Peak Design is building on the success of its innovative Travel Tripod. The photography accessory maker is launching a new Pro Tripod on Kickstarter. The latest model comes in three flavors: Pro Lite, Pro and Pro Tall. As you might expect, their prices dwarf that of the (already expensive) Travel Tripod.

The Pro Tripod is scaled up for greater stiffness and maximum height. It has stronger legs, an all-CNC-machined hub and a flanged center column. This results in double the weight capacity of the Travel Tripod, which supports 20 lbs. The new Pro Tripod and Pro Tall Tripod each support 40 lbs. Meanwhile, the Pro Lite Tripod handles a bit less at 35 lbs.

Peak Design

When packed, the Pro models take up more space than the Travel model, but they'll still easily fit in a backpack. The Pro and Pro Lite Tripods measure just under 20 inches. The Pro Tall Tripod folds down to 22.9 inches. The Pro and Pro Tall models weigh just over 4 lbs, while the Pro Lite weighs 3.7 lbs.

Peak Design is also selling new accessories for those with the most demanding needs. The tilt mod will be essential for those who need the smoothest video. It converts the Pro line's standard ball head into a fluid pan-and-tilt one. The Pro Leveling Base enables quick leveling on uneven terrain. And the Pro Spike Feet will help the tripod grip slippery or loose ground.

Peak Design

If you thought the Travel Tripod was expensive, well, brace yourself. The Pro Lite Tripod is estimated to cost $800. The Pro Tripod is expected to cost $900. And the Pro Tall Tripod will retail for approximately $1,000. They're "estimated" prices since the products are only now arriving on Kickstarter. But, as is often the case with crowdfunding, pledging early will get you a discount.

If you're aghast at the pricing, well, that's entirely understandable. But consider that Peak Design is truly targeting professionals here. It isn't uncommon to see tripods from brands like RRS and Gitzo crack the $1,000 barrier. Engadget plans to review the Pro Tripod to see how it stands up (sorry) to pro-level needs.

The Pro Lite Tripod is expected to ship in October. Meanwhile, the company is aiming for February 2026 for the Pro and Pro Tall models. You can learn more in the video below and on the Kickstarter page.

If you have ever looked at the X100VI said to yourself, "Man, I wish Fujifilm would just make an interchangeable lens version of this camera," consider your request answered. Four years after the release of the X-E4, the company has announced the X-E5, a compact, $1,699.95 camera that should appeal to the same crowd that loves X100VI.

Inside, the X-E5 has Fujifilm's latest X-Trans CMOS 5 HR sensor. That's the same sensor you'll find on the X100VI, X-T5 and X-T50. It's capable of capturing 40.2-megapixel stills, and video at up to 6.2K and 30 frames per second. Thanks to improvements Fujifilm has made to the sensor's pixel structure, the X-E5 offers a native 125 ISO, and there's AI-based autofocus to make it easier to capture moving subjects such as animals, birds, insects, motorcycles, planes and more.

Also new to the X-E5 is the inclusion of in-body image stabilization (IBIS). It offers up to seven stops of stabilization near the center of the frame and six stops toward the periphery.

Fujifilm has also once again tweaked the exterior of the camera. If the X-E4 was a bit too minimalistic for your taste, the good news is the X-E5 has a front grip where Fujifilm did away with that on the X-E4. The camera's top plate is machined from a single piece of aluminum, an addition that should make the X-E5 feel more premium than its predecessor. On the top, you'll find all the usual dials, including one for shutter speed and another for exposure compensation. 

Fujifilm

There's also an entirely new dial dedicated to Fujifilm's film simulations. In addition to the usual presets like Classic Chrome and Velvia, you can save up to three of your own recipes for easy access. As before, the external LCD can flip up 180-degrees to make it easier to capture selfies and vlog.

Fujifilm has also redesigned the X-E5's viewfinder. It offers two new modes. First, there's a "Classic" mode, which simplifies the interface so it's more like what you would find on an old film camera. All your exposure settings are displayed along the bottom of the screen in a deep red color, with the light meter present on the side. Alternatively, the other new mode, "Surround View," displays a black, semi-transparent or outlined area outside of the aspect ratio you've set. In practice, that should make it easier to frame your shots.

Alongside the X-E5, Fujifilm announced a new pancake lens, the XF23mm f/2.8 R WR. It's a full stop slower than the fixed, 35mm equivalent you'll find on the X100VI, but it's about the same size and should be a lot faster to focus thanks to inclusion of a direct current motor.

Fujifilm will offer the X-E5 in black and silver. The camera will be available starting in August. At $1,699.95 for just the camera body, the X-E5 is twice as expensive as its predecessor. In fact, it's more expensive than the $1,599 X100VI, which features a leaf shutter and hybrid optical viewfinder. Personally, I'm sad about that since the X-E4 was my recommendation for a great starter camera. Now I'll need to tell people to look elsewhere. 

If you have an old iPad and you’re interested in externalizing some of the thousands of photos in your iCloud account, this guide’s for you. Instead of buying a new digital picture frame, you can turn your retired iPad into a dedicated photo display without much effort. You’ll need to change a few settings, download a photo frame app and decide how you want to prop up your new display — which can be as simple as using a stand or as complicated as getting out the drill and modding an analog frame. Here’s how (and why) to upcycle your old iPad into a digital picture frame.

Upcycled iPad versus a digital picture frame

An actual digital picture frame has a few obvious advantages: the necessary software is already there, it’s display-ready, complete with a frame and matted display, and, as a unitasker, it won’t display Gmail notifications over your photos. But the resolution for most smart frames tops out at 1,280 by 800 pixels. Even the standard iPad (9th gen) from 2021 has a resolution of 2,160 by 1,620. Plus, your old iPad is already yours. A decent digital frame will cost you around $100. And, since your iPad is certainly not a single-purpose device — it can take a FaceTime call or play an episode of Poker Face if the need arises.

Amy Skorheim for Engadget

How to turn your old iPad into a digital picture frame

I figured I’d be able to use Apple’s built-in software to do something as simple as creating a looping slideshow of images, but the experience wasn't quite what I was looking for. Playing a slideshow within the Photos app does so as a Memory, complete with music, and there’s no way to turn that music off (though you can mute it). You can loop a Memory, but you can't randomize the images and the interval between images is far too short (anything less than ten minutes feels like yet another screen blinking at you). So, to turn an iPad into a randomized, always-on and silent digital picture frame with a decent display length, you'll have better luck with a third-party app.

I tried a few and my favorite is Synched Photo Frame by Re-frame ($10, lifetime access). It doesn’t pack a ton of features — no transitions, no image effects, no time and date overlay options and it’ll only access images from your Photos app — but it does the best job of making photos look good on an iPad.

