Polaroid announced a new collection of cameras, instant film, and accessories all featuring limited-edition designs to help celebrate the 30th anniversary of Pokémon. The new collection goes a little harder than Fujifilm's Pokémon collaboration from five years ago with the introduction of Polaroid film printed with various characters around the frames, including Pikachu and Snorlax. The entire collection will be available for preorder starting on August 25th in the US, Canada, and the UK through the Polaroid and Pokémon Center websites. A global release is expected to follow on October 5th.
The three cameras are existing models with new des …
Ah, the relationship between animals and the technology they can’t quite understand.
Today, it seems like there’s a high-tech solution to every element of pet ownership, with devices on the market designed to keep pets fed, cleaned, watched over, and entertained. And if you have a pet you know: nothing is too good — or too cutting-edge — for your (furry, slimy, feathery) best friend.
But while some tech can help care for your pet, it can be complicated when dogs and cats meet wires and waves. You might feel complicated about offloading elements of kitten parenthood to a robot. Some pet tech innovations over-promise or are over-hyped. And of course, your puppy (or parrot) might well mistake your gadgets for a snack.
To that end, we’ve put together a week of stories that explore the intersection of technology and pet ownership. Read on for how to take a decent photograph of your cat, pet scales and the chunky companions who need them, and takes on our favorite tools, both simple and complex.
Meet Noodle and Loaf, aka Carb Cats. | Image: The Verge, Getty Images
Like the pets of any self-respecting millennial, my cats have their own Instagram account.
Noodle and Loaf - aka Carb Cats - aren't exactly celebrities. But they are used to having their photos taken a lot. Between their Instagram account, my regular need to test smartphone cameras, and the fact that they are two adorable idiots, I've taken on an unofficial household role as pet photographer.
I know I'm not the only one. It's become standard practice to maintain a camera roll full of blurry bleps and dozing dogs. But pets are rarely easy to photograph. They're usually small, fast, and don't take direction well. Here are a few ways to impr …
The compact Polaroid Go is great for road trips and adventures. | Image: Polaroid
Smartphone cameras are convenient, but they lack the charm of analog instant cameras. If you’re trying to relive the nostalgia of waiting for an instant photo to develop, Amazon is selling the second-generation Polaroid Go instant camera with a 16-photo film pack for $71.99 (usually $109.99). That’s the lowest price we’ve seen for the bundle, with a pack of film usually costing $21.99 on its own. Plus, it’s four dollars cheaper to buy the bundle than to buy just the camera on its own.
With its more compact footprint, the Polaroid Go 2 shoots on smaller film to match. Where classic Polaroid photos are 88mm x 107mm, the Go film is 53.9mm x 66.6mm, a great size for sticking to your bulletin board or stashing in your wallet. The camera has a USB-C port for charging the battery, which can run for up to 15 packs of film on a single charge.
Maximum camera. | Photo: Antonio G. Di Benedetto / The Verge
It wasn't long ago that shooting with a super high-resolution camera meant making serious sacrifices for the sake of all those megapixels. Enter the A7R VI.
Sony's latest flagship high-res camera is a 66.8-megapixel spec monster. In addition to its modest bump in resolution from the last-gen A7R V, it uses a new sensor and processor that unlock nearly any kind of shooting - from sports and action to usable 8K video. It's a huge departure from years ago, when high-resolution cameras were slower, noisier, and more specialized as a result of all those megapixels.
The A7R VI's fully stacked sensor and new Bionz XR2 processor allow it to shoot …
In era when so much about the news is just plain depressing, what stands out about the burgeoning public rebellion against Flock security cameras is just how fun it all is. The artificial intelligence-powered surveillance cameras, which are sold by Flock Safety as mere “license plate readers” to local governments, have spurred a national cat-and-mouse game between vandals and cops that is being merrily followed on social media, mostly by people rooting for the vandals. City council meetings in which citizens swarm to protest paying for the cameras are the new must-see TV.
