Jump to content
toptenmaterial

digital camera from Apple

Recommended Posts

Interesting how? Because it has the original batteries?

Product description

 

Brand new, never opened Apple QuickTake 150. Includes the QuickTake camera, software and manuals for Macintosh. Still sealed in original packaging. Contents include - - QuickTake 150 Camera, Apple PhotoFlash and QuickTake software on floppy disks, close-up lens attachment, connecting cable, three AA batteries (original), neck strap, QuickTake 150 and PhotoFlash user guides. Satisfaction guaranteed.

It was an expensive turd when it was new. Now it's just a turd. Here's more about it since you seem curious. Digital cameras are not the kind of thing that improve with age, unless you're a collector who has to have one of everything. http://www.imore.com/blast-past-apple-quicktake-150-digital-camera

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My friend Bryan had a QuickTake, though I don't know if it was the 100 or 150. I know it wasn't the 200 as it reminded me of a set of binoculars as opposed to a traditional camera. It also did not have a screen, so you took the photos without knowing if they came out OK.

 

My mom, aunt and uncle had a Gourmet French Fry restaurant back then. I'd go down to Corpus Christi on the weekends to help out when they were first getting established. He took these photos with it. They're timestamped November 11, 1995 10:26-10:47 PM, so that's mostly the time Bryan converted the images to JPG. The picture info shows "no camera information, no lens information".

 

Menu

post-3056-0-20677500-1493211841_thumb.jpg

 

grandpa John, aunt Deb, uncle John, grandma Jean, mom

post-3056-0-16744800-1493211845_thumb.jpg

 

My friends Bryan and Beth as customers

post-3056-0-27242800-1493211849_thumb.jpg

 

mom

post-3056-0-47909900-1493211853_thumb.jpg

 

mom, me

post-3056-0-73892400-1493211859_thumb.jpg

 

grandpa, grandma, me, mom, uncle John, aunt Deb

post-3056-0-33189100-1493211865_thumb.jpg

 

me, mom

post-3056-0-25349700-1493211869_thumb.jpg

 

me, mom

post-3056-0-21780900-1493211874_thumb.jpg

 

The food was awesome, though they'd opened it up in Sunrise Mall which was going downhill. They eventually shut it down due to insufficient business. I think they'd still be in business with locations across the state, if not the country, had they been able to open it in Padre Staples Mall (now La Palmera).

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had access to one of the Apple QuickTake cameras through work around 95-96. It was briefly fun to play with, but the quality and resolution were restrictive. I believe we used it briefly to capture time sensitive images for web pages, like snapshots of campus events. The main advantage was quickly getting images onto a computer without having to develop film and use a scanner.

 

In 1996 I assembled this image in Photoshop using about a dozen QuickTake shots. IIRC, consistent exposure was a serious problem when assembling this.

 

post-20305-0-84068500-1493251545_thumb.jpg

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting how? Because it has the original batteries?

 

It was an expensive turd when it was new. Now it's just a turd. Here's more about it since you seem curious. Digital cameras are not the kind of thing that improve with age, unless you're a collector who has to have one of everything. http://www.imore.com/blast-past-apple-quicktake-150-digital-camera

This whole response is pure ball busting gold. Thanks :D

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This whole response is pure ball busting gold. Thanks :D

Sorry, I can be a little blunt sometimes ... Spiceware's charming photos with his mom melted my heart.

 

My old boss always used to buy tech toys with department funds just so we could try new technology out in the field, and this was a particularly lousy purchase. I've got some pics of our team way back when the QuickTake camera was new, but they aren't nearly as cute as the ones posted above me.

 

But seriously, what's interesting to you about that item? Just that it's oddball vintage Apple stuff you didn't know about?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, I can be a little blunt sometimes ... Spiceware's charming photos with his mom melted my heart.

 

My old boss always used to buy tech toys with department funds just so we could try new technology out in the field, and this was a particularly lousy purchase. I've got some pics of our team way back when the QuickTake camera was new, but they aren't nearly as cute as the ones posted above me.

 

But seriously, what's interesting to you about that item? Just that it's oddball vintage Apple stuff you didn't know about?

No it was great. The comment about the batteries made me laugh my ass off. Perhaps "interesting" is the wrong choice of words. It's a weird curiousity item I suppose, certainly not one I'd buy. Kind of like how this obsolete, expensive paperweight of a camera is also interesting:

 

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/801396655-USE/olympus_225505_ferrari_digital_model_2004.html#searchOpen

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spiceware, I concur, those are rad!! Akator I was unaware of photoshop back then (I would have been 16) I didn't come into contact with it until nearly a decade later. Was your impression of the Apple camera that it was shit?

 

The first digital camera that I ever used personally was my dad's canon EOS rebel in 2005 or 06 and that thing still cuts the mustard.