It lets you set the viewing interval from 10 seconds to 24 hours and there’s a programmable sleep function so it doesn’t beam smiling pictures into the 3AM void of your living room. If your iPad is oriented differently than a photo, it shows two side-by-side images (i.e., two portrait images next to each other if your iPad is in landscape or two stacked horizontal pics if your tablet is vertical). A clean white border surrounds each split image; full-screen images go edge to edge. Images are cropped slightly to fit, which means they may lose a few details around the borders, but I think the effect is more attractive than blurred extended edges or black bars. The two-up solution is how our top pick for a digital photo frame, the Aura Carver, handles images with different aspect ratios — but you can’t set that device in portrait mode.

LiveFrame is another option and it’s actually cheaper at $5 for lifetime access. It has more features like transitions and image filters, but there’s no option for having two images up at the same time like in Re-Frame. Instead it can blur the edges, add bars or (hideously) stretch the image. I also experienced a number of glitches with the app and found the navigation a little tougher than it should be. I also tried Digital Photo Frame Slideshow but, at $30 annually, it’s too expensive for my taste and it doesn’t have a sleep function.

How to prepare your iPad for photo frame mode

Step one: Create an album

Most photo display apps will pull from albums you select in Photos. You probably already know how to make a new album, but there are a couple of elements to consider as you create one for a digital photo frame app on an iPad. All instructions are for iPadOS 18. If you’re working with an older version, the steps may be slightly different.

Amy Skorheim for Engadget

1. Open Photos and tap the side bar icon in the upper left corner.

2. Under Albums, tap + New Album at the bottom of that list.

3. Name the album something memorable, as you’ll likely have to search for it within the photo frame app. Tap Create Album, then the blue plus sign.

4. If you want to only (or mostly) add a specific orientation (landscape or portrait), tap the up/down arrow icon at the bottom left of the pop up menu.

5. Tap View Options, then Aspect Ratio Grid. This will show the shape of each image so you can more easily select only the ones with the orientation you want. You can also use the View Options menu to zoom in on the thumbnails to get a better view of each picture.

6. Select the images you want and tap Add in the upper right.

Step two: Adjust your iPad settings

Adjusting a couple of settings will ensure your iPad keeps playing all day, interruption-free. Simply having the digital photo frame app playing should be enough to prevent your iPad from going dark, but your iPad may auto-lock when the app’s sleep mode kicks in, requiring you to unlock it in the morning to start the app back up. You’ll also want to make sure your slideshow isn’t interrupted with notifications from other apps.

1. Turn off Auto-Lock: Open Settings, tap Display & Brightness, tap Auto-Lock, select Never. You may get a warning that this setting will impact battery life, but since your iPad will stay plugged in, it won’t be an issue.

2. Turn off all Notifications: You’ll need to turn off notifications for every app on your iPad. Go to Settings> Notifications > Notification style, toggle off Allow Notifications for every app. Note: Using the Do Not Disturb Focus will enable DND on all your connected Apple devices, unless you toggle off Share Across Devices in Settings > Focus. But turning off notifications is still the better option.

Step three: Don’t let randos get at your stuff

Since you’ll probably want to display your new picture frame somewhere that people can see, there’s a risk of someone attempting to use your iPad. To prevent this, you can use an Accessibility feature called Guided Access. Apple designed it so parents could hand an iPad to their child without also giving them access to additional apps. We’re repurposing it for photo frame security to prevent anyone from navigating to your home screen or anywhere else. People can still tap on the screen to use the photo frame app’s controls or you can disable touch altogether.

Amy Skorheim for Engadget

1. Enable Guided Access: Open Settings, tap Accessibility then Guided Access. Set an unlock code, then set Display Auto-Lock to Never.

2. Turn on Guided Access: While the picture frame app is playing your slideshow, triple click the side button. A grey circle will appear, tap X to close it.

3. Enable or disable touch: If you still want to allow others to use functions within the photo frame app, toggle the Touch option on. If you want no response when the screen is touched, toggle it off. To access the Options menu, triple click the side button and enter your passcode. Tap Options in the lower left corner.

4. Note: Guided Access is turned on and off via the side button, so this option might not be feasible if you decide to put your iPad in a frame. One rather extreme workaround is to reset your iPad and set it up with a brand new Apple ID connected to family sharing that allows access to a shared Photos Library.

Amy Skorheim for Engadget

Put your new digital photo frame on display

This can be as simple as finding a stand you like and calling it a day. An Etsy seller called Event Frame makes custom frames for iPads. They aren’t cheap, going for around $100 each, but it’s one of the only companies I’ve found that actually offers model- and generation-specific sizing. I also considered the Snap Float Folio from Moft, as I’ve been impressed with some of the brand’s other origami-inspired accessories. If you’re crafty, you can take inspiration from this person’s Instructables and make your own frame from a physical media picture frame. Personally, I just got a right-angled USB-C cable and stuck my iPad in a collapsible stand I already had. The pictures are pretty enough.

Amy Skorheim for Engadget

Even with the ability to take excellent photos with our phones and instantly share them across the world, there’s something magical about the old-school instant camera. With just a click of a button, you can capture a moment in a photo that you can see and touch almost immediately. Images captured by an instant camera aren’t as pristine or perfect as those produced by modern digital cameras, but their soft images and imperfections are often a big part of the allure.

Yet not all instant cameras are the same, and some of them are better suited for different needs and budgets. That’s why we tested some of the most popular instant cameras on the market from brands like Fujifilm, Polaroid, Leica, Canon, and Kodak.

All of the models featured in our instant camera buying guide are enjoyable to use, but each offers a different set of features at a different price point. As a result, some are more appropriate for a child or budding photographer, while others are more advanced and provide added creative control (for a price). When it comes down to it, though, we consider print quality, ease of use, and affordability to be the hallmarks of a quality shooter. That’s why we picked Fujifilm’s Instax Mini 12 as the best instant camera for most people, as it ticks all three boxes wonderfully.

If you’re looking for more creative control or features like filters, however, the Instax Mini Evo is our choice, one that boasts great image quality and allows you to choose which photos you’d like to print. Other instant cameras, like the second-gen Polaroid Now Plus and Kodak’s Mini Retro 3, also offer a variety of advanced creative modes for those who desire more.

Take a look at this list of our instant camera recommendations to find the best fit for you.

The best instant camera for most people

Film type: Fujifilm Instax Mini film (sold separately) / Film size: 2 x 3-inches / Weight: 306 grams / Charging method: AA batteries / Companion app: None / Other features: Built-in selfie mirror, film counter

If all you’re looking to do is just click a button and get a decent print for a reasonable price, we recommend Fujifilm’s Instax Mini 12. It’s a basic instant camera that’s similar to our former pick, the Instax Mini 11, but with some minor updates. It still takes less than five minutes to start shooting, but the setup process is easier since all you need to do is twist the lens to either “on” or “off.” Such ease of use, combined with the camera’s thinner build, makes it particularly well suited for those new to photography and kids.

