Polaroid’s $150 PoGo is an inkless printer that churns out 2×3-inch photos sent to it via Bluetooth-enabled devices or from plugged-in digital cameras.

Just this year, Polaroid Corp. said it would cease production of its “magical” cameras. But this week, I had the chance to test the company’s latest attempt at relevance in our digital world: the $150 Polaroid PoGo (thenewinstant.com). The PoGo, which stands for Polaroid-on-the-Go, is an inkless printer that churns out 2×3-inch photos sent to it via Bluetooth devices like cellphones or from plugged-in digital cameras. It uses technology created by ZINK (Zero Ink) Imaging Inc. to activate paper-embedded dye crystals, creating a new kind of photo magic. The PoGo will be in stores on July 6.

Cool Factor

This device’s ZINK Technology gives it a cool factor that will leave friends scratching their heads over how such a small device can print without ink (technical details about the 100 billion heat-activated dye crystals on each sheet of paper can be found at zink.com/technology). Photos that I printed from a 10-megapixel digital camera looked sharp and colorful. And some people may use this Polaroid gadget as a solution for freeing images that would otherwise likely remain stuck in a mobile device’s memory.

But four major problems with the PoGo make it a no-go: It isn’t quite small and light enough to be truly portable; its battery life is poor; its prints are half the size of normal photos; and image quality when printing from mobile devices is unimpressive — though this can be attributed to the low-resolution images taken with and stored on these devices rather than the printer itself. For roughly the same price, you could buy a photo printer that produces better quality 4×6-inch or larger prints.

The PoGo works only with ZINK Photo Paper, which costs between 30 cents and 40 cents a page, depending on whether you buy a 10-sheet pack for $3.99 or a 30-sheet pack for $9.99. (Later this year, a 100-sheet pack of ZINK photo paper will be available for $29.99.) The PoGo comes with 10 pieces of this paper, which is coated with a waterproof, tear-proof, smudge-proof, semi-gloss finish. You can peel the backs of these 2×3 prints to stick them to things, though not in the same way Post-its can be stuck and removed (they leave a gooey film — I learned the hard way).

A Device With Weight

Surprisingly, Polaroid is touting the PoGo’s portability; it arrived in a custom-made jeans pocket to demonstrate the device’s pocket-sized shape. But at over 8 ounces, this thing was heavier and measured larger than Apple’s (AAPL) biggest 160-gigabyte iPod Classic. It even weighed more than a bulky point-and-shoot Kodak (EK) camera I recently tested, discouraging me from bringing it along when I went out.

A chart on polaroid.com/pogo/us/comp.html tells whether or not your mobile device is Bluetooth-compatible with the PoGo. Two out of the three devices that I tried worked: A new Motorola (MOT) Z6C and Research in Motion’s (RIMM) BlackBerry Curve were compatible, though an almost-two-year-old Motorola Razr V3 wasn’t.

Each mobile device needed only one initial “pairing,” or setup, with the PoGo before it sent photos. The device used a simple method of sending photos via Bluetooth that generally involved selecting a photo and telling the mobile device to send it to the PoGo. It usually took a few seconds for the send to go through.

The PoGo doesn’t have a display to tell users when images are received, when to load more paper or if the battery is running low. Instead, it uses two indicator lights that glow or pulse in green, orange or red colors. Each light means something different, such as whether or not the PoGo is ready to print or if it has a paper jam, but I usually had to refer to the user’s manual to figure out what each light meant.

Quiet Printer

The PoGo is rather quiet while printing, making a soft whirring sound as its thermal print head turns on and zaps dye crystals, which are embedded in the ZINK photo paper. These small pieces of paper are stored in and printed from a holding space inside the device, which saves users from opening a tray and loading paper before each print-out. However, the PoGo can hold a maximum of only 10 sheets at once. Some images printed in 45 seconds and a few took about twice that long, but most were done in about one minute — counting from when I pressed Send on a mobile device to when the print finished.

I hooked a Sony (SNE) Cyber-shot DSC-W170 to the PoGo via a USB cord and used the camera’s built-in PictBridge technology to print from the camera, following directions on the camera’s display screen. I even printed four of the same photo at once after adjusting the quantity category in a menu, though this seemed to slow the printing process a bit.

