@avizuber yes, that was version 1 back in 2014 ;D The new version has new capabilities and a new print size. Check it out on IndieGoGo https://www.indiegogo.com/projec...

@acewacewacew Do it and send it to us!!!

Hey @bentossell, the original Kickstarter was a learning experience for us :) We took our hits and realized that we could do something much cooler if we changed the product value proposition a bit and improved our feature set. Our existing campaign has done very well and we've raised over a quarter million dollars in pre-orders from excited customers :) https://www.indiegogo.com/projec...

@josselinco a primary feature of this printer is that it's on a global network, think of sending your mom thousands of miles away a photo which she can then bring to life in the app, that when she woke up in the am the photo was sitting there waiting for her, etc. ✌️

@duanewilsonsf Cool idea on paper, but I have high doubts that it will work out this way. If I want to send a video to my mom, even if she had the printer, I would just do it via a regular app. The printer thing adds a nice surprise-effect, but everything you have to go through just for this is a bit much. Buying the printer, letting everyone know you have it, send them the link to the app, getting them to download it... I mean, again, I don't feel like most people are going make such an effort. Especially with all the video-sharing apps out there. I might be wrong, but that's just me telling you how I feel, so you can help your startup find its customers and meet their needs :) What I do believe in, though, is a commercial use. Stores could use this as a cool way to advertise. Creative agencies could use it as a way to make mind blowing booklets. And in transmedia architecture, this could be such a new and creative trick to add.

@josselinco I agree, although the $209,515 they raised on Kickstarter speaks for itself. However, I think it's a gimmick, since the only real innovation here relies on the app (and the watermark) and not on the printer.

@josselinco @duanewilsonsf It's a very good point. Some people don't see the value in doing this physically. Why not just send a text of the video? And that's totally true if the user sees no value in physical photographs. We are not those people. We (and our customers) fundamentally believe it means more to hold a photo in your hands, or frame it and put it on your walls. Our customers are mostly millennials who desperately want to personalize their space (dormrooms, lockers, binders, etc) and see real value (emotionally) in the physical print. So if you take that person, who's already printing photos today maybe, or who has thought about printing pictures from their trip to Europe but haven't gotten around to it, we're offering a significantly more robust and convenient solution than making the trip down to Wallgreens and printing off some photos. Adding a social and AR element, brings photographs into the new millennium for people who still care about real pictures. And that's a HUGE market. So if you look at us through that lens, there's no doubt we kick the crap out of existing physical photographs today... which is still a $5 billion industry just in the US :)

@jay_bee12345 Are there any benefits to paying for the printer, then paying for a lot of Business Cards / ink / whatever else is needed. Instead of getting a regular business card with a link that sends them to a copy of the video? Especially if I then need to have extra room on the business card to say that in order to see the video along with the card, you need to go download this app here first.

Hey @samalter, LifePrint is not at all a Prynt knockoff. No more than Honda is a ripoff of Toyota for both cars having air conditioning. Or InCase and Speck for both having iPad cases with built in stands. AR is just one feature in a much broader product value proposition. Certainly both Prynt and LifePrint’s product offerings are more than just a single feature! LifePrint for example is a whole connected social network for Physical prints. A significant portion of our customers have bought 2-packs of printers or more so they can share photos with each other across a distance and watch those AR experiences from across the world. This allows physical photos to be ‘social’, in the modern sense of the word, for the first time ever. Prynt has absolutely no way of doing this. There’s lots of other areas where we're different as well (Prynt attaches directly to your phone for example, we do not). Any customer who has a chance to take a look at both in person will see a significant difference right away :) They certainly won't see a knockoff. Appreciate the chance to clarify!

@spacetuxedo What's special about your printer to provide the AR tech, shouldn't every printed image that's linked to the app/software work? Can't you do the same thing by mailing a picture, and then using the app? Solves the same problem, without needing special hardware...unless I'm missing something?

@samalter It's an interesting thought and definitely something we've considered, but it wouldn't work that way. We do some magic on our side that make that use case unrealistic. But even forgetting the technology piece, who wants to go to the post office or FedEx to mail pictures? Anybody that's excited about the idea of socially sharing photos would want a better solution than pony express I'd think. I might be wrong of course. Lastly, even assuming people DID do this and printed photos elsewhere and mailed them to people, we still benefit by having more people downloading our app, using our AR viewer, and becoming familiar with our ecosystem. Not a bad trade, though I think it's an outlier use case. Good questions and discussion. It's ok that you're skeptical, maybe it's just not for you. We've had so much interest already from people every day that are very excited about the opportunity to share images this way that we know there's a good market for it. Appreciate your thoughts.