For an instant camera, image quality is also better than most of the other cameras I tested, producing relatively true-to-life photos. Most of the cameras I tested struggled to capture low-light conditions well, and this one is no exception, but the built-in flash does help. Fujifilm claims the Mini 12 optimizes image quality in both dark and bright environments better than its predecessor, but I didn’t notice much of a difference. The flash — which you can’t disable — is also still overpowering in some instances, resulting in a few overexposed images. If anything, the photos actually seemed a little darker and less vivid than before.

However, at least the Instax Mini 12 captured my features and skin color more accurately when I used the included selfie feature — which is really just a small mirror mounted on the front of the camera.

You can also now zoom in a little easier thanks to a new lens structure, which you can twist to enter the Close-Up Mode in lieu of pressing a button. When in this mode, you can take advantage of the camera’s new “Parallax Correction” feature, which is supposed to result in a more aligned photo. The lens was fun to play with and reminded me of a traditional point-and-shoot, but actually using it to take quality photos takes some time to figure out. As with the Mini 11, it’s still somewhat tricky to center your subject in the frame using this mode, even with the updated lens. Thankfully, it became easier to properly align photos after a couple of attempts (as well as some composition guidance from the manual).

The Mini 12 also offers a number of other niceties. I appreciated the larger-than-average viewfinder and the fact that the camera comes with a small counter that displays the remaining number of shots, which is a feature many of the other instant cameras I tested lacked. It’s easy to lose track of how many photos you’ve taken, especially when out for drinks or while sightseeing on vacation. Yet given each print costs about $1, it’s important to be mindful of how many shots you’ve got left.

All in all, the Instax Mini 12 is a basic camera that caters to all ages and experience levels and gets the job done — and done relatively well. It doesn’t feature Bluetooth or pair with a companion app that allows you to edit photos (only scan them), and it also doesn’t offer advanced features like filters, lens options, or portrait modes. But if you’re looking for an instant camera that offers a great traditional analog experience, this is it.

Best premium instant camera

Film type: Fujifilm Instax Mini film (sold separately) / Film size: 2 x 3-inches / Weight: 285 grams / Charging method: USB-C (on newer models) / Companion app: Yes / Other features: LCD screen, smartphone printing

One of Fujifilm’s newest instant cameras, the Instax Mini Evo, was a favorite of my former colleague Becca Farcase — and it’s mine as well. A hybrid camera that bears a resemblance to Fujifilm’s more expensive Fujifilm X100 line of cameras, it looks good and boasts vintage dials and buttons so stylish that they even caught the attention of passersby as I walked around Los Angeles taking photos. I tested the black camera, but Fujifilm also sells a brown version and limited edition models in silver and gold.

It’s easy to balk at its $199 price tag, but this camera offers a level of flexibility that could save you money in the long run if you use it a lot. That’s because the Instax Mini Evo includes a full-color three-inch LCD screen that lets you preview and select which images you want to print, which can help you avoid wasting film on unwanted shots. The added flexibility gave me more room for creative experimentation, too, as I wasn’t worried about running out of film. I also loved using the Instax Mini Evo app to print photos from my smartphone. Plus, unlike the Instax Mini 12, the Evo now uses a USB-C port (though older black models still use the Micro USB port) for charging, so you don’t need to keep buying new batteries.

Unlike Fujifilm’s Instax Mini 12, the Mini Evo comes with a few extra features that can help you capture better photos. For example, you can actually turn off the flash on the Mini Evo and use the three-inch LCD screen as a viewfinder. You can also use the menu to adjust how bright you want the film to look when it’s printed out, which was helpful given neither the Evo nor the Mini 12 are particularly great at capturing dark environments.

Additionally, there are dials you can use to apply various lens options and filters, ranging from retro to monochrome shades, as well as a mirror lens, vignette, soft focus, and more. You can take app-based remote shots, too, which adds an extra element of photographic control that can help you take better selfie shots than the selfie mirror in the front.

Of course, it’s not a perfect device, and there are some downsides to consider outside the price. For instance, although you can add some filters and make a few edits using Fujifilm’s companion app, it just isn’t as feature-rich as some of the apps available for the other digital and hybrid instant cameras I tested. The Evo’s extensive menu system isn’t particularly easy to navigate, either, and it took me some time to figure out how to turn the flash on and off. Plus, if you rely on internal storage solely, you can only take 45 images before the device is full. Still, all of these are minor issues, and I was very happy overall with how portable the stylish camera is, as well as how easy it is to take good photos quickly.

Read our Fujifilm Instax Mini Evo review.

The best instant camera for social occasions

Film type: Kodak Instant Print 3 x 3-inch cartridge (included) / Film size: 3 x 3-inch square prints / Weight: 467 grams / Charging method: Micro USB / Companion app: Yes / Other features: LCD screen, smartphone printing

Whereas the Instax Mini Evo’s companion app is more functional, Kodak’s hybrid Mini Shot 3 Retro is all about fun. The camera’s accompanying mobile app allows you to apply frames, stickers, filters, and a plethora of customization options to photos, making the camera great for scrapbooking. There’s even a beauty feature within the app to conceal blemishes, as well as a set of Snapchat-like filters you can use to add, say, dog ears, making this a fun instant camera to use as a mini photo booth of sorts at parties.

Like the Instax Mini Evo, Kodak’s Mini Shot 3 Retro comes with an LCD screen (albeit a much smaller one) you can use to decide whether or not you want to print a shot. It also supports Bluetooth, and you can use the Kodak Photo Printer app to upload photos to social media or print decent, relatively crisp photos from your smartphone. Unlike the Mini Evo, however, Kodak’s Mini Shot 3 Retro retails for around $170 and includes a pack of a film (it’s also often on sale for a lot less). It also uses cheaper film; you can currently pick up a 60-sheet cartridge for about $17.99, which equates to roughly $0.33 a shot. The fact that the film is cheaper arguably encourages play and creative experimentation, even if the large 3 x 3-inch square prints feel lower in quality and more flimsy than both Fujifilm’s and Polaroid’s.

However, there are notable drawbacks to the Kodak Mini Shot 3. My biggest issue is that the resulting prints of photos taken with the camera aren’t nearly as crisp or clear as those taken with a smartphone. Photo quality wasn’t consistently as good as the Mini Evo’s or Mini 12’s nor, for the most part, as clear and sharp. The photos also sometimes had an excessive pink tint that can interfere with quality. It doesn’t store images the way the Mini Evo does, either, which means you can’t decide whether you’d like to print them later. It’s also noticeably heavier than the Mini Evo and, frankly, nowhere near as stylish.

Nonetheless, if you don’t mind compromising on photo quality and want a relatively affordable hybrid camera with fun app features, the Kodak Mini Shot 3 Retro is a good choice.

