Who wants a real Instagram camera?

Instagram's icon is pretty iconic, as app icons go, but wouldn't it be awesome if you could get a real camera that looked just like that? Antonio De Rosa thinks so, and he's asking the masses to help him make his dream a reality.

He's started a campaign on Indiegogo (sorta like KickStarter) seeking $50,000 to produce a real, working digital camera based on the Instagram icon. Socialmatic, as the camera will be called, will boast a 4:3 touchscreen, interoperability with Instagram's iPhone and Android App, and even a real Polaroid style printer. Sounds pretty awesome, doesn't it? The printed pictures even have your nickname, a QR code, and some sticky-note style goo on the back for easy display.

On the downside, it doesn't look particularly ergonomic:

If you'd like to own such a fine device, you've got 47 days left (as of right now) to give De Rosa a hand in raising that $50,000. So far he's only managed to get $1,215 pledged, but with a little help, amazing things can happen... Oh, and you'll get a discount on the camera if you pony up a little now.

Image via Indiegogo

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Apple patent dispute halts US HTC One X and Evo 4G LTE shipments

Next Story

Microsoft developing Kinect-based TV ads that watch you

26 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

There's a meme I want to post but since kids might be reading this I'll paraphrase it with less colorful language:
"Are you freakin' kidding me?"

PalletTown said,
Shut up and take my money... then shove it up you a**, we don't need more hipsters thinking they are professional photographers ¬_¬

Thank you! Tired of people thinking instagram makes them a photographer...it's like a photo factory, take image, apply crappy effects, try and act like you're talented.

SirEvan said,

Thank you! Tired of people thinking instagram makes them a photographer...it's like a photo factory, take image, apply crappy effects, try and act like you're talented.


This.

I have nothing against Instragram in itself (well yes I do, but just bugs, conceptual flaws, etc...), but the kind of attitude some of its users build up based on their "work" is really annoying.
It's not even so much the appreciation of putting the "old and retro" look on stuff, as long as it fits, I like those pictures, hell I like doing these effects myself in Aperture...

But Instagram's userbase sure is perfect in pi**ing off a whole industry. -_-

GS:mac

Glassed Silver said,

This.

I have nothing against Instragram in itself (well yes I do, but just bugs, conceptual flaws, etc...), but the kind of attitude some of its users build up based on their "work" is really annoying.
It's not even so much the appreciation of putting the "old and retro" look on stuff, as long as it fits, I like those pictures, hell I like doing these effects myself in Aperture...

But Instagram's userbase sure is perfect in pi**ing off a whole industry. -_-

GS:mac


Exactly, some photo's look pretty cool with a vintage look or depth of field effect but when people do it and then think of themselves as pro's that's when people get annoyed, especially those who are the real professionals! I'm not actually a photographer by the way it just annoys me when half of my news feed on Facebook and the like is taken up by pictures of cats with a vignette and then comments about how artistic the person who took it is so I can only imagine how annoyed the real pro's must get

PalletTown said,

Exactly, some photo's look pretty cool with a vintage look or depth of field effect but when people do it and then think of themselves as pro's that's when people get annoyed, especially those who are the real professionals! I'm not actually a photographer by the way it just annoys me when half of my news feed on Facebook and the like is taken up by pictures of cats with a vignette and then comments about how artistic the person who took it is so I can only imagine how annoyed the real pro's must get

Indeed, it doesn't start only with those doing it for a living.
I've been into photography for pretty much my whole life, I got my first camera when I was still a little kiddo and I certainly adore when people around me get creative and try to experiment.
Jeez, if they want, they can even abuse the same filter over and over and over and over and... <snip> again, I'm confused and irritated, but what I get annoyed over are those freaking hipsters trying to be "underground photographers" on a pro-level, debating how Instagram only makes it easier and they still maintain "full control"...
I bet most of them don't even know how to replicate those effects in a decent program and hence be creative from start to finish.

I believe creativity can exist along with easy workflows, however, if someone tries to put their works on the same shelf as someone who works from 10minutes to 2-3 hours on one picture (depending on complexity and manipulation), that's when I turn into INSANITY WOLF.

GS:mac

Edited by Glassed Silver, May 17 2012, 12:31pm :

I'd rather buy my own 120mm film and a 2nd hand Diana F ( if you really wanted to be legit) and have much more fun learning how to do this for real. Instagram is nice but it becomes very "standard" after a while.

Slammers said,
"but wouldn't it be awesome if you could get a real camera that looked just like that"

no.


exatc same thing i was going to post.

Ridlas said,
Why does he need 50 thousand dollars to make a camera?

All signs point to scam, but yet gets an article written about it like it's real

itsthenewDC said,

All signs point to scam, but yet gets an article written about it like it's real

What do you expect, this is Neowin after all!

itsthenewDC said,

All signs point to scam, but yet gets an article written about it like it's real

It's a kickstarter-esque project, you do realise it takes a little more than the cost of the bare components to create a project? What are 'all the signs'? It looks no more legit/fake than any indiegogo/kickstarter projects.

Ridlas said,
Why does he need 50 thousand dollars to make a camera?

Why how much do you think it would cost to develop (no pun) and manufacture something like this?

Ridlas said,
Why does he need 50 thousand dollars to make a camera?

have you ever tried to design something? to begin with, lets forget about the developers time, and for ease-of-computation, lets assume one inventor. Depending on the parts required, low-qty buys from electronics distrubuters are expensive. For example, an FTDI FT232 USB->serial bridge IC costs around $5.64 when purchased in quantities of one, however if you buy 100+, you can get them for under $2.50. A savings of half.

Then theres the PCB. The CHEAPEST place you can get a single board made charges $2.50 / in^2 for a 2 layer board, $8 for a 4 layer board. That can easily cost 100$ or more depending on the size of the boards needed. Ultimately however, the largest single expenditure of this project is going to the the case design. Assuming he can model it in a 3d cad program, it can cost easily a few thousand $ to have a custom case made in low yield qty's for prototyping, say <100. I'd easily see a case like that costing between 2000-8000$ for a single run. Lets not talk about the optics either.

In the end, a single prototype (thats assuming he gets things right with the very first one) is going to end up costing around 8-10K, and as mentioned that is only a rough estimate for the parts, not time, multiple prototypes, etc.

Hollow.Droid said,

It's a kickstarter-esque project, you do realise it takes a little more than the cost of the bare components to create a project? What are 'all the signs'? It looks no more legit/fake than any indiegogo/kickstarter projects.


Previous comment:
Just a photo. Flexible funding campaign. No perks. And at the end admits it's just a concept." Most of the "wow" Kickstarter-esque projecters at least have a video of a working prototype, or perks for getting discounts or the products themselves. And to be on a flexible funding campaign, he could essentially just end up taking a couple grand and doing nothing with it.