While prints from my grandmother’s Polaroid camera couldn’t be touched until about a minute after printing, the small PoGo prints come out dry to the touch. I held one under the kitchen faucet to test its waterproof claim, and the colors held up without running. These prints are borderless, which looks good but seems like the only sensible option with such small paper. Images from the digital camera looked dramatically better than those taken by mobile devices’ 1.3-megapixel or two-megapixel cameras.

Short Battery Life

The PoGo’s battery life wore out quickly, especially for a device that is advertised as portable. In one test, after I unplugged my fully charged PoGo and used it for about 40 minutes to print 16 photos — half from a Bluetooth-connected cellphone and the other half from a USB-connected digital camera — its battery indicator glowed a steady orange, meaning the PoGo was running low on power. This is about right, considering Polaroid claims that a fully charged battery will last for 15 prints. (It takes about 2.5 hours to fully charge the PoGo.)

I really liked the quality of the photos that PoGo printed from my digital camera — in fact, I’m planning to enclose a few small PoGo photos in cards that I send to friends and family members. But the PoGo’s awkward size, bad battery life and small prints make it a tough sell. I’m afraid the PoGo falls short in too many categories to be a practical gadget. Teens might like this device for printing photos from their cellphones that they can stick on lockers or books. And who knows — maybe a grandmother somewhere will buy one of these gadgets to create a little Polaroid magic for her grandchild.

Edited By Walter S. Mossberg

• Email: mossbergsolution@wsj.com

This week, I was curious to test the performance of three all-in-ones that cost around $100. I tried Eastman Kodak’s new $130 ESP 3 All-in-One Printer, Canon’s $100 PIXMA MP470 and Hewlett-Packard’s $100 HP Photosmart C4280. These particular machines are geared toward home users so they don’t include the ability to fax, and they print great quality photos. Each machine measures roughly the same size and has a lid that lifts to reveal a glass surface where documents are placed for scanning and copying.

These all-in-ones don’t include some of the heavy-duty features found in bigger, more expensive machines for businesses such as automatic feeders that suck in stacks of documents. And they aren’t nearly as fast as a company Xerox machine. But their compact size and convenient features — like memory-card slots, editing software and PC/Mac compatibility — make them useful in a home.

A year ago, Kodak took an aggressive tack when introducing its first consumer printer. Kodak charged more for the printer and less for ink compared with rivals, reasoning that people would rather pay more once for a machine than paying more for ink throughout the life of the printer.

But these companies make it very difficult for consumers to figure which ink cartridge will give them the most for their money because each uses different methods for testing page yields. The Kodak ESP 3 uses a $10 cartridge of black ink and a $15 color cartridge. The HP’s black and color cartridges cost $15 and $18, respectively, while Canon’s cost $16 and $20. (None of these all-in-ones use color cartridges that let you replace individual colors if you run out of one color.) When measuring pages printed from a black cartridge, Kodak (EK), HP (HPQ) and Canon (CAJ) claim 342, 200 and 219 pages, respectively.

Photos printed using the Kodak and HP printers looked most appealing to my eye. Their colors were natural yet vibrant, whereas some of the colors in the Canon images looked a bit too bright. And other Canon shots, such as one of my sister and me at the beach on vacation, appeared slightly muddy and not as sharp as the Kodak or HP images. Regular black-and-white documents looked fine on all of the machines. While the Kodak and HP come with better software than the Canon, I preferred the buttons and physical design of the Canon.

I got started with the Kodak ESP 3, which ships with new software that includes a Facial Retouch editing feature I first tried at January’s Consumer Electronics Show. In one click, Facial Retouch smoothes wrinkles, erases blemishes, blends blotchy skin and whitens teeth. While this tool deserves points for efficiency, it bordered a tad too much on the dramatic face-lift side, causing some subjects’ skin to appear waxy and unrealistic.

Physically, the Kodak ESP 3 looks handsome in all black. Its lid is indented with a waffle-like pattern, and its paper trays fold up neatly for storage. But this all-in-one lacks a key feature found on the Canon and HP: a color viewing screen. The Kodak, HP and Canon have built-in memory-card slots that — if used with preview screens — make photo printing a computer-free cinch. But without a preview screen, the Kodak ESP 3 can’t work independent of a computer screen to print photos from a memory card.

The Kodak ESP 3 uses a fast new type of scanner that uses LEDs to illuminate a document rather than a lamp, which takes more time to warm up. As a result, in my tests, the Kodak scanned a bit faster than the Canon and noticeably faster than the HP.