The best instant camera for retro fans

Film type: Polaroid i-Type Color Film (sold separately) / Film size: 4.2 x 3.5-inch prints / Weight: 451.5 grams / Charging method: USB-C / Companion app: Yes / Other features: Lens filter kit, film counter

If you’re looking for an instant camera that offers the most old-fashioned, instant-film experience, the second-gen Polaroid Now Plus is the camera for you. Compared to the other instant cameras on this list, it most closely resembles vintage instant cameras like the Polaroid 600 with its classic, retro-inspired design. Meanwhile, its square I-Type film prints and iconic Polaroid-style frame give photos a more authentically vintage look. 

At the same time, the second-gen Polaroid Now Plus comes with a suite of modern features, including support for USB-C charging. It also offers Bluetooth and a companion app that boasts several creative modes, allowing greater photographic control. These include a remote shutter, a self-timer, and the “Polaroid Lab,” which lets you adjust the exposure and various color settings. The app also features a handful of shooting modes — including a manual option — and the camera comes with a set of five colored lenses you can snap onto the front. These were enjoyable to play with and allowed for more artistic expression.

If there’s one thing the Polaroid Now Plus isn’t known for, it’s portability. Given how heavy, large, and awkwardly sized it is, it’s not the kind of instant camera you can easily slip into your purse or carry around. Plus, it takes up to 15 minutes for prints to develop, and you have to ensure it’s not exposed to light while developing. That’s quite an inconvenience if you’re out with friends, say, at the beach on a sunny day.

If you’re looking for an instant camera that can easily print a good, clear photo without much effort on your part, this is not the camera for you. Of all the cameras on this list, the latest Polaroid Now Plus struggles with low-light environments the most. I could barely see images I took indoors, and I could only get the clearest shots when the light was directly behind me during the day — specifically, in the morning. Even these images weren’t as clear in comparison to Instax film, and both contrast and color saturation levels tend to be quite low.

Admittedly, this gave my pictures more of a dreamy vintage look that felt artistic, and you can use the Polaroid Lab to slightly adjust saturation and exposure settings. However, doing so is time-consuming. Given all these issues, I found it was easy to waste film, which proved expensive. After all, you only get eight I-Type sheets for $16.99, and that’s in addition to forking out $149.99 for the camera.

Truth be told, however, you could argue that many of these shortcomings are typical of a retro Polaroid-inspired instant camera and, thus, part of the experience. If that’s what you’re looking for, and you don’t mind the price, the second-gen Polaroid Now Plus is the perfect camera for you.

All that being said, it’s worth pointing out that Polaroid recently launched the $139.99 Now Plus Generation 3. The instant camera costs $10 less than its predecessor’s MSRP, though, at the moment, the second-gen model is on sale starting at $119.26.The new camera seems like it’s largely an iterative update, with a built-in tripod and four new colors to choose from instead of just three. It should also offer brighter, more accurate lighting in high-contrast scenes and improved depth perception, courtesy of upgrades to the ranging sensor, light meter position, and autofocus.

The best instant camera for portability

Film type: Polaroid i-Type Color Film (sold separately) / Film size: 2.6 x 2.1-inch prints / Weight: 239 grams / Charging method: USB-C / Companion app: No / Other features: Self-timer, selfie mirror, film counter

Whereas the Polaroid Now Plus is huge, the second-gen Polaroid Go is tiny. It easily fits into the palm of my hand — which is saying a lot, given I’m petite and a little over five feet tall — making it easily the most portable instant camera on our list. It also produces the smallest prints of all the instant cameras I tested, which could be nice if you’re trying to save some space and want something more compact than Instax Mini prints.

Weighing just over a pound, the latest Polaroid Go is also the lightest instant camera I’ve ever held, and you can easily use it with one hand. That’s actually pretty convenient, given I sometimes struggled to take pictures with the heavier Polaroid Now Plus and, to a lesser extent, some of the other instant cameras I tested. In fact, if the images produced looked more true-to-life and didn’t require you to hide them from light for about 15 minutes while developing, I’d be tempted to call this the best instant camera for travel or small children.

At $79.99, the latest Polaroid Go is the most affordable Polaroid camera on the market, with film that costs just a little more than Fujifilm’s Instax Mini shots (or about $19.99 for a 16-sheet pack). It also sports a small number of upgrades over the last-gen model despite retailing for $20 less. The most significant is USB-C support, which allows for faster charging and prevents you from having to spend money on AA batteries.

Polaroid also claims the camera produces clearer stills than its predecessor, but truthfully, I didn’t see a significant difference from one generation to the next. The photos are a little brighter, but if anything, the original Polaroid Go — like the Now Plus — produced warmer pictures that I thought were truer to life. Still, the photos are charming in the way only a Polaroid photo can be. Contrast and color saturation levels are still low but in a way that exudes the vintage, almost dreamy look of the photos taken with the Now Plus.

Unlike the Now Plus, however, the Go lacks creative modes and more advanced features, although it does offer a helpful self-timer and a larger selfie mirror. There’s also no Bluetooth support and, thus, no fancy app that will allow you to add extra effects. Instead, it’s just a simple point-and-shoot camera, just like the Instax Mini 12, which makes it a little easier to use. In addition, as mentioned, the prints are smaller than those of the Instax Mini, which could be a drawback for those who prefer larger, more traditional Polaroid photos. While it produces similar vintage-style shots, design-wise, it doesn’t look anything like old-school Polaroid cameras, which could also take away from the retro experience some desire.

That said, none of the older Polaroid cameras came with an app, either. All in all, the Go’s simplicity makes it a suitable candidate for those seeking an easy-to-use camera that provides a more traditional instant film experience — one they can take advantage of just about anywhere for half the price of the Polaroid Now Plus.

Other instant cameras to consider

Kodak Smile Plus

The Kodak Smile Plus is another hybrid instant camera you can use to print smartphone photos. It’s smaller and less expensive than Kodak’s Mini Shot 3 Retro 3 at $99.99, and it’s available in a variety of vibrant colors that should appeal to children. It also comes with physical filter-changing lens and prints on Zinc paper, allowing you to use your photos as stickers.

However, it lacks a built-in display, so you can’t choose which images you want to print directly on the camera itself. This often results in more wasted shots, especially since image quality is so-so at best, even when compared to those of the Retro 3. Photos are nowhere near as clear as the Instax Mini 12’s, either, especially in areas that are either too bright or too dark.

That being said, the Smile Plus does offer a microSD card slot, so you can store and view photos elsewhere. It pairs with an app that’s similar to the Retro 3’s as well, and although the software is not as snappy or feature-rich, it still allows you to add a variety of filters and frames. Ultimately, I’d recommend the Retro 3 since it can often be found for less than $120, but the Smile Plus is a good, budget-friendly alternative.

Leica Sofort 2

From photo quality to the lever you pull to print photos, Leica’s Sofort 2 is a terrific camera that’s remarkably similar to the Instax Mini Evo. In all of my tests, the photos I took with both looked identical. The two hybrid cameras also print smartphone photos via Instax Mini film and offer 10 film and lens effects, along with a macro mode for those who want more creative control. The Sofort 2’s minimalistic look is stylish, too, even if it’s not as charming as the retro-inspired Evo.