 

EDIT: Flojo, did the Apple camera at the time give you the impression that digital was shit?

Edited by toptenmaterial

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we knew that quality would go up and costs would go down, but the instant gratification was nice. This was in the old beige Mac days, so expectations were pretty low. Blackberries were a few years off, as was decent 802.11 wireless.

 

Things are WAY better and cheaper and more democratic now. There's another thread on here when I got similarly pissy about the (expensive, unreliable) G4 Mac Cube. I'm lucky to have had these experiences but the past is firmly in the clear-eyed past for me.

 

Except for the video games I liked when I was 12. They're still fscking amazing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, it was state of the art - one of the first to take color photos.

True ...but the images were way worse than what one could do with a disposable-priced film camera, even after buying lots of supplies and development charges.

 

It's pretty cool that digital cameras are so good an ubiquitous now. Developing film is like searching for a phone booth to make a phone call, or sharing a phone line to get on the internet!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Felt like it's only appropriate that I post here to not only share my recent Apple QuickTake usage but also to thank @SpiceWare and @Akator for sharing some of their images that helped propel my interest in these cameras to begin with. I'm blown away by the panoramic! Any tips? I'm not sure I could do the same. Also, thanks @Toptenmaterial for starting the thread! I know we're years later here but it has proven to be interesting and useful, if at very least from a motivational standpoint!

 

About a month ago I didn't even know Apple had branded cameras made.

After going (way, waaaay down) the history rabbit hole with these cameras (Apple, Kodak, Chinon, this thread, etc.) and fast forwarding to today, I've now got all 3 QuickTake models, the 100, 150 and 200.

 

waywaydown.jpg.0e9b845d8e297262c7bfa3a52c492454.jpg

 

Why? I guess mostly as a fascination due to weird curiosity (as best said by toptenmaterial) and as twisted as that may seem considering their limiting technical capabilities. Yet, I remained drawn to them...

 

All were surprisingly easy to come by for dirt cheap, as might be expected, since they're not exactly top of the line or even collectible it seems seeing as how there's about 25+ always available on eBay at any given moment. I managed to snag the 100/150 for about $15 each and the 200 for $45. Not knowing smart media cards were basically worth more than gold, I completely lucked out and found a 4MB card for $10 on a synth forum. If it hadn't been for that, I would no doubt not be using a 200 at all.

 

Also snagged a decked out Apple PowerBook 1400c with G3 Sonnet upgrade for what I would consider cheap. Loaded it up with OS8.6 on a CF card so that I could retrieve any images taken with these cameras, which all proved to be a challenge but was kind of fun. Nothing beats figuring out why you have to move QuickTime files around after camera installation software, disabling Apple Talk, jumping through rings of fire.... you get the gist. It took hours! No instant gratification here, you have to work for it if you want those not so sharp, kind of blurry but sweet VGA photos!

 

setup.thumb.jpg.92c32c763ea99a20a8551f47e80e86e8.jpg

 

Only shortly after would I learn that I'd much prefer a 3400c Rocket Book (and now a G3 Kanga - anyone have on for sale? ;-) ) but I'm *mostly* happy with the 1400 as it is (for now) and am thankful for it reinvigorating some retro classic computer charm into my life, which I've missed a lot over the years.

 

Fast forward a little bit and after spending some time around the graffiti lands and taking a few cameras with me on some of our nature walks, have had success with semi-decent photos after all. The key is definitely to use Photoshop on the PowerBook but they still look alright unedited. In the end, not a camera to capture memories with necessarily but a fun jump down historical digital camera curiosity lane to see if you could actually capture anything worthwhile with them. Below are a few of my favorite images taken with these cameras and if you're interested in seeing more, I'm still in the process of adding *developing* and adding them on an Instagram account dedicated specifically for these photos using QuickTake cameras only:

 

MistySundayMorning.thumb.jpg.8b139490c47b2ff6887a84df2af025a4.jpgGlassRomance.thumb.jpg.1889b8ce8fc6de73df362d99878c2a87.jpg

SkyEatsPlane.thumb.jpg.b6a5f8c4636ed1a496ac2450caee4bc1.jpgGreenlandGraffitiAliens.thumb.jpg.647391829b2603217a28fd7727b17d7a.jpg

 

I really like how the graffiti pictures turn out. I'm also surprised that these cameras seem to retain pictures taken from 20 years ago, since the manual states up to a year. There's something truly fascinating about finding a camera with undeveloped film in it. In this case, digitally undeveloped film. It would make sense that most people wouldn't bother with trying to retrieve any pictures from these cameras since you have to have an ancient setup to do so, nor would most expect them to retain any previous pictures taken after all this time. All cameras purchased were sold as-is, untested but all worked and contained some form of previous owner photos on them. How cool!