All three all-in-ones allow users to lay about three 4×6 photos on the scanning glass, and as long as they aren’t touching, these images will register as separately scanned photos. I learned the hard way that overlapping prints will be scanned as one image; this was the case with each scanner. But separating photos into a position of two horizontal and one vertical allowed me to upload three shots at a time with the Kodak, HP and Canon.

The HP Photosmart C4280 had the most trouble with this multi-photo-scanning trick. Instead of performing one scan and then assessing three images on the glass, as the Kodak and Canon did, the HP seemed to look at each individual photo, taking at least 15 seconds per photo to capture each image.

This all-in-one comes encased in a glossy white plastic with a gray lid. Its eight buttons line the left-hand side, but most act as soft keys that correspond to words on a screen rather than acting as their own buttons, making navigation a bit clumsy. And though the HP has a 1.5-inch viewing screen, it doesn’t tilt up like the Canon’s, so I couldn’t use it without standing up and looking down.

Though the HP did well on photos, I found its color copies to be a little fuzzy when compared with those from the Canon and Kodak all-in-ones. I liked that these devices can make copies without using the computer, which could prove convenient in a pinch.

The Canon PIXMA MP470 felt more solid to me than the Kodak and HP printers. Its 1.8-inch flip-up viewing screen made it easy to sit back and use, and this screen is designed to cover up the machine’s buttons when it’s folded down — a plus if you want to port it around. Its front and sides are coated in glossy black, and its lid is colored gray.

But even with its tilting viewing screen and memory-card slots, the Canon lacks an xD memory-card slot, and I was using two digital cameras — a Fujifilm FinePix and an Olympus — that use xD memory cards. Canon suggests using an adapter to remedy this issue. Another odd physical trait of the Canon is its short power cord, which measures just half the length of the Kodak cord and about two feet shorter than the HP.

The Canon came with software that added six icons to my computer’s desktop during its installation, and though it includes facial fixers like digital face smoothing, face brightener, blemish remover and face sharpener, none of these features seemed to do as much as Kodak’s one-step Facial Retouch tool.

And while the Canon’s 4×6 photos churned out about 10 seconds faster than those on the Kodak and HP machines, they didn’t measure up in terms of quality.

If photos are important to you, I suggest the HP Photosmart C4280, which includes memory-card slots and a viewing screen for quick print-outs without the hassle of booting up a computer. If you don’t mind the Kodak ESP 3’s lack of viewing screen, the quality of its photos won’t disappoint, and its lower-priced ink might drive a hard bargain. The good news is no matter which one you buy, it’ll still be cheaper than paying $100 each for a scanner, copier and printer.

• Email mossbergsolution@wsj.com

A query on hotels in Italy might lead you to select a link about Florence, then two links about Michelangelo and four links to Italian Renaissance art. Suddenly, the home page for a carefully researched hotel is forgotten. It’s especially tough to backtrack through research using new sites with rich Web 2.0 features that display extra data directly within a Web page.

Some people try to organize Web research by opening Microsoft Word documents alongside their browsers. They copy and paste data from sites into the documents, but this is usually a messy process that traps users into wasting time fixing formats and deleting ads. Others press Print whenever a helpful site appears, resulting in wasted paper and ink. Savvier users create folders within their Web browsers that hold multiple URLs about a research topic, but these data can’t easily be shared or printed for use away from the PC.

The HP Smart Web Printing Software gathers Web content into one document that can be printed.

There’s a better way, and this week I took it for a spin. I tested the HP Smart Web Printing Software, a free program from Hewlett-Packard Co. that aims to help users compile a virtual clip book of content from Web sites while they’re browsing, within the same window. Using a tool in the browser, users highlight and copy images and text from a Web page and add them to the clip book. These clips can be edited, enhanced, saved as a PDF or printed out, without excess banner ads or sidebars.

I tried a version of this program that will be available for download at the end of next month from www.hp.com/go/smartwebprinting. It improves on the first version of the program (available now using the same URL) in various ways, including allowing you to add your own text to the clip book and crop clip-book items.

HP Smart Web Printing Software isn’t without its quirks: It only works on Windows computers, not Macs, and only with Microsoft’s Internet Explorer 6.0 and 7.0. Not everything copies over to the clip book perfectly. Also, typed-in text has its limits: changing the font type, size or color of one word changes all words in the text box.

But all in all, I found this smart program to be a real boon. It’s unobtrusive enough to stay hidden until used, and you’ll remember how it works even if you only use the program once in a while. It functions as a printing assistant, helping to send certain sections of a Web site to the printer, and it will also save whatever you’re working on as a PDF — the universal format for sharing with others.