The drawback to the Sofort 2 is that it’s twice the price of the Evo. It’s hard to recommend at $389 since most people would likely consider the differences between the two cameras relatively minor. The user interface is easier to navigate on the Leica, though, and I appreciate the included lens cap and extended two-year warranty. I also like that it lets you print photos taken with other Leica cameras via the companion app — a nice perk for Leica fans. Nonetheless, I don’t think those perks are enough to justify spending nearly $200 more.

Instax Mini 99

If you’re looking for an analog instant camera that’s more advanced, Fujifilm’s Instax Mini 99 is one to consider. At around $200, Fujifilm’s latest instant camera is not as affordable as the Instax Mini 12, but it’s certainly a step up from the one-button point-and-click camera given it has multiple brightness settings, focus zones, color effects, and even two shutter buttons for greater creative control. The camera even comes with a tripod socket and an aluminum extension column, as well as a Sports Mode designed to further reduce blur while capturing fast-moving subjects.

Thanks to the added level of customization, I was able to capture higher-quality photos that looked truer to life than those from the Instax Mini 12 and Mini Evo. Granted, the Mini 99 is an analog camera and not a hybrid like the $199.99 Mini Evo, meaning you shouldn’t buy it if you also want to print smartphone photos. The new model also isn’t as simple to use as the Mini 12, so I wouldn’t recommend it for young children. Still, for an advanced analog instant camera, it’s relatively easy to set up and use, rendering it as much fun for budding photographers as more experienced shooters. 

Instax Square SQ1

While it didn’t make the cut, the Instax Square SQ1 is also worth a brief mention. Like the Mini 12, the Instax Square SQ1 produces good-quality shots, is easy to set up and use, and comes with a built-in selfie mirror. The reason we didn’t include it above, however, is that it costs nearly twice as much as the Mini 12 at $119.95, though we do sometimes see it on sale for $100.

That said, it might be worth a look if you prefer large 2.4 x 2.4-inch square prints and relatively true-to-life photos over vintage-looking stills. After all, the SQ1 is still cheaper than the Polaroid Now Plus and produces higher-quality images than the Kodak Mini Shot 3 Square Retro, which also prints similarly sized square shots.

Fujifilm also sells the newer Instax Square SQ40. It’s similar to the Instax Square SQ1 but with a vintage look that’s more visually striking, yet it’s also more expensive at $149. Given it produces similarly good-quality photos and rarely goes on sale, I’d recommend the Instax Square SQ1 or the more capable Instax Mini Evo for $50 more.

Instax Wide Evo Hybrid

Fujifilm’s forthcoming Instax Wide Evo Hybrid is nearly identical to the Instax Mini Evo You can use it to print photos directly from your smartphone, though the $349 camera also comes with a 15.67mm lens — the widest used on any Instax camera — for taking wide-format pictures. While it’s currently available in Japan and Australia, Fujifilm hasn’t specified a US launch date, other than “soon.”

Ultimately, I preferred the smaller, more travel-friendly Instax Mini Evo, but if you’re into wide prints (and don’t mind spending twice as much), the Wide Evo Hybrid is rather fun. The photo quality is solid and on par with both the Instax Mini Evo and Instax Mini 12. The main difference is that the Wide Evo’s lens captures a broader field of view. It also offers a few additional lens and film effects, giving users a bit more creative control. I especially liked the Degree Control feature, which lets you fine-tune the intensity of each lens effect applied to your image.

Plus, unlike the Wide 400 (which I’m still testing), it’s a hybrid camera with an LCD screen — a helpful perk that can cut down on wasted shots. However, at $349, it’s a whopping $150 more than both the Mini Evo and the Wide 400. My other main complaint is that there’s a slight delay between pressing the shutter and the photo being taken — something I didn’t notice with the Mini Evo. It’s not a dealbreaker, but it can be frustrating when trying to capture fast-moving subjects like a dog or a hyper toddler.

What’s coming next

Polaroid Flip

The Polaroid Flip is a new, $199.99 instant camera that introduces scene analysis, which helps prevent exposure and focus issues by flashing a red LED warning light through the viewfinder. That’s a handy addition, as Polaroid says the Flip has the most powerful flash of any of its instant cameras (though its intensity can be adjusted to prevent overexposing close-ups). In addition, the Flip features new autofocus capabilities powered by a sonar sensor that automatically selects from one of four lenses.

Instax Mini 41

Fujifilm recently announced the $129.95 Instax Mini 41, which is the follow-up to the $99 Instax Mini 40. The updated model retains its retro design but introduces parallax correction, a feature borrowed from the Instax Mini 12 to help users avoid off-center shots when taking close-ups.

Polaroid Now Plus Generation 3

Polaroid recently launched the Now Plus Generation 3, a sequel to our current pick for the best retro-inspired camera. The new model is nearly identical to the second-gen Now Plus, only it’s available in six colors and features a built-in tripod. It also benefits from autofocus improvements and a better light meter position, which, according to Polaroid, should result in better photos. We’ll be testing it soon, so stay tuned.

Instax Wide 400

Fujifilm’s $149.95 Instax Wide 400 is an upgraded version of its Wide 300. It’s the company’s first wide-format instant camera in nearly a decade, and like its predecessor, it prints photos that are twice as wide as the Instax Mini 12’s. It features a new self-timer and a rounded body for better grip, though it’s currently only available in a sage green hue. So far, I’ve been impressed with the photo quality, which, like the photos from the Instax Mini 12, look relatively true-to-life. I’m still testing it to see how it stacks up to other wide-format instant cameras, though, so I have yet to form a conclusion.

Update, May 21st: Updated links/pricing and added our impressions on the Fujifilm Instax Wide Evo.

• The Sean "Diddy" Combs trial began this week and featured testimony from Cassie Ventura.
• She testified about the graphic moments in her 11-year relationship with Combs.
• In the courthouse, the atmosphere was grim as Ventura shared shocking details.

From the start of Sean "Diddy" Combs' sex-trafficking trial, everyone was waiting for Cassie Ventura to appear. She was the star witness.

I expected Ventura's testimony to be explosive. But it turned out to be more graphic than I ever imagined.

In the courtroom, I noticed the distress on the face of Ventura's husband. His wife, who is eight months pregnant, was telling her alleged abuser and a room full of strangers about some of the worst moments in her life.

In September, federal prosecutors in Manhattan accused Combs of racketeering and sex trafficking. They say he used the vast power and resources of his record label and other businesses to arrange drug-fueled and baby oil-lubricated sexual encounters called "freak offs" with Ventura, other victims, and male escorts.

Combs pleaded not guilty and denies the sex-trafficking allegations, but he hasn't quite denied all wrongdoing. His legal team said he participated in "mutual abuse" with Ventura, and that the two frequently fought physically. This was a domestic violence case, they argued — ugly, but not criminal sex trafficking.