 

Here's one that came from a school in Hayward, California - care to guess the time period? I have no idea:

 

CouchPotato.thumb.jpg.5c91ee062715d9d515920a543af449fc.jpg

 

Looks like it could be late 90s? Though I suppose that's also part of the charm with these cameras. They capture the essence of the time period they were made in, unless you're standing next to and taking a picture of a Tesla I guess to completely blow the time period illusion.  I've got a few dozen more pulls from these cameras to add at some point from previous owners. Nothing necessarily noteworthy but still cool to see.

 

Further fueling my curiosity was wondering how these photos would look printed. Specifically, on an Apple StyleWriter 2200 from 1995 as if I were printing them in 1996. I'm still kind of shocked a 26+ year old printer can print as nicely as it did:

 

printout.thumb.jpg.da4a712ba9dba6e826f8ab9bbd4085cb.jpg

 

Consider my retro digital photography curiosity  / classic computing thirst quenched!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey these posts are great. I am so old that I was so impressed with all of these early digital photo devices when they first appeared. Of course now it is all quite primitive compared to the quality we have in the most basic devices but in a way I almost feel it has come full circle, I mean I think it is cool seeing how creative we can be and how we can make use of all these classic imaging devices, looking at all the images posted in this thread I still think a lot of fun and creative expression can be had with them, it's even challenging and fun to me at least to see just how far we can push these old digital cameras. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, KG7PFS said:

Is there software available to use this with the IIgs? If so, I want one.

Sadly not. The pictures are 640x480, I don't think the IIgs supports that resolution. As far as I know, it requires a Macintosh with OS7 or higher.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, The Usotsuki said:

GS maxes out at 640x200.

No interlace mode?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was in college when the first Quicktake was released, and my work-study job was in the computer lab.  So over winter break, I got to check one out and take it home, along with a Powerbook - but only with a black and white screen.

But my family was still kind of impressed at my nerd powers.  "Look, I can take a picture and show it to you on this screen in minutes!"

Sadly any pictures I took are long gone.

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, OLD CS1 said:

No interlace mode?

I think you need the Video Overlay Card for that.

 

GS native modes only have one page, so the tricks some software used on the //e to get 384 scanlines aren't useful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 4/28/2021 at 10:50 PM, thanatos said:

I was in college when the first Quicktake was released, and my work-study job was in the computer lab.  So over winter break, I got to check one out and take it home, along with a Powerbook - but only with a black and white screen.

But my family was still kind of impressed at my nerd powers.  "Look, I can take a picture and show it to you on this screen in minutes!"

Sadly any pictures I took are long gone.

 

 

That's awesome, take it you didn't manage to get any printed? Maybe they had photo printers in the lab? Otherwise, what was your... take on the QuickTake overall in the end? Did you feel like you managed to obtain any decent results?

 

Part of what shoved me down the QuickTake path was this news story about some kids in school taking pictures with the QuickTake in 1996 on a field trip and also recording their stories digitally to "publish" onto their school website, which I found really fascinating since I'm sure not many schools did that.

 

FieldTrip.thumb.jpg.9c6567dd56edae5169d89b97bc7aa1d8.jpg

 

Although the website doesn't exist on Archive (from what I could find anyways, thought it would be cool to see what was written) someone who had gone on the trip uploaded a ton of pictures onto their Flickr account that I found here (obviously this photo was not taken with the QuickTake lol):

 

Day 7 - 6/28/1996 - Mesa Verde National Park


*While I couldn't find any journal entries, I have sent a message to Luke to see if he's aware of any archive containing them and did stumble upon this journal times report, for those who may find this just as fascinating as I do: https://journaltimes.com/news/journal-entries-tell-story-of-7-500-mile-trip/article_a4b6946f-601b-5a86-8649-3fc62a96f336.html

 

I would have loved to have gone on a trip like this in 1996. The life-long memories must have been amazing, despite them looking somewhat bored, confused or even uncertain.

 

16 hours ago, The Usotsuki said:

I think you need the Video Overlay Card for that.

 

GS native modes only have one page, so the tricks some software used on the //e to get 384 scanlines aren't useful.

Either way, just double checked and it does indeed require OS7+ to run the software. I think a single picture is 900k imported, didn't the IIGS only have 1MB of RAM?

Edited by Clint Thompson
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 4/30/2021 at 3:06 AM, Clint Thompson said:

*While I couldn't find any journal entries, I have sent a message to Luke to see if he's aware of any archive containing them...

Turns out he has them on his own personal site, which I wasn't even aware existed but he kindly shared the link to: http://lukpac.org/wfs/

 

I found humor in the first journal entry being by a Casey MacIntosh :D *(though the entry seems anything but)

Edited by Clint Thompson
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...