H-P likes to tout its HP Smart Web Printing Software’s environmentally friendly qualities, namely its ability to print just what you want, without wasting ink or paper on extra pages that would otherwise print. But make no mistake about it: This product, while helping users not to print extra items from Web sites, still encourages users to print, thus helping H-P sell more of its high-margin ink and paper.

I used the program to trim content from Web sites, printing more of what I wanted to read in fewer pages. I focused on this program’s clip-book functionality, which works as a bare-bones virtual scrapbook to organize research.

I downloaded and used the newest version of this free program on computers running Windows Vista and XP operating systems. I came across a few items that, when highlighted and moved over to the clip book, didn’t actually move, but most of the text and image clips moved without a problem. H-P explained that some images are rendered on Web sites in such a way so as to not be copied for copyright and protection purposes.

A small HP Smart Select icon appears in the Internet Explorer command bar after this program is downloaded; selecting it toggles its highlighting capability on or off. By default, the clip book is hidden from view, but a quick change in settings opens this on the right edge of the Internet Explorer window.

The HP Smart Web Printing program proved useful for online-shopping research. I’ve been gathering a lot of information from various Web sites to find a special new handbag for work, including which bag is sold where, how much it costs and what it looks like.

When I saw a bag that interested me, I selected it by holding the left mouse button down and moving my cursor over the text or image. Releasing the left mouse button automatically opens a tiny drop-down menu with two simple options: clip (place in the clip book) or print (send directly to the printer). Items that I clipped were moved into the right panel clip book in order of most recently added items at the top.

A helpful checkbox appeared beside each item in the clip book; items without checkmarked boxes weren’t visible when I edited clips. Within the editing screen, I dragged and dropped images around the page, organizing bags in ascending price order. I resized photos to make them smaller or larger and cropped a couple shots such as an image of a black leather bag with an unrelated text description below it.

I filled the equivalent of two clip-book pages with images of bags and brief descriptions of each, copied directly from store sites. I added my own text boxes in to write my impressions. As I worked, opening the edit screen and closing it to return to the browser, I clicked on a simple Save button so my work wouldn’t be lost each time I closed this screen. When finished, I selected one button to save the document as a PDF, which I could email to friends for their feedback on which bag they liked best.

In another test, I assembled a clip book filled with various news blurbs about presidential campaigns from online sites including WSJ.com and CNN.com before printing a single page that included bits and pieces from each in a neat format without ads on the page.

I also tried organizing a few maps in the clip book; these copied from Google Maps and Yahoo Maps without a problem, and in one instance I cropped a map to include just the section of Manhattan where The Wall Street Journal is located.

The more I used this program, the more I wished it offered the ability to work with two clip books at once. For instance, if I was planning a trip and was researching hotels and tourist attractions at the same time, I could clip the hotel data into one book and store the touristy information in the other.

H-P says it will release a version of this program for Mozilla’s Firefox browser sometime in the next six months, and it also hopes to introduce a version that is compatible with Apple’s Safari browser within a year.

The HP Smart Web Printing program is a useful free solution that organizes online research right in your browser. Its ability to modify and preview documents before printing is also a help.

Email mossbergsolution@wsj.com

This week, I tested a product that marries prints with the digital frame: Hewlett-Packard’s $249 HP Photosmart A826 Home Photo Center.

The A826 is the latest in H-P’s series of compact countertop home snapshot printers, meant to turn out small photos quickly. But it has an unusual form, with a large seven-inch screen that also allows for images to be displayed in slide shows, like a digital picture frame. This touch-screen also lets users edit shots using a finger or stylus. Pressing one button prints the image in about a minute and a half.

HP Photosmart A826 Home Photo Center

This new model, due in stores this weekend, is meant to work as a home photo kiosk, so it’s a bit bigger than H-P’s compact photo printers, which have built-in handles for portability and take up less space. The A826 is also pricier than these smaller printers — $70 more than the newest model.

I liked the idea behind this photo printer, editing station and digital frame. Its large screen, 5.6 inches of which are used for the photos, was a welcome change to most photo printers with preview screens that can’t be seen without squinting. But I was disappointed by some of the A826’s features. The newly added ability to draw on images, for example, yielded results that looked fine on-screen but printed out looking like scribble. Removing red eye didn’t seem to improve images on the screen; only when printed did these shots appear red-eye free. And the touch-screen wasn’t as sensitive as I would’ve liked, requiring a few tries to get some buttons to respond.

