>>4462381Old Fujifilm was using the licensed Polaroid process, whereas Instax is an evolution of Kodak's design. Old machinery and chemical plants got sold off and scrapped during Polaroid's downfall and manufacturing quality instant film became sort of a lost knowledge.
Fuji could do it, but they won't bother because:
A) they are on a crusade to kill film for professional uses.
B) there is now a generational gap between people who shot actual Polaroid film back in its day and those who use modern instant film. The look Instax provides fulfills faux-nostalgic expectations of the latter group on what instant film looked like, even though it looks nothing like the actual stuff.
C) It sells well anyway
Now the thing is Instax is actually a pretty decent film stock, it is Fuji's cheap plastic lens full-auto cameras they keep releasing that are responsible for the crappy results. I'd suggest you look into what kind of photos people have been making with third-party instax cameras from Mint, Lomography and such.
Revived Polaroid stuff is inferior to Instax in both quality and handling, but they've been making small improvements over the years and the situation might reverse in the future.