In Huntington, West Virginia, a small city in the heart of Appalachia, one man became an internet folk hero when he stood up at a city council meeting and said, “I’m not gonna waste your time; I’m kinda hungry. But one last thing: Every single Flock camera has about 2-3 pounds of copper and about 1-2 grams of gold. Do with that information what you will.” He then walked off in triumph.
By targeting Flock cameras, activists are building momentum for a larger rebellion against the tech industry — and against political leaders who are complicit in their assault on our freedoms.
As with opposition to AI-fueling data centers, the revolt against Flock cameras is drawing support from across the political spectrum, uniting Republicans and Democrats in red and blue America. Their frustration isn’t just rooted in annoyance at having surprise speeding tickets show up in the mail. Flock cameras have become a symbol of growing anger over the efforts by technology oligarchs to impose their dystopian fantasies on the country, replacing liberal democracy with a surveillance state. As Jill Lepore recently noted in Wired, it’s as if tech leaders read George Orwell’s “1984,” Aldous Huxley’s “Brave New World” and other sci-fi classics “as instruction manuals” rather than “cautionary tales.” By targeting Flock cameras, activists are building momentum for a larger rebellion against the tech industry — and against political leaders who are complicit in their assault on our freedoms.
Flock Safety embodies the dishonesty that has been the prevailing theme of tech corporate communications and marketing for at least the past decade. While the cameras are sold to the public as a banal traffic safety measure, they have prompted an outpouring of stories about how they’re being used to violate civil liberties and undermine democracy.
“Flock from the first has been quite deliberate in sequestering decision making processes — where these things are placed, what they gather and for whom — and the data gathered through them from the general public,” Adrian Daub told me. A comparative literature professor at Stanford University, his forthcoming book, “What Tech Calls Governing,” examines the increasingly authoritarian politics of Silicon Valley.
“The intersection with state actors is particularly worrisome,” Daub said. “Governments can outsource the dodgier aspects of data collection and use, while the private sector gets to disavow the obvious political implications of this kind of massive surveillance.”
According to an exhaustive 10-month analysis by Electronic Foundation Frontier, a nonprofit dedicated to defending civil liberties in our digital age, local police were using the cameras to track protesters, such as those at No Kings rallies, who were then put in a national database to be used across all jurisdictions. Despite claims that the cameras only record license plates, the technology-focused outlet 404 Media found that the database is also being used to collect information on individual people whom cops can then search for using descriptions of clothing, race, gender and body type. In Johnson County, Texas, police officers fixated on a woman suspected of having an abortion, and used the database to track her movements in an effort to prove it — even though state law is supposed to exempt the patient from criminal prosecution. Police have been outed for using the cameras to stalk people for personal reasons, such as having a conflict — or even a sexual obsession — with them.
Flock has claimed the company will reform its policies to address these issues, but history suggests it would be unwise to trust them. One former Flock employee, Jonathan Paz, has accused the company of lying about its intentions to gain government contracts, which are then abused by law enforcement to harm the public. Paz told 404 Media that company management had assured him they weren’t feeding information to agencies like Immigration and Customs Enforcement, a falsehood he passed on to city governments in his sales pitch. After finding out about a secret pilot program to help track down and detain immigrants, Paz left the company.
Flock’s behavior represents a microcosm of a larger trend in tech that should alarm freedom-loving Americans, regardless of political affiliation. Silicon Valley enriched itself with promises that the cyber revolution would mean more freedom and democracy by enabling the flow of information and communication. But in recent years, there has been a dramatic about-face as the C-suite class has become increasingly authoritarian. Algorithms and AI are used to choke off people’s access to information and make intra-human communication more difficult. Journalism is faltering as an industry, even as social media and search engines are being programmed to dissuade users from reading or watching real news sources. Surveillance is starting to feel ubiquitous, between online bots tracking our every move to cameras everywhere, including the faces of other people wearing AI glasses. Billionaires like New York Knicks owner James L. Dolan reportedly use spying tech to harass people who criticize them.
