Filed under: Accessories, Hardware, Peripherals, Odds and ends, Retro Mac, Apple History, This Old Apple
Retro Apple: The QuickTake 100 digital camera
In 1994, I was working as the IT manager for a natural gas pipeline company (all Macs, of course), had long hair pulled back in a ponytail, and none of that hair was gray. In January of '94, I remember being invited down to Apple's Denver office -- they had a Denver office in those days -- to see some new products that were being introduced.While I was disappointed that they didn't show us an updated Newton (the MessagePad 110 would be introduced in March), I was intrigued by another device that was demonstrated -- the Apple QuickTake 100 digital camera. At the time, the only other small business / consumer digital cameras on the market were the Canon Ion, a device from Kodak (rebranded by Apple as the QuickTake 100), and the Logitech PhotoMan.
After the demo, we passed around the camera and took photos of each other, and then waited as the pictures were uploaded to a Mac. Considering that "digital photography" for us at that time meant taking a picture with a film camera, waiting for the film to be developed and prints made, and then scanning the pictures on an expensive and slow SCSI scanner, this seemed like the future. Of course, I remember comments from many of the people in attendance to the effect of "digital photography will never replace film photography."
At WWDC 1994 in San Jose, there was a booth at one of the many evening parties where you could have your picture taken with a QuickTake 100, uploaded to a Mac, placed into a fake Macworld magazine cover, and then printed out on a color printer. While that type of action would take literally seconds with modern technology, it took the Apple employees who manned the booth close to 10 minutes per picture! The line to get on the cover of Macworld was long and slow as a result.
So what started this trip down Memory Lane? A few days ago when I opened up the mailbox, there was a box sitting inside of it. The box was from my nephew in Seattle, and it contained some goodies that he decided not to take with him when he starts graduate school at M.I.T. this fall.
Nestled in packing paper along with a full set of Apple IIc system disks was an Apple QuickTake 100 in good condition. I knew that my nephew had mentioned finding the QuickTake in a surplus pile somewhere, but I never expected to end up in my hands. He knows that I have a penchant for collecting old tech, so he must have decided that the QuickTake would find a good home with me.
The first thing that struck me is how large the QuickTake 100 actually is (see comparison with iPhone below). It looks like a set of binoculars and it is held in both hands that way. Since it weighs one pound, that may be what the designers at Kodak thought would be the best way to hold up a heavy camera. On the back of the camera is an optical viewfinder that you peer into, along with a postage stamp-sized monochrome LCD that displays the current number of pictures stored in the camera.

The QuickTake 100 had a fixed 8 mm lens and a shutter speed range of 1/30 - 1/175 of a second. The QuickTake 150, which was essentially the same camera, added a separate close-up lens that allowed focusing as close as 30 cm (about a foot). Due to the rather slow shutter speeds, the QuickTake had a built-in flash.

Success! Through the icons on the display, I was able to figure out that the top right button toggled the camera resolution, that the top left button toggled the flash, that the bottom right button started up a 10-second timer, and that the bottom left recessed button erased the camera. Next to the resolution icon was a number (in this case, 0) and in the middle of the display was a larger number (8). I had to resort to reading the manual to figure out that the number 8 was the number of photos stored in the camera, and that the zero was how many pictures I had left.

The next task was trying to figure out how to look at the photos in the QuickTake. Remember, the QuickTake doesn't have an external color LCD display, nor does it have any way of emailing photos to an address. A quick Google search indicated that I was going to be out of luck. The QuickTake 100 has a simple RS-232 connector, and needs to connect to a serial port on the other end. That leaves both of my Macs out of the picture (no pun intended). A serial to USB adapter wouldn't work, and the QuickTake software (available here) doesn't run under Mac OS X.
To get these photos off of the camera, I'll need a Mac that has the proper port and that is running Mac OS 7.5 through 9. I might just try my luck on an old PowerBook on eBay. In the meantime, here's a link to some photos taken with a QuickTake that show you how the photos look. These pictures were taken by Franny Wentzel and posted at citynoise.org, and as Franny mentions, the photos have a wonderful watercolor look to them.
I'm not willing to spend more than $25 to get an old Mac that will work with the QuickTake, so I may never have a chance to actually use the camera. I'll keep this device as a historical piece, since it does represent one of the first consumer digital cameras to hit the market. The QuickTake series never was a best seller for Apple, and the last model was dropped by Steve Jobs in 1997 as part of the streamlining of Apple that he instituted.
It's fascinating to see what an impact Apple has had in the digital photography world through iPhoto, Aperture, and even PhotoBooth, and also through the trend of building digital cameras into its products. Between the omnipresent iSight cameras built into most Macs, the iPhone cameras, and rumors of new iPods with cameras built in, most Apple hardware either has or will have a way of capturing photos. All of this started with the clunky, overpriced digital camera called the QuickTake 100.


