Advantix. Take pictures. Further.

Feb 10 14:28 UTC 1996

In case you haven't read about Kodak's Advanced Photo System, I've saved a
copy of the FAQ in /u/kaplan/lynx/advantix.shtml which you should be able to
read with more or lynx.

Brace yourself for the ads.  "Advantix" is going to be Kokak's biggest
campaign ever.  Several things that are good about Advantix were also good
about the (now deceased) disc camera.  Did the industry learn enough from
the disc that this new system is going to catch on? 

response 2 of 23:

Feb 10 14:48 UTC 1996

Apparantly Kodak developed (or at least shared) the technology with camera
makers and competitive film makers.  To me, I see one disadvantage: smaller
negative size.  Picture quality is dependent upon negative size.

A bonus, at least for some, is you do not have to deal with the leader.  The
new film cartridges are "leaderless" and you drop them in and the camera does
all the film threading for you.  There must be other advantages, however, but
I don't know what they are.  I can't believe people would switch to a new
system for the sake of not having to deal with a leader.  Maybe they would
enter the photo field with this camera, however.

response 4 of 23:

Feb 10 19:23 UTC 1996

I have sat behind the printer at one hour photo labs and I find it hard to
believe that data passed from the camera to the printer would be more useful
than having a slightly expirenced eyeball look at the negative.  I guess the
idea is that it will take a less skilled person to operate an Advanced Photo
System printer than a regular one.  It might also go faster if the human
doesn't have to look at each negative.  It'll cost less to process the new
film because less area means less chemicals hit the film.  It'll cost less
to print because it's more automated.  And they'll charge more for it.  Hm.

response 6 of 23:

Feb 11 13:24 UTC 1996

I had heard about that feature, but it slipped my mind.  It is my guess that
it really isn't a panoramic lens, but an "editing" of the top and bottom third
of the negative space to give a wide print.  If this is the case you could
do it with any negative.  Does anyone know if the panorama shot uses a
different lens than the normal shot?

response 8 of 23:

Feb 12 02:34 UTC 1996

Right, as the pictures are printed, each image is recorded digitally and at
the end of the roll, the digital images are composed into the index print.
Before the photofinisher finishes with the roll, they put it back into the
cartridge instead of cutting the negs into strips and throwing away the
cartridge.

I'm pretty sure that all existing panorama photos are done by leaving blank
film at the top and bottom.  I hope that Advantix pictures can expose longer
pieces of film instead.

response 10 of 23:

Jul 10 18:05 UTC 1996

Now that this camera has been out for a few months, what kind or
response is it getting?? How are the pictures [quality]? And the
cost?  Any info/insite would be appreciated, especially3
since I can't use the web to access the info mentioned earlier
in the item [my computer doesn't have anough access...].

response 12 of 23:

Jul 13 03:12 UTC 1996

I scanned dejanews and there were 38 hits for "advantix"
In Altavista, there were 178 hits.

Here is a typical one:
                                         Deja News Retrieved Document (p2 of
3)
glenn.olsen@trw.com (Glenn Olsen) wrote:
    
>> think preventing people from seeing their negatives is a
>> REALLY BAD THING. 
> 
>So, has anyone actually _tried out_ APS?  How is it, really?
  
Yes, I've tried Fuji 100, 200 and 400, Kodak 100, 200 and 400 and Agfa 100
and 400 APS films using an Advantix 3600 IX camera. The results are pretty
impressive and at least as good as you would get with a similar 35mm point
& shoot camera and a comparable amateur film. Obviously a 35mm SLR will
give better results, especially if you use films like Reala. The "real   
test" will be how APS performs agains 35mm using the same lens (that will
only be possible when Canon of Nikon APS SLR are available in the spring).
 
 
 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Johan W. Elzenga                                   Editor / Photographer
Burg. Verheullaan 59                                      jwe@dataweb.nl

response 14 of 23:

Oct 19 12:35 UTC 1996

Darn, I hate it when this happens! 

Anyway, I'm still curious how things with these APS cameras are now
doing, now that there are other companies making these cameras, too.
I was looking through a photo magazine last night that had a number of
pages with lots of these cameras, what they do/features, and price ranges.
And on the upper price ranges ARE cameras with a [an] interchangeable
lense[s].  Is the film quality/deveolopment doing well with these photos?

response 16 of 23:

Oct 20 00:38 UTC 1996

Hmm, next time I talk with my sister-in-law [who lives in MI], I'll
ask her and see if she remembers [she borught one of these cameras a
few months back].

response 18 of 23:

Nov 10 17:43 UTC 1996

Cool, Marc!!  Thanks for passing on this information!!  A couple weeks
ago, I viewed some prints of [I think, a lesser expensive camera that
uses the advantix format... And though they were taken by a very good
photographer, I wasn't really impressed with the overall quality. The
prints seemd to be slightly grainy/out of focus [and she had used
the various formats--the panarama, the 4x6 and the 4x7]. Comparing her
prints with the ones I just got back using my Pentacx [autofocus, zoom
90/wr or whatever its called], I liked mine a heck of a lot better...
But perhaps her camera was on the lower end of the price scale and
thus, a lesser quality over all??

 I do like the small size of the camera Mark mentioned AND the ability
to choose the various formats, even after the picture is taken AND
the ability to switch back and forth between film speeds. But the
end result HAS to be great pictures to make it worth while... So
while I'm saving up, too, I need to check this camera out, too!  :-)

response 20 of 23:

Nov 24 23:11 UTC 1997

The last response was written a year ago.  Is it still true that APS film has
finer grain than available 35 MM film?  Sounds silly that they would sell the
best quality film grain only in the smaller format.

response 22 of 23:

Nov 25 01:54 UTC 1997

Not silly at all, given they were selling a new format.  Annoying to crusty
old curmudgeon 35mm holdouts like myself who might want the new film w/o the
new camera, though.

(Actually, I'm just a casual vacation photographer these days).