REVIEW: Polaroid Hi-Print Pocket Photo Printer. Quality at a cost.

[@Paul_VanGo]

And that's why we watch your content. It's not sponsored, thus it much more honest than many other.

[@supergeekjay]

I've seen manufacturers trying to sue for defamation in independent videos in the past, myself included, so I stopped. When they pay people to review they slap an NDA in there for the stuff you're NOT allowed to say/do to protect the company's business interests.

[@Akotski-ys9rr]

Why would sponsoring a video make you dishonest?

[@jdatlas4668]

@@Akotski-ys9rr This is specifically about being paid by the company that makes the thing you're reviewing.

[@Bananna219]

And that is why I watch the ads before after and during for creators like this. They’re not making money on the content, so they only get paid for the ads we watch (and patreon).

[@supernpstr]

As always, fantastic review. Especially the last part of the plastic waste information.

[@BertGrink]

Agreed; that is _VERY_ important information for any would-be user of this (or similar) products.

[@Techmoan]

gesundheit

[@stevesstuff1450]

True. Neat as these Polaroid devices are, the plastic waste (unless they specify that it's all recyclable) is just ridiculous.

[@fraggit]

@@Techmoan Bless you

[@Siarawaszympanemjest]

As soon as China stops producing hundreds of millions of tons of unusable plastic crap I'll start worrying about the way we treat plastic that people can actually use. As for now I refuse to feel guilty about any part of my plastic waste.

[@recklessroges]

Good guy Teachmoan with the facts, the whole facts and nothing but the fax (noises).

[@wiipe]

Being too young to experience it myself (30, young given the context I suppose), I loved the fax reference. Now I need to look up more fax stuff (the suggestion of non-uniform behaviour is what caused that, naturally I had assumed they'd just resemble printers with some extra parts).

[@maighstir3003]

Careful now, you don't want him to go off listing the entire history of the universe in perfect detail. I'd prefer to get at least a few more videos off him before sealing him in a bunker to prevent everyone around him going mad.

[@wisteela]

@@rommix0 "moaning for your pleasure" - Oo er!

[@AB0BA_69]

I almost came listening to those analog printing sounds.

[@TheMajkla]

@@wiipe check out the dial up modems, that was some cool stuff:)

[@SilverEagleDev]

I'm glad you included the last 5 minutes or so of the video, because seeing the amount of waste being produced by this process really saps the "magic" out of it, and makes you appreciate existing printing technologies. I looked into alternatives to this and found thermal transfer printing, which is almost exactly the same idea, but unfortunately it produces the same amount of waste, because the ribbon it uses for each color is similarly the same size as the media itself. In the end, I guess this is just one of those convenience factor things, and the vendors are hoping that hiding the sizable plastic waste it produces will keep you from thinking too much about it.

[@TheRuben654]

If you overlay the 3 colors of the leftover ink ribbon, would it look like a perfect negative of the printed picture?

[@MoraFermi]

Yes it does. Not 100% perfect in tone but very close.

[@RonLaws]

you would have to scan each one individually and use something like Photoshop to convert each layer in to monochrome to invert it before turning it back in to CYM layers to combine but yes.

[@Keepskatin]

@@RonLaws you are a proper nerd🙇🏾‍♂️🧠🤔

[@Keepskatin]

@@whitesapphire5865 You figured it out too,❓💯 proper nerd🙇🏾‍♂️🙇‍♂️❕

[@johnbutler5650]

You could make a nice art project with the transparencies: sandwich the films between plates of glass and frame them. They would make the most excellent sun catcher ever!

[@malad1]

This is the sort of item where most people buy the printer and a pack of the paper and that's it. No more paper is ever purchased. So ends up even more expensive per photo! Ha ha.

[@philpem]

Pretty close to the mark there. I've got one of the Polaroid Zink printers and a Canon Selphy (a fairly old one). I still have the boxes of paper and ribbons I bought when I got the printers.

[@skochin]

And then it goes to waste, ends up in a landfill, beautiful!

[@oneduality]

Yeah you're right.. I have the exact same thing only it has a different branding.. I don't think poloroid made their own hardware here.. but to the point, I bought mine and 6 boxes of paper .. I still have 5 packs unopened and I got mine back in January 2017

[@lwvmobile]

I bought a Canon Selphy printer years ago as a gift and bought up all the stock of cassettes they had to go along with it since it was all on clearance. Since then, I don't believe any other print cassettes were ever purchased, since they had all vanished from store shelves and prices online weren't particularly great either.

[@DavidLeeKersey]

@@philpem Most waste happens at the point of purchase.

[@frankiesomeone]

Neat, I didn't even know these types of photo printers existed

[@volvo09]

They've been around for a while, but never truly caught on due to price, and I assume manufacturing complexity. I actually have a small Kodak photo printer from around 2005 which docks with a digital camera of that era. (It's huge compared to this!) The printer was like $200 USD and the paper / ink refills were also expensive, like $35 for around 24 prints or so... Besides a couple docks for digital cameras, most of these printers are in professional print houses and we regular folks never really come across them :) I can't recall the name of it, but if you look up kodak camera dock printer you'll probably see a few. I also find this one really neat, it's so compact... Modern manufacturing just amazes me.

