View Post
    Was looking through some old pictures that my mom got from my grandmother. And I found some old polaroid but they were labeled Kodak Instant film. These pictures were dated mid seventies. How long ago was this product discontinued? I have never heard of it and was just curious.
    Sounds like pictures taken with one of the old Colorburst cameras of the 1970s and early 1980s. If you are old enough, you might even remember seeing those REALLY tall and funky looking cameras (they looked MUCH more ridiculous than a polaroid). I should also note that Kodak made an instant camera in the early 1980s that produced a print that was MUCH more like a conventional RA-4 print than a polaroid. I believe they called it the Trimprint series (since the prints were thinner, and advertised as being able to be trimmed with scissors just like RA-4 prints). Of course, as others here have said, this all went away with the Polaroid lawsuit.

  8. #18
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    22,912
    Images
    65
    Kodak did not produce a peel apart product. It was produced internally but never sold on the open market.

    Kodak did produce Ektaflex C and R for prints. They were sold up until the end of the lawsuit with Polaroid.

    I ask one question here. Was the Polaroid win good or bad for us all using hindsight? Was the GAF / Pavell lawsuit good or bad for us all? IMHO, all of them were bad for all concerned.

    PE

  9. #19
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    12,050
    Images
    60
    I really preferred the contrast and saturation of the Kodak instant materials as compared to the SX-70 materials.

    I also preferred the rectangular format, as compared to the square format of the SX-70.

    The cameras - they were different.

    Matt

  10. #20
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    22,912
    Images
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by MattKing View Post
    The cameras - they were different.

    Matt
    No kidding!

    I had a special pass to allow me to enter and exit Kodak Park with those cameras in order to avoid a search by the security guards. Kodak didn't want anyone to see these oddball "things". IDK if there was any significance, but the pass had brown lettering instead of the usual Kodak stuff.

    I used to carry the camera and test film home and back over and over to evaluate it when I was working on the project. At first, the shut down didn't work with the chemistry I was coating/using and I had to peel everything apart. So I have a few peel apart / integral units hereabouts too as well as the camera which got caught in the recall.

    PE

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin