Nimslo/Nishika failure

[P3D Marvin Jones <Campfire@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> > The main reason for the demise of the
> > Nimslo/Nishika is that people just aren't willing to pay that much
> > for the limited 3-D effect of the 3 & 4 lens lenticulars.  It was an
> > expensive novelty.  
> 
> When I bought my Nimslo 7 or 8 years ago (which I bought primarily
> for making stereo slides), I did run a couple of rols of print
> film and had them processed by Nimslo.
> 
> When I showed them around, the reaction was almost the same
> everywhere and could be summed up as "delightfully tacky and
> great fun for a couple of rolls .... but I'll stick to
> regular prints for the family album, thanks".
> 
Cost and "novelty meltdown" were certainly contributory factors to the lack
of success of lenticular photography; however service was undoubtedly a
factor, too. I had a friend who was among the first purchasers of the
original Nimslo, and he loved everything about the camera and its output
... except the fact that it took an average of SIX MONTHS for him to get a
roll processed and returned. In an era when the one-hour photomat was
beginning to make itself heard from, that was a bucket of cold water on his
enthusiasm!


------------------------------