[@frankiesomeone]

@ the spent cartridges look like they would make for a good modern art composition when framed

[@bsadewitz]

@@volvo09 So it was a dye sub printer? Wow, I'm so behind the times. The last time I used one of those, they were definitely not portable devices. ;-)

[@DriveCancelDC]

@Paul van Dinther Of course, making photobooks and having photos in your hand is still nice

[@richardcastro-parker3704]

@@DriveCancelDC Agreed. I never look at my precious photos as they are all stored badly on a computer. Who wants to get family and or friends around a pc and look at photos. I am going to print the best photos and put them in an album. If anything should happen to my pc or me for that matter my photos would be lost. My family wouldn't be able to log on to my pc as it has a password. Not too long ago I was looking at some old family photos and it reminded me how important printed photos are. My Mum recently created a new photo album starting with older photos going all the way up to this year. It's so nice to know I don't have to go hunting down photos from hard drives when the inevitble day comes. Also there is a special feeling from looking at printed photos. The printers in the video are pretty cool. I like the canon one. I haveone of the first or second generation of Epson portable photo printers. It wasn't die sublimation and it's now hard to get the cartridges for it. By today's standards my portable Epson is massive. In its day though it was pretty small. I'd love to get a canon like the one in the video but I can't given the waste produced as I'm trying to reduce my footprint on the planet as much as I can.

[@Jon-Cameron]

I have a paper/ink pack for my Canon Selphy printer that I bought around 11 years ago. I just installed it and it prints perfectly! Great longevity for a consumable.

[@Nigel58]

Yep, my Selphy is very old now but weren't they made solidly? Top quality. I don't want to throw it away. Only problem now is there are no new Windows drivers for it, no Mac at all, and so I have to go Bluetooth with an adapter.

[@Gadgetonomy]

@@Nigel58 I'm pretty sure there's a generic driver, alternatively use an older OS version driver and run in compatibility mode.

[@Nigel58]

@@Gadgetonomy Thanks. I'll double-check.

[@austfox2170]

Anyone else notice that most passport photos (especially in this instance) make the skin tones a little green?

[@kevinr.3542]

That is racist against frogs

[@MoraFermi]

Probably from uncorrected fluorescent lighting.

[@sivalley]

@@andymerrett wooosh

[@lordpitnolen2196]

Handy for when we move to Mars :-)

[@kbhasi]

3:31 I like that their mobile app actually explains to the user what the printer is doing!

[@Nolroa]

And it lies ... the app speaks red when it should be magenta and blue when it should be cyan.

[@user2C47]

Such words as "magenta" and "cyan" are _clearly_ far too advanced for the general public to understand.

[@DerMarkus1982]

They do that to avoid all those dumbknuckles ripping the photo out of the printer after run#1 (Yellow) and then complaining via some social platform and leaving a 1-star review...

[@malad1]

The Polaroid paper should come with a prepaid envelope to return the empty paper cartridge back to Polaroid for recycling.

[@vernonzehr]

turns out not cost effective. raw materials to make from scratch are way cheaper than recycling. even now recycling is not a money maker it’s a money loser. it would have to be made into law like some countries do. i forget which country but one has rules about tech equipment and things like computers must by law be recycled. some day hopefully this will be done everywhere.

[@omsi-fanmark]

This, however, would also result in Polaroid getting all your photos due to the remains on the used color strips. From the recycling standpoint, good idea. On the other hand, it's a privacy problem. If you have printed pictures with other people than yourself on them, it would even be a violation of the EU-.GDPR. GDPR Overview: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Data_Protection_Regulation (applies to all cases where personal data of a citizen of the European Union is involved)

[@TheErador]

@@omsi-fanmark not really, if you send it back for recycling that could be deemed as consent for them to 'process' your data, you could always recycle it a different way. I.e. remove the film and use for smthg else and put the rest of the plastic cart into standard plastic recycling.

[@jmulvey371]

Then when Poloroid receives your cartridge "for recycling," they throw it in a landfill in Indonesia.

[@CTCTraining1]

OMSI-Fan Mark ... rubbish, the situation is the same as it recycling companies who take obsolete pc equipment and use practices and processes to ensure that any information is destroyed. Dropping your used packs into the bin sounds like a more vulnerable way to proceed. One day manufacturers will become truly responsible for the after-use phase of their product lifecycle, and it can’t come soon enough if you ask me.

[@KmF0X]

That plastic film waste looks interesting, like, imagine putting them back together like some sort of transparent colour negative

[@omsi-fanmark]

Imagine that to happen automatically, you could actually use it to get even more prints from a lab. But don't let this waste fall into the wrong hands.