In her testimony, Ventura talked about a messy, 11-year relationship during which she fought for scraps of Combs' attention. He was often busy with other women and his various businesses, she said. Ventura participated in the freak offs out of love for Combs, she said, but they were never something she wanted.

The hip-hop mogul introduced her to the idea of freak offs about six months into their relationship, when she was 22 and owed him another nine albums as part of a record label deal, Ventura said. Combs would watch as Ventura would have sex with other men, who were paid thousands of dollars in cash, according to court testimony.

In text messages and emails shown as trial evidence, Ventura talked about arranging the freak offs, which required dropping by a Duane Reade to pick up baby oil, lubricant, candles, and condoms.

The freak offs could last up to four days, requiring drugs to maintain stamina, she said. They typically required up to 10 large bottles of baby oil, she testified. Everyone "had to be glistening," as she described it. At one point, the judge stepped in to ask prosecutors to pull back from the deluge of baby oil questions.

The disturbing nature of the testimony was only heightened by Ventura's appearance. She is due to have a baby in June and was visibly pregnant. One courtroom marshal said he was prepared to deliver her baby if the stress of testifying induced labor. I wasn't sure if he was joking. One of the prosecutors urged the judge to require Combs' lawyers to wrap up cross-examination. "We are afraid she could have the baby over the weekend," she said.

Cassie Ventura's testimony transfixed the courtroom

Over the years, I've reported on about a dozen trials and countless more court hearings. There were the uncomfortable benches of Donald Trump's criminal trial. The rowdy fans at the R. Kelly Trial. The cold December mornings when I lined up for the Ghislaine Maxwell trial. The ultracompetitive Sam Bankman-Fried trial, where getting in line at 4 a.m. still wasn't early enough to get inside the courtroom.

But nothing in my experience has compared to the Combs trial, which began Monday morning after a week of jury selection and is supposed to last two months.

Ever since Ventura accused Combs of sexual abuse in November 2023, Combs' legal quagmire has been one of the biggest stories in the country. Combs paid Ventura $20 million to settle her case, but a flood of other accusers filed additional civil lawsuits against him. When prosecutors brought the criminal case against Combs, it was put on the fast track.

No longer the image of a pop star, Combs dresses for court like an office drone, wearing thin crewneck sweaters over white button-down shirts. He rarely betrays any emotion, occasionally nodding during his lawyers' arguments or huddling with the attorneys beside him.

His large family, including his mother and seven children, has been in the courtroom to show their support. Every day, Combs flashes them heart symbols with his hands. Their expressions, during trial proceedings, have remained neutral. The gravity of the situation — Combs could spend the rest of his life in prison if convicted of all charges — is obvious.

On the other side of the courtroom aisle are Ventura's support group, which includes her husband, Alex Fine, and several relatives. At some of the more raw moments of Ventura's testimony, Fine's face looked visibly pained. When her texts with Combs about the freak offs were shown to the jury, he broke his gaze and looked at his lap.

As Ventura testified in graphic detail, the courtroom was rapt. She spoke in a faint, dispassionate voice.

The grim atmosphere made the otherwise unbelievable details of the trial feel upsetting rather than dramatic. On social media, these details fly by as jokes. For Ventura, they left scars. In February of 2023, years after she left Combs, Ventura couldn't sleep, she testified.

"I couldn't take the pain that I was in anymore, and so I just tried to walk out the front door into traffic," she told the jury. "And my husband would not let me."

'I've been to a Diddy party'

On Monday, for opening statements, the line outside the lower Manhattan courthouse began the previous afternoon. Same Old Line Dudes, the standard-bearer line-sitting company for New York trials, declined to disclose the precise time their clients booked because "it's very competitive," a receptionist told me.

During lunch breaks, live-streamers went outside and updated their followers on what unfolded indoors. Christine Cornell, a courtroom sketch artist, took photos of her illustrations in natural sunlight to share them with the media. Vicky Perez, who had come to New York City from Connecticut to watch the trial's opening day, said she's a fan of Ventura, having purchased her first album when she was in the fifth grade. Perez wanted her to "get justice," she said.

"I want to see his downfall," she said of Combs.

The scene overwhelmed even Dennis Byron, the editor in chief of the Hip-Hop Enquirer, who said he's reported on the hip-hop scene for 35 years. He covered Comb's career since he was an up-and-coming artist.

"I've been to a Diddy party," he said.

"Not one of those parties," he quickly clarified.

Byron — who wore a tweed vest and trousers in the May afternoon heat — said he's attended and photographed Combs' extravagant "White Parties," where he took photos of the likes of Combs, Ventura, Kim Porter, and Jay-Z.

These parties took on a new meaning following the indictment against Combs, where they've been widely re-interpreted as sex parties (virtually every single celebrity who has been asked about this denies they were sex parties). But celebrities have been having orgies forever, Byron said. He remembers hearing about them in the 1980s. Flying in escorts — as prosecutors said Combs did for freak offs — wasn't anything new either, Byron said.

"Well, I never stayed for those," Byron said. "I never stayed for those orgies. But I'm sure they happen. But I never seen them."

Combs' White Parties were meant to show off his power as "a tastemaker," Byron said. Combs accrued cultural capital — something prosecutors later said he used to coerce his victims.

"Remember, that party was a regular party," he said as I wrapped up our conversation. "Ain't no party like a regular Diddy party."

Combs' lawyers acknowledge his flaws — but say he's not a sex trafficker

Combs' trial was taking place in the same 26th-floor courtroom that saw the trials of Sam Bankman-Fried and two of E. Jean Carroll's lawsuits against Trump. (Bankman-Fried and Combs share a jail unit together; Trump is in the White House.) As with all federal court cases, there's no broadcast or livestream.

Karen Agnifilo-Friedman, Luigi Mangione's lead defense lawyer and the husband of Combs' lead lawyer Mark Agnifilo, often showed up to watch. The court staff had also set up three overflow rooms for journalists and members of the public to watch the trial on a closed-circuit camera feed, plus two rooms for members of the in-house press like me.

Several people I spoke to said they were willing to keep an open mind, but believed it would be hard to shake the memory of watching the video of Combs beating Ventura and dragging her through a hotel hallway.

"I'm going to try to give him a fair shake, said Oota Ongo, a YouTuber who livestreamed himself walking around the courthouse after watching opening statements. "We all saw the Cassie tape. That Cassie tape is just something that I can't get out of my head."

Depending on the day, I alternated between the courtroom itself and a press room. When I checked out an overflow room one day, I spotted a prominent federal prosecutor who had put Bankman-Fried behind bars. He was paying close attention to Combs' lawyer, Teny Gregagaros, giving Combs' side of the story in an opening statement.

While Combs may have been an unpleasant, angry, jealous, and violent man — especially when drunk or high — he was not guilty of sex trafficking, Gregagos insisted. At most, he was responsible for domestic violence, she conceded.