“Citizens will be on their best behavior, because we’re constantly recording and reporting everything that is going on,” Oracle CEO Larry Ellison, a major donor to pro-Trump groups, observed at a recent meeting of financial analysts about the future of AI.
“There is a link between technology (whether it ‘works’ or not) and repressive state apparatuses,” Daub explained. For example, while Flock cameras expand the ability of the government to crack down on people, they also allow officials “to claim it’s not their fault when some poor sucker gets snared” unjustly by blaming poor technology. “It’s not an accident that their politics have tacked more openly to the right in recent years,” he said of the tech CEO class.
The goal of this isn’t mysterious. Tech CEOs, mimicking the villains of sci-fi, are telling the public that resistance is futile.
This can all feel overwhelming at times, which is very much by design. Silicon Valley’s hype machine portrays an AI-controlled future as inevitable, even equating the technology to a god that will overpower us humans, rendering democracy a quaint artifact of the past. AI was swiftly embedded in innumberable computer programs, often not even allowing a user to opt out. The goal of this isn’t mysterious. Tech CEOs, mimicking the villains of sci-fi, are telling the public that resistance is futile.
The Flock uprising, though, is the stirrings of public understanding that none of this inevitable — and we have the right to fight back. The public has some leverage points. Despite their elaborate efforts at secrecy and unaccountability, Flock works through government contracts. Citizens can petition leaders to avoid or drop contracts, a tactic that has been working across the country. There are still transparency laws that apply to Flock databases, which is how 404 Media and other media outlets have discovered abuses of the technology. Activists have been building maps alerting people where the cameras are.
The maps intersect with what has been the most controversial part of the Flock uprising: the vandalism. Although it appears the vandals aren’t organized in any meaningful way, they are being egged on by social media users who cheer from afar as people shoot, steal or otherwise disable the cameras. It’s understandable that the vandalism is the most compelling front of the rebellion, and not just because petty, victimless crime is a cheap thrill. Vandalizing the cameras is a sharp rebuttal to Silicon Valley talk about how technology will liberate us from the limitations of the physical world.
The reality is that bodies and physical space are still of paramount importance, which is why tracking and controlling people’s movement is a priority for tech-obsessed authoritarians. But while they’d like to pretend they are gods on an invisible mountain, bending us to their wills, the reality is that they need old-fashioned metal — copper and gold, even! — to get it done. Destroying a camera sends a strong and unmistakable message: They are finite, physical entities, just like us.
Like it or not, the vandalism sends an emboldening signal to the public that tech oligarchs are not omnipotent. If you toss a brick at their expensive cameras, they squawk. It’s crass and illegal, and yes, the cameras are insured and immediately get replaced. But the boost to human self-esteem and the reminder that our squishy bodies still matter more than all the data in the cloud? It’s hard to argue against it.
There are still plenty of pitfalls. MAGA leaders like Tucker Carlson are clocking the anti-Flock movement and trying to hijack it. Using conspiracy theories, he and others can redirect attention away from real enemies — tech oligarchs and compliant politicians — and toward blaming phantasms like the “deep state,” falsely insinuating that the tech spies are left-wingers doing some poorly defined socialism. This has the twin benefits of ginning up outrage at innocent people, while also shielding the very right-wing forces that are actually the source of the problem.
Still, it’s promising sign that people are rebelling against Flock cameras. Along with protests against data centers, it’s a sign that the public is desperate for a way to fight back against not just AI, but also the anti-democratic forces fueling this latest tech wave.
Insta360 announced the next iteration of its popular 360-degree action cameras that have helped the company expand its offerings. The new X6 introduces a design that's smaller than last year's X5 and X4 Air but with improved video capabilities thanks to an even larger pair of custom 1/1.1-inch square sensors from Sony. While last year's models offered 8K recording at up to 30fps, the new X6 can capture 8K at up to 50fps. It also carries forward the X5's replaceable lenses, which are now five times more scratch-resistant and 60 percent cheaper, according to the company.
