• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Would Kodak get back into the instant film business?


To clarify I still shoot Polaroid, I just got a real early start

I have the packfilm adapter for my mamiya press sitting on the shelf just waiting in case the day comes that packfilm is available again.
 

My mother had an SLR but I don't even know if the kit lens ever came off. She had a Minolta of some sort when autofocus came out. Other than that it was point and shoots. The Minolta SLR was her pride and joy and went everywhere. When the shutter quit on that she got a bridge camera/SLR with the slow monster zoom. Who needs more than one lens? Fast lenses weren't a thing. Film choice was 100 for outside and 400 for everything else. Everyone besides for Mom got disposables or fixed focus point and shoots. Storing film in a fridge wasn't heard of, that was for batteries. Every last film camera was ditched as soon as digital became viable and affordable. I've gotten dozens of cameras over the years with a half shot roll from around 2005. You can tell when the camera was set aside for a digital camera. And digital delivered on every promise and more.


No such luck. I couldn't touch my mothers SLR. It was off limits. I even got a Fisher Price SLR camera and Movie Pocket camera so I would have something to mess with. My first camera that I loaded myself was in my 20's. Everything else was a disposable.


I had a buddy who was a 'rich kid' His family used Polaroid. We never did nor did any of our circle of friends and family. It was way to expensive back then. We would get Polaroids at events, they'd have an SX70 or something set up and give us a photo. Otherwise we never had it. I have two Polaroids from my childhood.
 

My family was poor but my father let me play with his toys like his cameras, his tape recorder so I didn't have much in term of kid toys but I could play with my father's toys. Back then I could only afford to shoot Plus X because Tri X was too expensive and it would take me a month to finish the roll. Every shot must be a keeper.
 
benderscameracorner said:
If I'm correctly informed, Instax was basically the only analogue photography format not in utter freefall back then... while film itself seemed set to disappear completely, Instax continue to sell and sell well.
Click to expand...

Fuji was actually evaluating whether or not to discontinue Instax, around the same time of the final Polaroid bankruptcy. Thanks to a couple of Korean TV shows featuring Instax cameras in the late 2000s, though, a ton of teenagers got interested in them and sales suddenly skyrocketed, basically saving the format.

This chart also shows it well:

Close to death in 2005-2008 and a sudden boom afterward.
 

I remember this. People realized that sharing a physical photo was something they missed.
 
Except type 55 and 8x10 and larger, the old Polaroid was pretty sorry, too. The big deal was it was relatively "instant." I remember tales of subjects and assistants fainting from the chemical smells while the very large Polaroids were processed.
 
BrianShaw said:
did any of you use instant film?
Click to expand...

My family had a rainbow polaroid that was used for taking periodic family photos to send to my grandparents. Film for that was considered too expensive to buy often.

I currently have a few packs of 100 Polaroid peel apart b&w (the stuff that gives you a negative) that is still good. I bought it from a guy who kept it in a fridge since 1980. I sparingly use it in my Big Shot (using Magicubes).

The 4x5 peel apart he sold me didn't fare as well, even though it was in the same fridge....
 
Pieter12 said:
Except type 55 and 8x10 and larger, the old Polaroid was pretty sorry, too. The big deal was it was relatively "instant."
Click to expand...

My experience with Polaroid was different.

I never warmed up to T55. It was either a usable negative or a usable print but never both. Plus the neg was thin and floppy and the sodium sulfite bath could be mess.

The T59 color was magnificent, as was the slow-speed B&W (forgot its number, though; T54 perhaps).
 

Well I was clearly informed incorrectly - thanks for the correction and info! I didn't use Instax in the early 2000s, we had Polaroid SX70 and 600 cameras, and I remember then sometimes struggling to find packs for sale.

That 2005-2009 dip aside, it is interesting to see Instax still basically "grow" as an analogue format over the period where film itself was on the ropes to the point of non-existence (read Kodak and Ilford going bankrupt). You have to wonder how much of that jump around 2008-2010 was due to Polariod bowing out and perhaps creating renewed interest?

I'd be interested to see Instax's growth in the last 10-12 years... you'd assume that trajectory has flattened out to some extent. That said, Instax seems to have an innate ability to appeal to each generation of kids/teenagers even in the era of mobile phone cameras and social media. I was introduced to Instax through my gen-alpha step kids. Go figure.

EDIT: Apparently Instax reached 100 million cumulative units sold earlier this year. Not sure what that looks like on a graph, but it's pretty impressive nonetheless.
 
Last edited:
thinkbrown said:
Still a joy to shoot though. It's just good fun
Click to expand...

I use an instax printer when travelling.

Sometimes if I've approached someone to ask for a portrait shot, I'll print off an instax print on the spot as a thankyou for their time.
Somtimes they'll grab their kids or whatever and end up with a few shots. lol.
 
Totally legitimate option, I've got one of the little Canon selphy printers for that use case.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register