"He is not charged with being mean," Gregaros told the jurors. "He is not charged with being a jerk."

The first witness was a security guard at the Intercontinental Hotel, who testified about the infamous video where Combs assaulted Ventura (Combs just wanted to get his phone back from her, his defense lawyers said).

Next, before Ventura, was a male dancer who said he acted as an escort. He testified about being asked to carefully urinate during sex.

"Apparently, I was doing it wrong because they both stopped me and told me that I was supposed to let a little out at a time and not go full, like, take a leak on her," he said, in a quote that perhaps best encapsulated both the graphic nature of the trial testimony and how prosecutors say Combs intimately choreographed people around him to satisfy his own desires.

During Ventura's cross-examination, Combs' lawyers pulled up texts in which Ventura indicated she enjoyed the freak offs.

But Ventura, in her testimony earlier, said she just wanted to make Combs happy. She loved him. But she never wanted the freak offs, she said.

"It made me feel worthless," Ventura testified. "Like I didn't have anything else to offer him."

IPOs are making headlines again, which could mean Pat Healy's hopes for "hot and heavy" activity this year may not be completely quashed after all.

Healy is the founder and CEO of Issuer Network, which helps C-suite executives leading IPOs get multimillion-dollar marketing packages from prospective stock exchanges through "bake-off" bidding competitions. For the last 30 years, he's worked behind the scenes on some of the biggest IPOs and corporate spin-offs, including Facebook, Zillow, KraftHeinz, and 3M.

He's won praise from clients such as Jason Child, the CFO of the semiconductor company Arm (and the former CFO of Splunk), and Dick Grasso, a former CEO of the New York Stock Exchange, who sat on opposite the deal table from Healy when he first started Issuer Network in 1995.

He's helped clients get everything from free advertising at Davos to NFL players attending their closing bell ceremonies.

Never heard of him? There's a reason for that. Healy, who appears to be a forefather of this type of bake-off, or contest between companies, runs his business largely by word of mouth. He also refuses to spend a dime on marketing. Just take a look at the company's website — the very picture of a mid-2000s web interface.

"I could make a big deal about some of these things, but that's not who I am," Healy, 74, told Business Insider in an interview. "I believe I do a really good job for people, and I shouldn't go around bragging about it. I just let my customers do the talking."

With IPOs back in the spotlight, thanks to the fintechs Chime and eToro, BI sat down with Healy and spoke to people who have worked with him. We wanted to understand the business and the man behind it, including how he got his start, how an exchange bake-off works, and what he's been occupied with since public offerings took a nosedive in 2022.

IPO activity has whipsawed this year with Trump's tariffs, and Healy saw several of the offerings in his docket pulled due to market volatility. Where things go next is anyone's guess, but Healy is bracing for a potential torrent of demand.

"Who knows when the sun's going to come out?" Healy said. "When it does, I expect all these guys to put their foot on the gas and come to market right away."

In the early '90s, after having held multiple CFO roles at DC-area banks, Healy started doing consulting work for Nasdaq. His job, he explained, was to disincentivize companies from leaving for the NYSE at a time when Nasdaq was a lesser-known exchange for new companies.

"I designed and helped build products that were useful to CFOs so that if they decided to leave Nasdaq, they'd have to give something up," he said. "They'd be less inclined to do so. And it created a stickiness."

That opened Healy's eyes to what he called an unfilled gap. Investment bankers advising on IPOs don't want to get caught in the crossfire between the exchanges, he said (and many banks are themselves listed in the NYSE). There are other professionals who help companies get listed on an exchange, including business consultants, but Healy's appears to have been the first to specialize in this competitive process for marketing perks.

"I discovered that CFOs really didn't have anybody to talk to when they had to make a decision about where they're going to list their stock," he said.

"There was no one else doing it. And there's still no one else doing it," he added.

Issuer Network's first client was AOL, the now (mostly) defunct internet and instant messaging service. Healy said he managed to get a meeting with the CFO and convinced him to let Healy negotiate a "co-branding package" on the company's behalf.

"I just hopped in my car and went over to Tyson's Corner," a Virginia suburb of Washington, DC, where AOL was headquartered at the time. "I visited with the CFO. I said, 'Look, you're on the wrong exchange here.'"

In August 1996, AOL switched from the Nasdaq to the NYSE.

AOL was an example of a service Healy refers to as "switches." Today, most of his business involves advising companies about to go public on which exchange they should be listed. Beyond the trading style and fit of a given exchange, there are hidden levers that companies ccan pull, said Healy.

"Issuers are always focused on the listing fee," he said. "What they don't see is what the exchange is going to make off the listing."

Exchanges cannot technically buy a company's listing, but they can pick up the tab for co-branded advertisements or other marketing perks. That's where Healy comes in. He essentially creates a competition between the exchanges to see which one can offer clients the best package with their listing.

"We create pretty substantial co-branding packages and we literally bake it off," he said.

Typically, a company would contact the exchanges to say it's decided to make its listing decision "a competitive process." Then, Healy said, the company would lay out how it wants to reach customers, and the exchanges would come back with "a co-branding package commensurate with those defined outcomes." From there, it's a back-and-forth of negotiations and adjustments until the company (not Healy, as he emphasized) names a winner. The whole process typically takes about six weeks.

Healy wouldn't reveal how much these deals are worth — except for one, which is public. The package he got for Arm, a semiconductor company that went public in 2023, was worth $50 million.

"He understands exactly what the terms and conditions are for the market," Child, Arm's CFO, said. "So he can help you understand, as the issuing company, what is the benefit to the exchange? What is the value they can provide? What are the pros and cons?"

Child first hired Healy when he was Groupon's CFO for the tech company's 2011 IPO. He tapped Healy again in 2023 when Arm went public.

Arm's package with Nasdaq, for example, included several years of advertising at the Davos World Economic Forum in Switzerland. As part of its deal, another Healy client, PNC, got NFL Hall of Famers, including Jerry Rice and Emmitt Smith, to ring the closing bell at the NYSE with company employees in 2010.

There are moments when both sides are unhappy, said Healy, but it's all business — nothing personal.

"I maintain very good relationships with both exchanges," he said. "We have no agenda here other than the best deal for our client. And we don't favor anybody. The minute we do, we lose all credibility and we're out of business."

Of the IPOs that happened during the early days of Healy's business, only a small percentage of his clients were large enough to be eligible for the NYSE. Those that were crossed Grasso's desk, the former NYSE chief told BI.

"Some of my marketing people, in the early days of Pat's business, were highly skeptical," said Grasso, who headed the exchange from 1995 to 2003. "But after a couple of sit-downs with me, I was very comfortable that Pat was going to be fair."

Healy also advises clients on what he refers to as "spins," when a company spins off a part of its business into its own company. Issuer Network has worked on more of these during the recent IPO downturn.