Apple is seemingly developing an iOS feature that can verify when a photograph was taken using an iPhone camera. 9to5Mac reports that the iOS 27 beta 5 includes code references for an "Apple Reference Image" system that can embed provenance metadata into iPhone photographs at the point of capture - enabling users to prove where the photo originated, and that it isn't AI fakery.
Apple Reference Image isn't currently live, but a privacy disclosure in the iOS beta notes that the feature will be off by default. When (or if) it does roll out, 9to5Mac says it can be enabled via Settings > Camera > Reference Image > Reference Mode, and that only p …
There’s something magical about using instant cameras that smartphones can’t match. You can capture a moment, print it out, and then give the photo as a gift or hold onto it. Image quality won’t be all that good, but imperfections are part of the allure.
We tested instant camera models from popular brands and landed on a handful that we think are the best. Some aim to preserve the classic experience above all else, while others support companion apps and the ability to print stored photos.
Fujifilm’s latest Instax cameras are the best out there for most people. The company’s Instax Mini Evo is a bit pricey, but it produces great-looking images and offers a lot of creative control. If you’re shopping on a tighter budget, the Instax Mini 13 also takes good photos but has fewer features. The Polaroid Flip is the best retro-focused experience (be warned: prints are pricey!), while Kodak’s Mini Retro 3 might be a better purchase for some because its prints are quite affordable by comparison.
Film type: Fujifilm Instax Mini film/ Film size: 2 x 3 inches /Weight: 285 grams/ Charging method: USB-C / Companion app: Yes/ Other features: LCD screen, smartphone printing
Fujifilm’s Instax Mini Evo is a hybrid instant camera that bears a resemblance to its premium X100 line of cameras that cost hundreds more. Its vintage dials and buttons look so stylish that they caught the attention of passersby as I walked around Los Angeles.
It’s easy to balk at its price tag, but this camera offers a level of flexibility that sets it apart (and could save you from wasting a bunch of prints). The camera’s dials also let you apply lens options and effects, from retro filters to monochrome shades, and you can even remotely trigger shots from the app. Its 3-inch LCD screen can be used as a viewfinder, and it also lets you preview and select which images you want to print. The camera’s internal storage tops out at 45 images, which is more limited than we’d prefer, though you can send photos from a smartphone to print. Plus, unlike the Instax Mini 13 (a more budget-friendly pick mentioned below), the Evo uses a USB-C port for charging.
Film type: Fujifilm Instax Mini film/ Film size: 2 x 3 inches /Weight: 327 grams/ Charging method: AA batteries/ Companion app: None/ Other features: Built-in selfie mirror, self-timer, film counter
Fujifilm’s Instax Mini 13 is a more budget-friendly option that can take great photos mostly on par with the Mini Evo. It’s easy to use (just twist its lens to turn the camera on or off), it outperforms other budget instant cameras we tested, and we like its bright, playful designs. Its biggest improvement over the Mini 12 is its self-timer, with both two- and 10-second countdown options. Meanwhile, the Instax Mini 41 looks more sleek, but it lacks the Mini 13’s self-timer and costs about $23 more usually.
The Mini 13 produced more true-to-life photos than the non-Fujifilm instant cameras I tested. I also appreciated the Mini 13’s generously sized physical viewfinder and that it shows your remaining shots, which is useful given that each print costs about $1.
Like many instant cameras, it struggles in low light, though the built-in flash brightens dark scenes. The flash can’t be disabled, and it’s very powerful, which resulted in a handful of overexposed shots during testing. It lacks Bluetooth connectivity along with creative shooting modes found on pricier cameras, so you can’t edit photos, apply filters, or choose from different lens effects before printing.