[@jamesslick4790]

@@omsi-fanmark Ironically "home brew" porn sold a lot of POLAROID cameras in "the day", because the amateur "producers" of such "art" did not want a third party to see their "work". LOL

[@MoraFermi]

It is a serious attack vector! I worked in a setting where we had to print ID cards -- a single spool of ink ribbon would have personal information of hundred people or so on it. We had to send these to be destroyed via a specialised firm and we'd get back DVDs with recordings of somebody tossing these into a fine toothed shredder.

[@fluxington]

The dye sub rolls, unrolled, remind me of theatre lighting colour gels, that are sometimes on a motorised reel, to change colour remotely.

[@richkawaiipikachu]

You could scan them in a computer & composite the individual colours back into a full coloured photo.

[@thebaldconvict]

I always think this kind of printer gives great photos AND Christmas decorations at the same time!

[@ct6502c]

I was just going to say that to me the plastic left over isn't really "waste", I think it could be very useful for decoration! Make a frame with backlighting to light up the sheets and you could create pretty cool color effects with the images!

[@hazonku]

That's literally what I said to my girlfriend. LOL. "Oh nice, can just crinkle that up & throw it on the Christmas tree."

[@Styrola]

And it makes great tails for kites.

[@thebaldconvict]

@@Styrola Hadn't thought of that one, that is a great idea!

[@thebaldconvict]

@@23Scadu make for an interesting conversation with Grandma round the dinner table ha ha

[@ramblerandy2397]

Very good point on the overall cost to the environment. If I was in two minds as to whether I "needed" one of these, that important point would most definitely side me with NO.

[@ThomasEdge]

Thanks, Techmoan. I decided to get the CP1300 SELPHY printer. I realized that my wife and I take so many pictures of our daughter that are just digitally lost in our phones. To print out at least one photo a week to put in an album will be a treasure. I also really appreciate your unbiased reviews - with the inclusion of the environmental impact. Cheers.

[@tommylakindasorta3068]

Mat I don't know your professional training background, but you have the mind of a true journalist. You anticipated and answered every question a typical viewer might have about this product.

[@GDJason]

I ran a 1 hour photo lab in the late 90s - early 2000s. I remember getting our first digital equipment that included a pair of commercial grade dye sub printers. I was pretty skeptical at the beginning as I was definitely partial to prints made on photographic paper. But as camera technology improved and more people were using digital, I came around. Honestly a bit impressed that this technology still holds up as well as it does. I've still got photos printed nearly 20 years ago on dye sub that still look pretty good and also some that are really showing their age, depends a lot on how they're stored. I appreciate your dedication to thorough, honest reviews of products as well as showing us some very unique items.

[@JessicaFEREM]

I like the Selphy printer. it may be bigger and pricier, but it makes cheaper, larger prints, that and it's probably gonna be easier to buy paper for in the future being from a well known printer company.

[@gasfiltered]

I believe Polaroid is a brand of the Eastman Kodak company. A prime example that just because a company is huge and owns the largest market share in several diverse industries doesn't mean they can't shit the bed overnight just as fast as a startup. It's why CEOs get paid ridiculous salaries. A bad one can literally end entire industries and ruin 10s of thousands of lives.

[@nslouka90]

Plus you don’t have to be tethered to an App that will go bust who knows when and turn your device into essentially a brick.

[@akaydogan]

@@gasfiltered Polaroid has nothing whatsoever to do with any remaining entity of Eastman Kodak. Polaroid is owned primariy by a Polish investor who, along with his son, are trying to revive the instant film. Canon is still more likely to be in in business in five years as opposed to Polaroid.

[@andreasu.3546]

@@gasfiltered "A bad one can literally end entire industries and ruin 10s of thousands of lives" - ... and still be paid millions.

[@gacelperfinian]

@@gasfiltered Polaroid was NEVER part of Kodak, but it did have a Kodak-like life in early 2010s (I have seen a "Polaroid" Android tablet which I'm sure is just a very cheap tablet). Now however, the brand is owned by a European company previously known as The Impossible Project (which is from the start tried to revive Polaroid films).

[@mattgreen5351]

“Sounds like an indecisive fax machine” 🤣

[@zappawench6048]

Yes, that made me smile!

[@sonickrnd]

Лёрн нью ворд тодей.

[@arhythmicnick9929]

Did they record a session for John Peel in the 80s?

[@senilyDeluxe]

I have a Sony Color Video Printer that sounds very similar and probably uses a similar technique. It's from 1996 and still working. Finally I can have screenshots from retro games running on real hardware. 1/2m high stack of old video grabber cards "Am I a joke to you?"

[@needfortweed8734]

Man have got a way with words, I'd say...

[@JeffCD77]

I've used dye-sub printing for many years for photos and will never use anything else. The quality is leaps and bounds over the competition. I'm still quite happy with my Selphy that was purchased YEARS AGO.

[@richardtufty]

Same, I have a Selphy that comes in a bucket to hold the power brick and paper etc., it's awesome. I also used to have a fantastic Epson A4 dye-sub printer (P440 I think) but they stopped making the consumables for it years ago and I had to ditch it. It produced the best home printed photos I have ever seen.