I couldn’t help but compare the A826 with standalone digital frames. Unlike almost all such frames, the A826 lacks internal storage meaning that in order to keep a slide show going, a memory card, USB drive or camera would need to be plugged into the device. Some digital frames also come with built-in wireless networking to pull images from the Web; the A826 doesn’t have this capability.

This device is hard to miss. Its rounded edges are covered in a stylish white plastic, and the screen is surrounded by black and a pretty shade of pale blue, making it look like a prop from the Jetsons cartoon. It measures roughly the same width as H-P’s compact photo printers, but stands more than twice as tall with the screen at the top so users don’t have to bend as far down to see images. Photo paper measuring 4 by 6 or 5 by 7 inches feeds into the back of the printer in a neat, enclosed compartment that holds up to 100 sheets.

A tiny speaker on the front side of the A826 emits cutesy chimes whenever the device powers on or finishes printing a photo, which I liked. It also uses its large screen for illustrating how to perform tasks like loading paper or inserting a print cartridge.

I got started using the HP Photosmart A826 for its digital frame capabilities, inserting my digital camera’s SecureDigital memory card into a slot below the viewing screen and queuing up about 400 images from my memory card. Images appear on the screen six at a time and in the bottom left corner of each there is a white circle, which can be touched to give it a red checkmark, putting it in the slide-show queue. Tapping the center of any shot magnifies it for editing.

I marked about 30 photos and played them in succession by touching a Slideshow button on the far right edge of the screen. This touchscreen button and others — representing Menu, Back, Print, Scroll Left and Scroll Right — line the left and right black borders of the screen. Only the buttons that make sense to choose at any given time will glow, so users know which ones can be selected and, therefore, can navigate a little easier. For instance, in the Get Creative editing menu, only the Scroll Left, Scroll Right and Back buttons glow.

I folded up a flap that covers the memory-card slots and left my slide show playing for a while on my kitchen counter. It worked like a digital picture frame, for the most part. If the A826 isn’t used for about 10 minutes, it will automatically switch into slide-show mode — a feature I found useful for moments when I didn’t remember that I left it on. This automatic slide show switches over to a black screen after about an hour, though programmed slide shows stay on until turned off.

Touching the screen when an image appears, mid-slide show, will pause the slide show for editing or printing. I used my finger to do simple editing, and most options are offered in large touch-screen buttons, though in more than one instance I had to press buttons with my finger a few times to get them to work. A small white stylus helped, especially for drawing on photos.

I drew cartoon bubbles coming out of people’s mouths and wrote little messages like, “Hey y’all!” bubbling from a Texan friend in a shot from her trip to Europe. These touches can be done in different colors and line thicknesses, and mistakes can easily be erased. They looked good on-screen, but when printed, turned pixilated and detracted from the photo.

I tried some more normal photo editing, such as cropping photos, enhancing a photo’s brightness and removing red eye. The last of these options didn’t work so well in my photos, seeming to leave eyes glowing on the screen. When I printed these shots for the sake of testing, I realized that red eye was actually removed in almost all instances. But this is confusing for users who don’t want to waste ink and paper finding out whether or not the image was corrected.

I found the A826’s most useful photo-enhancing option to be the ability to add captions to shots. These can be entered by using an on-screen keyboard, choosing from five fonts and six colors. The caption can be dragged around the screen to test where it will look best. These typed fonts looked professional and neat, especially compared with my own drawn-on editing.

Printing on the HP Photosmart A826 worked without a problem. It comes with five 5-by-7-inch sheets of paper enough ink for 20 4-by-6-inch prints. Value packs of paper and ink for 120 4-by-6-inch prints cost $35. The printer automatically detects whether it’s loaded with photo paper measuring 5-by-7 or 4-by-6 inches, and prints accordingly. A 5-by-7-inch shot takes a bit longer to print, but looked rather good.

The HP Photosmart A826 seems like it was designed with good intentions, and its large touchscreen is an improvement all on its own. But too many features of this device didn’t work the way they should, from red eyes that didn’t appear fixed on-screen to the touchscreen that didn’t always respond right away. H-P will find an eager audience with this home photo kiosk, but it needs improvement.

Edited by Walter S. Mossberg

Email: mossbergsolution@wsj.com