Ask Florian Kaps of the Impossible Project 61
The Impossible Project, first mentioned here in 2009, has a goal that might be quixotic, but (despite the name) is looking ever more possible, after all: to bring back film for the millions of Polaroid instant cameras that have mostly become paperweights in the wake of the near-total discontinuation of instant film. This takes a sort of modern alchemy; the chemistry of instant film is tricky, and the knowledge had been dying out quickly. The Impossible team members didn't start from nothing, though: besides hiring a core of former Polaroid employees, they bought part of the former production facility in Enschede, the Netherlands, as well as production equipment. Now you can ask project founder Dr. Florian Kaps about the technical hurdles the project faces, as well as the motivations that led him to take on such a task. Note; though it's not all in stock right now, the project has successfully created various kinds of instant film, both monochrome and color. (If you have multiple unrelated questions, please post them separately.)
Location (Score:4, Interesting)
Long-term speaking, do you plan to stay in the current location of the old Polaroid factory?
I suppose you'd basically run production like old days, but on a much smaller scale. That might make it very costly to stay in the same building & pay for maintenance / repairs / heating etc. So do you have any plans to move to another location, one that might be more fitting to the size of the operation? If so, what would you be looking for @ a possible next site?
(disclaimer: I happen to live around the corner from it, so I know the building & surrounding area).
Other Films? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Forgot about patents? (Score:4, Interesting)
Real patents rarely have the information you need to reimplement a technology; the lawyers who write them up are experts at putting in only what needs to be detailed to get past the patent examiners, and no more. It's not like the patent examiners actually try to reimplement things based on patent texts, to make sure they're complete.
Re:Enablement requirement (Score:5, Interesting)
On the other hand, patent Enablement under 35 U.S.C. 112 requires that a person of ordinary skill in the art (POSITA) be able to make and use the process or invention described and embodied in the patent (without undue experimentation, per court interpretation.) If the patent fails in that respect, it gets invalidated. Patent attorneys walk a fine line.
Ah, but there's a catch. It must be of sufficient detail that a person can follow the process described in the patent. It does not follow that the person will get the best - or even a usable - result that process can provide. It may say what compounds but not their mixture. It can show a series of steps but not the actual timings. You forget that they typically write patents as broad as possible, they don't say "coat in solution for 2-3 minutes" as that would mean a process that takes 1 minute or 4 minutes aren't covered. They'll just patent all variations, useful or not.