[@SeanBZA]

I have an old Sony Selphy printer that still works, but needs a colour TV set to display, plus you can either get images as screen grabs off of standard PAL tv, or via a serial port ( kind of dates it doesn't it) or by using a sub 256M Memory Stick, of which I do have some, a whole 8M on one, perfect for use here, as I also have a Sony mouse that has a built in MS adaptor. got a whole lot of dye cartridges and the photo paper as well, but barely use it. Price i paid was free, it was being thrown away. Yes I have used it to print postcards, which it does really nicely, and they are all from my own photography as well, so unique each time. Resolution is around 1024 by 768, definitely not the best you can get these days, but for a system from the late 1990's really good, and still has vibrant colour. Competition to film, and no drive to get it in a one hour lab, or buy the then brand new inkjet technology. Quirks are being fussy about image size, and it is really slow both to respond to keypresses and to print, taking minutes per pass. Plus you need to connect up something that will handle composite video to actually use it, I use a small JVC portable TV set, which is around the same age, but with a 5 inch colour CRT as display.

[@jorge23483]

I like your reviews because they are more a "user experience" review than a "professional" review, there's more honesty and pragmatism. Thanks for another video 😃👌.

[@allenellisdewitt]

Thank you for talking about the entire cost, including the waste.

[@williamjones4483]

Canon and Polaroid, take note; Hewlett Packard have a recycling program for their laser printer toner cartridges and they even pay for the return shipping via UPS.

[@kaitlyn__L]

i believe most laser printer manufacturers do, because it's mostly businesses who buy those - ensuring goodwill and return customers is a bigger priority for these companies when it comes to businesses, who tend to have many of the same machine and upgrade all at once, than it is for us regular folks, who they view as un-loyal turncoats.

[@retrorusty1708]

So does Brother. I have a brother laser printer

[@hadireg]

it's challenging to find a question to ask after watching a Techmoan presentation :) Thanks Matt!

[@brbbiobreak]

I have one, Where's the puppet show at the end?

[@kingfishercomputing9497]

Did the US costs include sales tax? (Not that I care, living in UK, but it is a question)

[@hadireg]

@@brbbiobreak yeah misssing that one! :) we got spoiled with too good things... hard to do with less now :)

[@hadireg]

@@kingfishercomputing9497 lol indeed :p

[@philreed1605]

Thank you so much for including the waste material cost!

[@spudhead169]

The 8 Bit Guy would love this for his label making activities. Looks ideal for that purpose.

[@negirno]

I remember he got some flak from some retro gaming purists who didn't like that he remade the prints of a old cartridge game.

[@trailersic]

The no-repro crowd in all collecting circles can go spin.

[@peterg.8245]

What ya gonna do, live with sharpie? I agree that the people selling them as original are evil but so are people paying $1000s for rare cartridges. We’ve moved beyond that with ROMs on original hardware and/or emulation. I know some carts have special hardware but that a special case.

[@nickwallette6201]

As someone that has bought about as many fake copies of Windows 7, 8, and 10 as real copies of all versions ever, I can definitely sympathize with the discomfort of seeing identical-to-genuine products being manufactured. It’s just too hard to tell until you have it in your hand, then you have to deal with trying to get your money back. OTOH, if I had a perfectly good cart with a trashed label, I would love to have a perfect replacement. Having a “this is a repro” disclaimer spoils it. There is no right answer.

[@OfficialNukeDukem]

@@peterg.8245 Emulation isn't the same, and most people that claim it is haven't played the real device/cart or it's been decades since they did. Not saying it's horrible or anything. It's just not a replacement, it's an alternative. I enjoy both, depending on the game/platform.

[@legacydepot]

This is truly what a review of a product should be. I wish other KZbinrs took Techmoans approach with product reviews

[@TimothyONeill_84.]

Yesterday I was thinking about getting a Polaroid camera or an equivalent of said camera, and then I see this, at first glance I thought, Wow, cool, just what I was looking for, but when you broke it down of how much waste was involved and that pretty much made up my mind right then and there, I hate wasting money and resources, thank you for this informative video, take care and be safe

[@unpairedelectron2886]

Honestly you drinking a bottle of pop wastes more plastic than probably five of those cartridges combined. Important to keep things in perspective.

[@TimothyONeill_84.]

Unpaired Electron Yes, also true, same can be said for any product that we use today, which is why we need people like Techmoan ( Matt ) showing us / helping us making better decisions on the things we buy. As for my “perspective” thank you for your concern, much appreciated but unwarranted, have a good day

[@rich_edwards79]

@@unpairedelectron2886 yes but the pop bottle is fairly simple thing and can be easily recycled; I doubt the same is true for this film.

[@nicholasfarley5967]

@@unpairedelectron2886 A soft drink bottle is PET that can be recycled back into PET which is pretty good if it happens. The film, rollers and cartridge of the polaroid won't be. Add to that the fact that the product will be discontinued in 5 years all the whole device will end up in landfill or e-waste it seems like a crappy product.