"You've got Comcast spinning, Honeywell spinning, FedEx spinning. You've got quite a lineup of spins out there," he said. "We've done a lot of spins in our day, and we expect to be active in the spin market here for the foreseeable future — through the summer, at least. A lot of these deals will bleed into '26, but their exchange selection decision I expect will be made in '25."

Healy said he couldn't disclose current clients, but noted he worked on a spin with 3M last year. He advised the company as it spun off its healthcare business, now called Solventum, and led a bake-off between exchanges for both the parent and spin company at the same time.

"The winner takes all," Healy said. "So instead of getting a $5 or $10 million co-branding package for 'Spinco,' you get many times that amount for the whole enchilada."

(3M stayed with the NYSE, and Solventum joined its listings.)

Healy declined to discuss his fees, but said he follows a "satisfaction guarantee" policy: He tells clients they can "tear up our invoice" if they aren't happy — something of an anomaly on Wall Street.

Child called Healy "an old soul."

"He basically just tells you, 'Pay me what you think it's worth' when it's over," Child said. "It's like the opposite of dealing with an enterprise software person."

Healy's humble upbringing might explain his aversion to the spotlight. Growing up, he was one of nine children. His father was a mailman in the Cleveland suburb of Brook Park. The town was home to a Ford manufacturing plant, what Healy described as "an ugly scene" — not necessarily the kind of place you might expect someone who brokers deals on Wall Street for some of the largest corporations in the world to get their start.

"I'm just a hick from Ohio," Healy said. "People like talking to me. And I have something good to offer them. You build a momentum over time by just keeping your nose to the grindstone, delivering good results, and just shooting straight with people."

• Three teenagers in New York designed a cardboard, called Kiriboard, to replace plastic packaging.
• They got the idea when a box of motors for their robotics hobby arrived damaged.
• Their invention won the $12,500 Earth Prize. Now they plan to buy a machine to make more Kiriboards.

Three teenage boys in New York City have invented a clever packaging material that they hope will replace toxic plastics and make plastic-free shipping a reality.

Zhi Han (Anthony) Yao, Flint Mueller, and James Clare are planning to pursue a patent and eventually pitch their product to Home Depot, as well as traditional shippers like Amazon, FedEx, and the US Postal Service.

They call their geometric, cardboard invention Kiriboard, since it's inspired by Japanese kirigami, which is the art of cutting and folding paper.

"Something like this is the wave of the future," Jerry Citron, the teenagers' environmental-science teacher, told Business Insider.

Yao, Mueller, and Clare won the Earth Prize on April 8, making them one of seven winning environmental projects by teenagers across the globe. The award comes with $12,500, which they plan to use to buy a cutting machine, called a CNC router, and test more prototypes.

Plastic-free shipping could change the world

Just like any plastic, Styrofoam and other plastic packaging can shed microscopic bits of plastic into homes and the environment.

Microplastics have been detected from the oceans to the top of Mount Everest, in animals' and humans' body tissues and blood, and even in rain all over the planet. They're associated with heart attack and stroke risk. Some researchers suspect they could even be contributing to the recent rise in colon cancers in young people.

"I didn't realize it was as big of an issue as it was," Yao told BI. "I mean, companies have made sustainable initiatives and greener initiatives, but they haven't really fully replaced plastic packaging."

Enter the Kiriboard: Kiriboard is cut into lattice-like shapes so that it can bend to fill the space between an item and the wall of its box. The cuts give the cardboard a three-dimensional structure that makes it sturdy and allows it to bend and absorb impact, protecting what's inside, similar to bubble wrap but without the plastic.

Once perfected, the three teens hope their design can help ship packages of sensitive or heavy equipment even more securely, at a competitive price.

Broken motors and crumple zones

Clare, Mueller, and Yao are all on the same robotics team at Stuyvesant High School in New York City. Clare is a junior, and Mueller and Yao are seniors.

The idea for Kiriboard started when they opened a shipment of Kraken X60 motors, which are about $200 a pop. They found that the brass pins, which connect the motors to a robot, were damaged and unusable. They assumed the pins had been damaged in transit.

"We're like, well, we should do something about this packaging, because clearly the packaging wasn't good enough," Mueller said.

Clare thought about how cars are engineered with crumple zones, meant to absorb the energy of impacts to protect the people inside.

Similarly, he said, "you can make strategic weak points in your packaging so that the package warps and deforms," sparing the package's contents.

With help from the Earth Prize program and Citron, they built and tested their first Kiriboard prototypes.

The matrix

It was a scrappy effort, with cardboard scavenged from their school.

After some research and consulting various teachers, Yao said they drew up eight or nine different designs, and narrowed down to four to build and test. Then, came the fun part: dropping heavy stuff on their creations.

To test their prototypes' durability, the teens slammed them with a roll of tape, a stapler, a can of soda, and a metal water bottle — "which did the most damage, but not as much as we thought it would," Clare said.

They dropped each item onto the Kiriboard prototypes from various heights, so that they could calculate and study the physical forces of each impact.

"Basically, we want to see what's the most amount of force it can take before it snaps," Yao said.

The results were promising, the trio said. The Kiriboard prototypes sustained very little damage, which they judged by checking the cardboard for dents. They plan to move forward with all four designs, which they hope will be useful for different types of shipping.

In the design pictured above, four triangular "legs" hold the Kiriboard in place inside a box.

"This middle section, we call it the matrix. This is supposed to be flexible," Yao said. Once you place an item for shipping inside the box, the matrix "is supposed to form to the product."

Once they've purchased a CNC router to automate cutting the cardboard, they plan to test prototypes by actually shipping them in boxes.

"Right now, we want to perfect our product," Yao said.

When it's ready, they said they might also pitch it to the electronics company AndyMark, which shipped them the robotic motors that arrived broken.

"No shade to them," Clare said, adding that their robotics team frequently orders from AndyMark with no problems.

"We're on the brink of, like, this could become a reality, and it's just up to us to put in that final effort," Mueller said. Clare chimed in: "All from a broken package."

When you set up a new camera, or even go to take a picture on some smartphones, you’re presented with a key choice: JPG or RAW?

JPGs are ready to post just about anywhere, while RAWs yield an unfinished file filled with extra data that allows for much richer post-processing. That option for a RAW file (and even the generic name, RAW) has been standardized across the camera industry — but despite that, the camera world has never actually settled on one standardized RAW format.

Most cameras capture RAW files in proprietary formats, like Canon’s CR3, Nikon’s NEF, and Sony’s ARW. The result is a world of compatibility issues. Photo editing software needs to specifically support not just each manufacturer’s file type but also make changes for each new camera that shoots it. That creates pain for app developers and early camera adopters who want to know that their preferred software will just work.

Adobe tried to solve this problem years ago with a universal RAW format, DNG (Digital Negative), which it open-sourced for anyone to use. A handful of camera manufacturers have since adopted DNG as their RAW format. But the largest names in the space still use their own proprie …

Read the full story at The Verge.