Fujifilm’s Instax cameras produce excellent-looking photos, but each print costs around $1. Kodak’s hybrid Mini Shot 3 Retro is pricier up front (it retails for $159.99 but it often on sale for much less) but much cheaper to buy film for, making it the better budget pick (or beginner-friendly pick). Replacement cartridges are often around $20 for a 60-print pack. And, because you can preview photos before printing, you’re less likely to waste prints.
The Mini Shot 3 Retro affords you more controls than the Instax Mini 13; it sports an LCD screen for previewing photos, it lets you print photos from your phone via Bluetooth, and you can upload ones you shoot to social media using Kodak’s Photo Printer app. The companion app features frames, stickers, filters, and other effects that would look great in a scrapbook. There’s even a beauty mode and Snapchat-style filters. However, photos taken with the Mini Shot 3 Retro lack sharpness and sometimes have an excessive pink tint, and the prints also feel flimsier.
The best instant cameras for retro fans
Polaroid Flip
Score: 6
Pros
Cons
Attractive, retro design
Prints dreamy, vintage-style photos that are relatively sharp for a Polaroid photo
Film type: Polaroid i-Type Color Film / Film size: 4.2 x 3.5 inches / Weight: 648 grams / Charging method: USB-C / Companion app: Yes / Other features: Scene Analysis
If you’re looking for an instant camera that offers a retro-inspired experience, the Polaroid Flip might be for you. Its classic design and flip-up lid resemble vintage instant cameras like the Polaroid 600, and its square I-Type film prints iconic white-framed photos that look like authentic Polaroids. Yet the camera has modern features like Bluetooth, USB-C charging, and a beginner-friendly companion app that adds convenience and creative control.
The Flip improves on my former retro pick, the third-gen Polaroid Now Plus, with clearer shots and fewer wasted photos. That’s important, as you don’t want to waste any of the eight I-Type sheets that come in a pack that’s $18.99. The Flip’s sonar autofocus and a four-lens hyperfocal system result in sharper images, plus it has an excellent flash — it’s the most powerful of any Polaroid camera I’ve tested. The Scene Analysis feature also helps by warning if a shot is likely to be over or underexposed, or if you’re too close to your subject (these warnings didn’t always get the exposure right).
The Flip has a few downsides, in addition to its costly film. It’s the heaviest camera on this list, not to mention it’s awkwardly sized, making it tough to slip into a purse or easily carry around. Prints also take 15 minutes to develop, during which they must be shielded from light. Low-light performance remains a weak spot as well, and I struggled to capture indoor shots given the contrast and saturation are lower than with Instax film. Sometimes, this gave my pictures a more dreamy, vintage look that felt artistic, but you might not be into it.
If the Flip seems too bulky or expensive for you, the third-generation Polaroid Go is a smaller retro-inspired alternative. It weighs just over a pound and fits easily in the palm of my hand. At $89.99, the latest Go is the most affordable Polaroid camera available, with film that costs only a little more than Fujifilm’s Instax sheets (a 16-sheet pack runs $21.99).
The Go skips advanced features found in the Flip, including creative shooting modes, Bluetooth connectivity, and a companion app for editing photos. It’s a straightforward point-and-shoot camera with a self-timer and large selfie mirror. The smaller prints may disappoint those who prefer traditional Polaroid sizes, but its simplicity and portability make it an approachable way to enjoy the classic Polaroid experience at a much lower price.
Update, August 6: Added the Instax Mini 13 and Polaroid Go Gen 3, made the Instax Mini Evo our top pick, and designated the Kodak Mini Retro and Instax Mini 13 as our budget picks.
The renaissance of pocket point-and-shoot cameras proceeds apace with Kodak's EC35, inexpensive at $35 and good enough to take to the party. If the Charmera and its blind-box business model represents a digital extravagance, and the $100 Snapic was simply too cool for school, the EC35 is the real deal shoved back in your pocket. — Read the rest
Login