[@flybywire5866]

I do use a Canon Selphy 1300 and i am quite happy with it. I got sick of ink jet printers with clogged print heads which cant be unclogged even if you pump 100€ of ink through them. The Selphy costs about 35€ for 108 prints. Contrary to the ink jet prints they are light fast for many years.For printing a picture then and now its great. For a bigger amount of pictures a online picture service is of course way cheaper.

[@gundamlurva]

I have an old Sony dye sub printer that recently had a "blocked nozzle", so to speak. One of the tiny elements in the thermal print head had died, resulting in a white line across all of my prints. So dye sub printers aren't exactly fool-proof, per se; but for what it's worth, that Sony printer is about 15 years old at this point.

[@gundamlurva]

@@TangoAndToys I've tried running multiple prints with no luck; it's still printing with that white streak. I'll probably shell out for a new Selphy, seeing as it's basically the same technology (earlier versions used the same Sony cartridges - Canon might have bought the tech from Sony), or I might upgrade to an inkjet system.

[@robbieoman8312]

I'm actually quite interested in the look of this so emailed Polaroid about the Recycling and got this back: "Thank you for your email and your interest in disposing of the Hi-Print film cartridges From the information given the plastic is made with an ABS plastic which is non-toxic, the metal spring and the plastic cassette components can be placed in a regular recycling bin." So guess downside is the film isn't recyclable but the cartridge and springs can be 🤷‍♂️

[@brianoconnell6459]

If memory serves, the Alps line of dye sub used the colors a little more efficiently, resulting in the same quality with longer print times and less waste,

[@leonexis]

Thank you for covering the waste aspect of this type of printing. Few people know the end to end cost of the products they use and balanced coverage is very much needed.

[@jmulvey371]

Thanks for talking about all the plastic waste, Techmoan.

[@johnnyjules2008]

Best thing i've seen in a while mentioning the waste of a product.

[@kr2112]

This is an EXCELLENT review and reviewer! My husband and I are sold on both the Polaroid and the Selphy and now understand so much about what we can do with them. The “only” drawback, which we appreciate was noted, is that there is waste going into the environment. Thank you for such a great post!

[@rubydoobstylie]

And I naively thought manufacturers were becoming more environmentally aware.... this product ain't for me! Thanks for the open review 👍

[@albertward2254]

Thank you so much for this Matt. On the strength of this video I've bought a Canon Selphy cp1300 and its the first printer I've bought in years that I haven't been disappointed with!

[@TheMainCore]

This made me considering buying the Canon printer! Cool technology.

[@MickeyMolad]

That app looks quite slick and smoothly animated, better than most consumer product paired apps. Shame about the waste and thank you for highlighting it.

[@Techmoan]

It’s a surprisingly good app, yes.

[@misamee]

4:30 it looks like the print has stripes. That wouldn't make the quality of the print so good. Maybe is an artefact from the original image or just a reflection of the lights?

[@spud3149]

Looks like colour banding doesnt it. When you dont have enough colours to print the true images. 8 bit vs 24 bit colour used by applications.

[@misamee]

@@spud3149 In that case, I would expect the printer software to apply at least some dithering

[@EggBastion]

I sees it too Was expecting a bit more detail on it

[@timmantle7154]

Thank you very much for pointing out the waste that this leaves behind. It's the first thing I thought about @3.21 - it's a worry to me that others simply won't care. So I appreciate that you put that in the consumers mind.

[@MatSpeedle]

"An indecisive fax machine" had me in stitches! Great review this is a very cool little bit of kit :)

[@pqrstzxerty1296]

Dye Sub been round for two decades now, mainly used for ID cards or tickets.

[@retrocomputinggrotto]

"An indecisive fax machine" should be the strapline on the back of the packaging!!

[@TheOrangeType]

These weekend uploads really do save me whilst I’m working from home. Watching a couple minutes here and there really help the day go quicker. Keep up the great work, really appreciate it!

[@WhatALoadOfTosca]

I use that same canon selphy printer in my photography studio to print passport photos :) it does a great job.

[@blindmandan]

Hey there thank you so much for giving a detailed and in-depth review of this Polaroid printer. I am a blind guy who lives in San Francisco California and I love listening to KZbin videos were the person like you said and like you do buys the item them selves and it’s not paid to review it because you lose the important facts like you laid out at the end of the video on the waist and the ink and all that stuff. Thank you for being so detailed and telling the truth! Honesty these days is really hard to find so thank you. Cheers

[@muh1h1]

I want to see the 3 leftover (negative) films of a foto lined up. Should give a perfect nevative of the image!

[@markevans2294]

Which you could create a positive from.

[@johnm2012]

It wouldn't be perfect because the process is designed and optimised for making prints, not transparencies but it would probably be recognisable, though rather dark.