![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)


Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Nick said 5:14PM on 7-29-2009
The photos attached to the post are almost as bad as the ones taken with the QuickTake! :D
Reply
Calexifan said 5:19PM on 7-29-2009
I was working for a newspaper in 1994, and remember the news photographers saying the same thing -- "digital photography will never replace real photography."
Little did they know that "digital" delivery of news articles and news photographs would soon replace newspapers themselves!
Reply
D. Law said 9:30PM on 7-29-2009
I'm sure someone smarter than I could get this to work:
http://www.google.com/products/catalog?q=RS-232+to+usb&oe=utf-8&cid=15240211815118028394&sa=title#p
Reply
Mike said 5:38PM on 7-29-2009
I have a Powerbook 3400c running OS 8.6 that still works (when plugged in anyway - the battery is effectively shot) and is just collecting dust. Drop me an email and we can discuss things if you want it.
Reply
Jgolden said 6:18PM on 7-29-2009
I'm still looking for a way to view (and convert) old images from my quicktake in OSX. If anyone knows a method, I would like see these old images (if I can find a mac with a floppy or zip drive to retrieve them)
Reply
Chris said 10:53AM on 7-30-2009
i had one of the Kodak DC models, I think they used the same kdc format...
I believe we eventually used a Photoshop plugin:
http://www.kodak.com/global/en/service/software/pcdPlugInUpdates.shtml
i didn't need to use the serial connector because it could dump images to a compact flash card... convenient... if the camera and flash didn't hoover down AA batteries so fast it would have been a decent camera.
back then we were running a glorious Powermac 7100/80 AV
VedicHymn said 5:54PM on 7-29-2009
Ha, I used one of these in high school. The journalism department didn't have one, but somehow our vice principal had blown some bucks on one he never used, so he let us borrow it.
At the time, it was freaking amazing.
Reply
Big-O said 5:57PM on 7-29-2009
"digital photography will never replace film photography."
People who say things like that forget the fact that when it comes to Technology, it doesn't have to be "better" in order to replace something older. In most cases it just has to be "good enough" and cheaper.
VHS does not have better quality than beta-max and CD's don't have better quality than Vinyls.
Reply
Johnny said 5:57PM on 7-29-2009
I can see how people might have thought digital cameras wouldn't take off at the resolution they had then. I guess it's hard for some people to imagine how much better a technology will become in the future. I just love the fact that cameras like the one on the 3GS are centimeters wide and take better pictures than a dedicated camera that weighed a pound 15 years ago.
Reply
Finn said 6:08PM on 7-29-2009
Oh, man.... I worked at Kinko's when that puppy came out and we thought it was so sweet. I vividly remember how bulbous and hefty it was. Crazy.
Reply
Martin said 8:03PM on 7-29-2009
I have one as well, rescued for a school and have the same connection problems. I look forward to a follow-up.
I remember using a Logitech camera connected to my Mac Plus.
Reply
Dustin said 6:23PM on 7-29-2009
My Dad has two of those in a closet. I tried to use them, but ran into the same problem. My earliest mac is an iBook G4, so no serial port and no OS 9.
Reply
Amerist said 2:24AM on 7-30-2009
Yes, but you can run classic on an ibook g4 with Panther!
djscott said 6:41PM on 7-29-2009
Mine still works! I can take pictures, load them onto an old machine, and (after some trouble) was able to transfer them onto my new iMac. But just like Jgolden, I can't convert them into a usable format on OSX. Low priority item, but if anyone know how to do this...Thanks in advance.
Reply
Dan said 6:55PM on 7-29-2009
You should be able to use SheepShaver with a USB to Serial adapter. Assuming you have the cable that came with the camera.
I have done this with a Newton and a Quicktake 210.
Reply
Robert M. Hall said 9:53PM on 7-29-2009
I have an original one of the Quicktakes as well (its still in mint working condition). I haven't used it in years but going through some old boxes of computer stuff in my basement doing some cleaning I ran across an old archive of CDs, DAT tapes, Syquest and ZIP cartridges where I had backed up hundreds of pictures I had taken with my Quicktake. I really wanted to look a the photos to see what they were, and I still have a number of older Macs lying around that run the software, but I actually found it easier to just download the Windows 95 version of the software and install it onto a copy of XP under VMware, and it worked perfectly. You can find a copy of the windows 95 install software here: http://members.driverguide.com/driver/detail.php?driverid=74152&action=summary
It worked perfectly for me under Windows XP without any problems.
Good luck!
Reply
mickey said 4:22AM on 7-30-2009
Kodak treated their photo format, .KDC, as a (licensing) cash cow rather than make it open and make money from good hardware.
The only Mac software that I recall that was able to read, view, and convert .KDC was an early version of Thorsten Lemke's brilliant GraphicConverter software (which was and is available as a fully-functional, free, trial version).
Exactly *which* version, and whether it was for an early Mac OS X or earlier, I'll leave up to the next person in the chain.
I hope this helps bring some of those early masterpieces to life,
Michael 'Mickey' Sattler
Reply
Wesley Bowman said 4:35AM on 7-30-2009
I had one of these in 1994. We didn't have Macs at the time. There was Windows-based software for it and I had it hooked up to a 386 laptop running Windows 3.1. At the time a picture from the QuickTake was full screen! Although it was expensive, it saved our rural real estate appraisal business a huge amount of time in running to the nearest 1 hour photo over 20 miles away.
Reply
Finnschi said 6:33AM on 7-30-2009
I am willing to give you my Old Power mac G4 sawtooth 400 Mhz 4 free , If you pay for the shipping... its just sitting there i my basement (it hast OSX Tiger on there right now.. but it came with os9 , don't have the install disks though....)
hit me up if you want it...
Reply
EMoShunz said 8:11AM on 7-30-2009
"attracting the attention of the cat, who decided that it tasted pretty good and kept licking it"
that may well be the best line i've ever read! reminds me of that picture of olivia munn...
http://images.dailytech.com/nimage/11502_Olivia-Munn-Lick-Iphone.jpg
Reply