Polaroid has begun to reinvent itself for the 21st century. As you’ll see at the company’s website, Polaroid hopes to reposition itself in the digital-imaging environment while building on its brand-name recognition and long history in the medium. More power to them. Inevitably, some of its earlier products will fall by the wayside during that process — to the dismay of their dedicated users. This represents elementary free-market economics in action. Type 55 film has become one of the casualties. . . . […]
|
Follow me on Mastodon:
@adcoleman@hcommons.social
 |
 SPJ Research Award 2014All content of this publication is © copyright 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017 by A. D. Coleman unless otherwise noted. All materials contained on this site are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced for commercial purposes without prior written permission. All photos copyright by the individual photographers. "Fair use" allows quotation of excerpts of textual material from this site for educational and other noncommercial purposes.
Published by Flying Dragon LLC.
|
|
Polaroid Collections: Another Ponzi Fatality?
Certainly no one expected any corner of the photo world to become entangled in the elaborate, byzantine schemes that have made headline news recently and brought down investment scammers such as the visibly non-archival Bernie Madoff. But that’s exactly what’s happened to the Polaroid Collection, which now faces a distinctly uncertain fate. It’s caught up in the international fiscal crisis — because Polaroid’s assets were purchased in 2004 by alleged Minnesota Ponzi schemer Tom Petters, presently in jail and awaiting trial on these charges in September 2009. Under these circumstances, title to ownership of the works isn’t clear; it seems likely the Petters fraud case will drag on for years, leaving the collection in limbo until it concludes. . . . […]