[@the_cheese]

I remember back in the early 1990s when I worked at a shop where our main work was to produce negatives of advertisments for printing in magazines and newspapers. One of our services was CMYK prints up to 11"x17" / A3 using a dye-sublimation process printer; our cost (in 1990 US dollars) was $16 per print, from a machine the size of a small moving box. That's $32 in today's money per print, even if it didn't turn out right. Its amazing to see that dye-sub technology has finally become reasonably inexpensive and tiny. Thanks for the great video!

[@BushWookie666]

Tech Moan: the real G that buys everything he talks about so he can say anything he wants

[@DaedalusYoung]

And the one time he got sent something, he reluctantly reviewed it, warning others not to send him anything.

[@thomasallison1258]

KZbinLoser nixie tube watch

[@kaitlyn__L]

@@thomasallison1258 VFD watch, no?

[@thomasallison1258]

Kaitlyn L ah yes. You’re right. It was.

[@blinkfraid]

I just bought this polaroid printer, right before I watched your video. Already feeling regrets, buts I now know the weight of my purchase. I decided to buy the printer because I'm going through a time where I journal and I wanted a visual aspect to capture things going on in my life when I don't feel up to drawing them. This small print reminded me of the Polaroid 1Zone I used to have as a teen. It was much more wasteful and the images not even a quarter as good, but definitely a niche product for youth--as is this little Polaroid printer. I'll have to consider if I want to return it to get the selphy and simply cut the photos down to size, but I'm very glad that I saw this review til I've made my final decision.

[@fluxington]

4:31 Bands across that lovely blue sky? They don't appear on the phone screen, so I can't blame YT compression.

[@IrisGalaxis]

I don't see them

[@fluxington]

@@IrisGalaxis Watch it on 1080p if you haven't. They run vertically. It's a trait associated with a poor inkjet or inconsistent paper feed and not typical of dye sub printers.

[@IrisGalaxis]

@@fluxington My phone only goes up to 480 :D

[@fluxington]

@@IrisGalaxis 480p? Ok. Maybe a lower res smooths them out!

[@gacelperfinian]

@@fluxington Maybe the heater is not consistent or (as you said) the pressure applied is not consistent.

[@kushith]

This sort of independent reviewing and comparing relevant alternatives is something we the consumers should pay you for. Thank you

[@Tim_3100]

Clever how it prints each colour and tells you on the app

[@calumproctor981]

Thanks for this. It was bang on. Sorry to hear about your father. Mine passed away last year. He loved sailing and had all the time in the world for lifeboat crews.

[@tehhamstah]

I'd like to see how those used prints look when cut out and laid over each other, perhaps then scanned in on a back-lit scanner and inversed?

[@jimthechaosbunny]

Thanks, finding this review very informative and still useful two years on. Really appreciate the attention to detail!

[@baronvonlimbourgh1716]

This actually makes nice good looking prints on the go. I'll have me one of these. Edit: i see canon makes small versions of the selphy as well. Not sure which would be beter now.

[@hughmnyks]

I've had a Canon for years. Don't use it that often but it still works just fine! Thanks for all the info, Matt.

[@thecaveofthedead]

This is tech that's very meaningful to me. I like to take pictures of people when I travel, and I'm a relatively skilled photographer. Many of those people have never had a picture of themselves taken by a decent photographer with good gear. And I'd really love to be able to give them a print (ideally with an instagram handle so they can also direct their friends and family to the picture online rather than having to photograph the print with their phones). So I obviously therefor want a fully portable, battery-powered device. But the zinc printers are a complete disservice to the idea of leaving someone with a quality photograph. I'm pleased to see the breakdown of these dye-sub printers because that wastefulness is unacceptable to me given what I want to use it for. So the only alternative are the Fuji Instax printers at the moment. They use a photographic process which has its own environmental issues but doesn't leave as much plastic waste at least. Unfortunately, in all cases I think these manufacturers are taking the piss price-wise. They've done the calculation on - especially young people - being ok to spend under a dollar or a pound for an item that should cost 20c or 20p - given the cost of materials and manufacturing and still including a profit. Printing has long been one of the greatest market scams in the world, and it doesn't look set to change.

[@scottstrang1583]

Santa brought a Canon version to my daughter a couple years ago. She loves it and she was 9 at the time. She'd take it with her to her friends houses an print pics for them. Pretty neat.

[@wolf3dv]

If you think that's expensive I wonder what you think about the pricing of Polaroid film

[@Techmoan]

I think it's more expensive.

[@GGoAwayy]

Techmoan Plus when you toss out a used Polaroid film pack, youre tossing out a battery as well. (Unless its the new "i type" film packs).

[@efkastner]

The Hi-Print is on Amazon US right now. I think I’ll pick one up.... but I’ll also wait a bit to see if an affiliate link shows up in the description so I can get it that way :)

[@Techmoan]

Thanks for the info - I've added one now.

[@davidanttila9305]

Sounds like those manufacturers should offer a program where you send all that waste material back for refurbishment to make new ones... To cut down on all that waste..

[@Alpha8713]

Shipping has an environmental cost, too, though.

[@theplasticdeer2612]

@@Alpha8713 A lose - lose situation.

