mobile photography technology, culture and community
www.dpreview.com

LifePrint's portable wireless printer hits Kickstarter

19

Robert Macauley wants to make photographs special again - by printing them. He's one of the heads behind the LifePrint Kickstarter project that is aiming to build a portable wireless printer that is controlled via an iOS or Android app. 

The LifePrint team is looking to secure $200,000 of funding to build a printer that will be capable of printing a 3x4" photo in approximately 30 seconds. Via the LifePrint app you can send an image to the printer right after you have captured it so it will be waiting for you when you get home. You can also take the printer with you to events or on a trip. Its small dimensions make it portable and the built-in battery means you don't have to be near a power supply to use it. Fully charged, the battery is good for 30 prints.

LifePrint also adds a social element to mobile printing. In the LifePrint app you can follow other users, just like on Instagram or other social networks and those users can then send images to your printer. According to LifePrint this is not only a great way for family members to stay in touch but also for brands and celebrities to connect with their fans. Followers will be able to reject unwanted prints, which is probably a good idea given a print will cost you $.65.

If the funding campaign is successful we might find out if users are willing to spend their cash on prints again. In the meantime you can learn more about the project, or even pledge, on the LifePrint Kickstarter page.

Via: Wired


Comments

Total comments: 19
Philip Young
By Philip Young (5 months ago)

Who the heck wants to print a 3x4" photo a $0.65 each, especially with other people shooting 20 photos of their stupid cats to your printer when you're not around. If they can make it 2 cents a copy, maybe then they'll have something. We all know about the ink and photo paper scams, so give it up. What do glossy prints at Costco cost? 3 cents each? There's a reason why people stick to their smart phones for photos, they're FREE, no matter how many photos they shoot. OK, so I have over 350,000 photos, how much will that cost me, and how long will it take to sort and find them if they were paper format?

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Peter K Burian
By Peter K Burian (5 months ago)

I would not invest in this. People who prefer to use a cell phone vs. a camera to take photos will not want to carry another device. Or pay $200 for it.

And people simply do not seem to want prints these days; they are happy with digital images on a screen.

0 upvotes
RichRMA
By RichRMA (5 months ago)

Pointless.

0 upvotes
TTMartin
By TTMartin (5 months ago)

This already exists in the Polaroid PoGo and GL10 Zink printer.

http://www.polaroidstore.com/products/portable-photo-printers/instant-mobile-printer-gl10-with-zink-zero-ink-printing-technology.htm

http://youtu.be/UhcA88tye4M

1 upvote
Lars Rehm
By Lars Rehm (5 months ago)

you can't print to the Polaroid via web...that's the main difference. The actual printing technology may well be the same.

0 upvotes
TTMartin
By TTMartin (5 months ago)

There are already photo printers that let you print via the web.
Again, I don't see anything special here.

0 upvotes
Lars Rehm
By Lars Rehm (5 months ago)

well, there is still the social network element but that's probably not or everyone...

0 upvotes
Scottelly
By Scottelly (5 months ago)

This is stupid. NOBODY prints anymore . . . especially not in a small format. The only prints I have made in the last 5 years are 8x10 or bigger. Why would I want to print smaller than that? EVERYONE has a smart phone.

1 upvote
Lars Rehm
By Lars Rehm (5 months ago)

I get the impression you are not within this product's target clientele...

3 upvotes
ianp5a
By ianp5a (5 months ago)

It seems like EVERYONE wants to do the same things. Lets all be IDENTICAL.

0 upvotes
ivan1973
By ivan1973 (5 months ago)

Look at the success of Fuji Instax.

0 upvotes
Kai Griffin
By Kai Griffin (5 months ago)

Well, I'm glad not to be NOBODY, because I make small prints all the time. Not EVERYONE I know has a smart phone, either. STUPID, huh?

0 upvotes
Ikay
By Ikay (5 months ago)

Sorry, I DON'T have a SmartPhone !!
I must be VERY STUPID !

Comment edited 59 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Ikay
By Ikay (5 months ago)

Dear Scottelly, you really have opened my eyes !
What does it take to be like EVERYONE ?
Help me, I crave to be a copy of the guy next door !
Should I kill myself if I differ from others ?
You seem to have the answers. Tell me, Is the crap I just wrote different from the crap you wrote ?

0 upvotes
RKGoth
By RKGoth (5 months ago)

The difference is, as with Fuji's variation between Pivi and Instax Share, the application and infrastructure behind it.

They're cagey about the technology, but I'm betting some dollars ($170 of them) that it's Zink without the limitations of the GL10 or Pogo, and maybe, MAYBE with some effort made to improve the print quality. Where it differs is in integration with social networking.

Fuji could do this. Fuji could make it so Instax Share's app could broadcast a presence or watch an online service for other paired Instax Share apps, and print to a nearby printer a file 'sent' by a friend or family. You wouldn't necessarily want it automated, though there's some fun in the idea of trusted partners being able to surprise you with a print.

0 upvotes
plasnu
By plasnu (5 months ago)

I agree. Fuji can do this, for sure, and probably they will.

0 upvotes
WizardOfOss
By WizardOfOss (5 months ago)

Apart from the app, how is this device different from the Polaroid Pogo?

1 upvote
Lars Rehm
By Lars Rehm (5 months ago)

In the Pogo's case wireless means Bluetooth, in LifePrint's case it means the Internet.

0 upvotes
RKGoth
By RKGoth (5 months ago)

Bluetooth was only an issue for the iPhone, just like Pivi's IrDA based interface was incompatible with a surprising number of devices (my hit rate, 2/8 so far).

2 upvotes
Total comments: 19
About us
Sitemap
Connect