[@kaitlyn__L]

@@Alpha8713 albeit less than drilling for oil, refining into raw materials, producing virgin plastic, creating the plastic tape, laying the dye over.... etc. that's just for the actual dye part!

[@mickf1983]

This is why Techmoan is my favourite technology related channel, you expose everything, even what most people are not aware of and can make the brands uncomfortable. You deserve a lot mate!

[@aeiouxs]

Great video as always Mat - and while the product clearly produces high quality results, the environmental waste is obscene for such a small number of results :(

[@flymario8046]

Wow that little guy makes such beautiful prints! I didn't even know this detail of prints was even available to normal people. Thanks for this!

[@Nerd3927]

Ideal for Fire Extinguisher, Life Jacket, Emergency Exit, No Smoking, Electrical Hazard, Used Oil Rags, Keep Closed At Sea and other mandatory stickers they keep inventing in shipping. What is the UV resistance? 4 years would be good enough, same as the paint :-)

[@organiccold]

Haha, you need tons of paper to all the stickers they invent every month haha

[@cleffei]

You never fully appreciate how much waste really goes into some things. Thanks for showcasing this Mat, this is stuff that definitely will be ignored by virtually every other reviewer.

[@MasticinaAkicta]

Ah yes as most things polaroid, it looks cute buuuuut very expensive in use.

[@sclogse1]

Not really.

[@DDenDeeen]

1: Stand infront of the shop and found this printer 2: search videos for the printer review 3: watched 5 minutes 4: deal! on my hand now! thanks for the review, as a cp1300 owner always prints 2R, I want some portability.

[@TheUglyGnome]

8:59 Great passport picture!

[@pepperpepperpepper]

Thanks - I didn't get it until now :)

[@HannuPulli]

Great job introducing all the facts including the excess waste. It all looks so convenient in the promotional photos.

[@DejanTesic]

Thanks for the full picture. It is incredible to me that such a wasteful thing is being made in 2020, as if we hadn't made enough of a mess of this planet already. I take comfort in the hope that it won't sell too well.

[@kaitlyn__L]

unfortunately, many industries lobby against waste reduction as it would also reduce their profits....

[@candicebowie1329]

THE BEST REVIEW I HAVE EVER SEEN ON THE INTERNET .....ifeel like a pro. period

[@euphony5552]

"A review should inform you of all the facts... That's why I like to buy the things I show." Techmoan, quality at a cost.

[@utente7707]

Thank you so much for including the plastic waste mention, it's super important as a comsumer persepective. Appreciate it, man

[@Jamato-sUn]

I had no idea such printing process existed

[@CDNChaoZ]

If you ever used a photo booth at a party, it's likely printing in a commercial-grade dye-sublimation printer.

[@sairamedia888]

this is the only place left on youtube where a person talks to you normally in a normal voice. thank you, subscribed.

[@TheTwick]

I’m guessing none of these systems materials are ‘recyclable’?

[@kaitlyn__L]

@KZbinLoser it's actually simple. i can put type 1 and type 2 in the recycling. all else has to go in the bin. other locations can also do type 5 and type 6. if you don't see a number, it goes in the bin. type 4 is collected by many supermarkets. obviously avoiding buying it is the best option, but there are many areas in life where you have no option. hopefully you're not sending it all to landfill.

[@TheColinputer]

Im glad you included the bit about the waste left over. Very important with these printers people know this and also you should never print anything sensitive with these. Same is true for the majority of label printers. I do a bit of work for a networking company and we use brother p touch label makers We always have to ensure the old label ribbons are destroyed and not just thrown away for this reason.

[@drcarrot415]

“Indecisive fax machine” this is why techmoan always wins

[@BThings]

Finally! I've been trying to figure out what these sorts of printers were called for ages. I knew that they existed, and even had a guess as to how they worked, but I didn't know they were called _dye sublimation_ printers. Now I do, and I can properly scratch that persistent brain itch! Thank you :)

[@rumblebars]

At the print size, this seems more like a glorified high-cost label/decal maker than a photograph printer. I wonder as to the quality of the self-adhesive.

[@ripleyfan1]

I really appreciate the discussion about the waste produced, it's a major factor when I go to buy a product.

[@twocvbloke]

Definitely wouldn't want to use it if you were a spy, them leftovers would be a goldmine to some enemy spy agent... :P

[@electronicengineer]

Or just have the consumed photo cartridge self destruct (go up in smoke) like Peter Graves' reel to reel tapes did in Mission Impossible... "This photo cartridge will self destruct in five (5) seconds".

[@mrb692]

The old IBM electric typewriters had the same security concern. The “ink” was actually a black plastic film that the type head smacked into and stuck the film to the paper, leaving a perfect cut out of the letter in the ribbon. That meant an enterprising individual could take a used cartridge and see exactly what you had written.

[@aevangel1]

"Burn after printing"

[@user2C47]

@@mrb692 This applies to any typewriter or printer that uses a plastic ribbon. The security concern can be addressed with a paper shredder followed by a blender-like contraption and, if possible, fire.

[@kaitlyn__L]

@@mrb692 however, IBM did sell a high security ribbon for governments etc to use, which operated in a different method and didn't leave negatives.

[@ajbfwb]

Thanks, Mat.... another perfect example of why I'm one of your 1,000,000+ subscribers.

[@finkelmana]

Dye sublimation isnt wasteful, its actually very efficient. Its that THIS implementation is inefficient.

[@kaitlyn__L]

pretty thin hair to be splitting when this is the only method of dye sub in home printers right now

[@finkelmana]

@@kaitlyn__L Ummm. No?

[@dougbergen8157]

Good review. Yeah the waste is always my concern too. I have a Samsung sp-2020 which is a good dye sub printer. But they don't make any paper or ribbons anymore. Waste of a good product. Still works fine. Big companies need to take more responsibility for the products they make. Keep up the good work TM.

[@TheKitsuneCavalier]

I am sure that at least one artist shall make use of the images on the waste that the Polaroid printer produces.

[@ct6502c]

I actually thought they looked pretty cool, almost like "negatives" of your images. You could make some kind of frame with backlighting and get some interesting color effects.

[@TheKitsuneCavalier]

I totally agree, @@ct6502c . :)

[@ChristianBehnke]

Thanks for including the environmental costs as well. The consumer really needs to be aware of the additional waste, and the manufacturers should be more proactive about creating responsible products with systems in place to collect / re-use / recycle their "waste."

[@LifestyleShortz]

You have been to Portugal: D I can see the "Torre de Belém" in one of the pics. Cheers

[@organiccold]

Yep, pensei o mesmo. Aposto que encheu a barriga de pasteís hahaha

[@kaitlyn__L]

i also saw what looked like the city of arts and sciences in one of them, from valencia spain

[@jamesslick4790]

I was prepared to be underwhelmed because so many things made today with once proud brand names (Polaroid,Kodak,RCA,Westinghouse...) are often crapola made my companies who just bought the rights to the brand name. This thing actually seems to be a legit useful device. As a side note. Dye sub printing would still seem to be cheaper than the way most of us did 35mm color (colour) prints: Shoot a 35 exposure roll, Send it in, pay for all 36 prints - Decide that only 8 -10 are actually "keepers". That was pretty wasteful too. I did my own B&W developing and printing in "the" day, but that was not cheap either and is a "time suck" (unless, like for me the time spent was enjoyable as a hobby).

[@sczarnecki5887]

OMG all that Plastic and metal that's left over for 10 pictures! I was considering one of these until you showed that. Polaroid should ask that those be returned so they can reuse them. They could offer a discount on your next roll for the returned caddy. Reusing them would save them a lot of money. They can't be cheap to produce. That whole caddy to the land fill every time. Nope. I cannot support this.

[@MechaGzilla]

Thank you for adding that bit at the end about the waste it produces. I will probably go with the bigger model because of all the waste the smaller one produces.

[@Keepskatin]

They both produce the same waste. The polaroid films are smaller, so it evens out how much water they both produce.

[@zsin128]

All printers are better than my inkjet 😞

[@latebloomer2]

HP "ink advantage" series? ...😂

[@zsin128]

@@latebloomer2 yup.

[@Nolroa]

Yeah ... HP sucks when it comes to printers on photographic paper, Canon is kinda meh...Maybe, maybe Epson ...

[@dashcamandy2242]

I have an Apple ImageWriter II... And an Apple Color StyleWriter 2400... And somewhere, also an Okidata Microline U92.

[@kaitlyn__L]

@@Nolroa I'm still using a 12 year old Canon wifi printer... I refuse to upgrade it because this one can't tell when you've used third party ink cartridges :D and there's no dang app or updates needed - so it's super quick at scanning right onto a USB stick too. the colour quality on these third party inks is kinda meh, the black especially is more of a dark grey, but it's more than good enough for cheaply printing out bank statements and the like. (I never even touched the 5-pack of photo paper it came with.) plus it's never made banding, which I certainly can't say for the Epsons my dad always used to use (a '96 parallel port one, and an '02 USB one. so, sample size of two. neither scanned or anything of course)

[@TheVextor]

This is the most honest review I've seen in a while. It is amazing that you care to inform your viewers about the environment.

[@devintage1993]

Like you said, you could totally buy old cartridges and see what people printed, that's kind of interesting and creepy 🤣

[@supergeekjay]

Naked girlfriend alert! (My Japanese girl used to send SELFY printed pics of her to me from Japan

[@deusexaethera]

I have a Canon dye-sublimation photo printer. It prints 4x6-inch photos, which is the smallest photo size that's actually useful. 2x3-inch is only good if you enjoy keeping photos in your wallet so they can get mangled or stuck together, making your photos impossible to look at the one day each year you remember they exist and decide to pull them out. Besides, that's what smartphones are for nowadays; printed photos are for hanging on walls or putting in frames on your desk, which necessitates a larger size so you can actually see them clearly from more than a foot away.