lonesomexloveus Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 Sure it does reek of hipster but if I let that put me off doing it, I'd be worse than the people doing it for that reason! It's less arty for me, and more about having cool pictures to remember good times. I only have 1 photo pinned to my wall, and even though that one still makes me smile, I'd like a lot more! As I said, I have seen really nice images from lomo cameras. However, the lomo trend has a bunch of dorks running around with plastic cameras thinking that every time they snap a picture they're creating art because their crappy camera vignettes or leaks light. A dull image is a dull image, with or without flaws. Their whole "anti-art" stance is just rebellion through conformity and creates a whole slew of reverse camera snobs, people that think that they're true artists because they don't need fancy cameras to create images (it's true, you don't). But they completely dismiss all other aspects of photography. That combined with the fact that these cameras are seriously overpriced is kinda upsetting. However, anything that gets people burning more film and therefore keeping the entire medium alive is OK by me. i'm amused that things that are, under normal circumstances, considered bad by photographers like vignetteing and lens flare, etc are now either considered 'artsy' and desirable, or added in post production. there's a reason that adding the darkened corners is under 'lens correction' in photoshop lol. not gonna lie, i'm just as guilty of adding vignetteing as the next person. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdwell Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 Lomography cameras should cost quite a bit less than they do...that said, I slapped a much cheaper price-tag on the Fisheye II and purchased it for what I thought was a more reasonable cost of $12.00. I purchased a Holga through freestyle to avoid insane charges as well. I love both of these cameras, but I also hate these little bastards running around with them thinking that every picture they take is the most indie form of art out there b/c they picked their camera up at Urban Outfitters. I do love having these cheap cameras around though (Esp. Holga) as I just tape up all the seems...and I've taken it out in the ocean to take photographs w/o too big of a worry if I drop it or if it gets splashed (no underwater shots). If I ever get to a scanner I'll load the pages from my photobook I made last year that's almost all taken with Holga, Fisheye II, and a 4x5 pinhole...and all printed via Van Dyke process, Argyrotype, Salt Printing, and Cyanotype. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motorbike Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 Lomography cameras should cost quite a bit less than they do...that said, I slapped a much cheaper price-tag on the Fisheye II and purchased it for what I thought was a more reasonable cost of $12.00. I purchased a Holga through freestyle to avoid insane charges as well. how did you manage this? im assuming vigilate style, taking a price tag off one thing and putting it on another. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdwell Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 Lomography cameras should cost quite a bit less than they do...that said, I slapped a much cheaper price-tag on the Fisheye II and purchased it for what I thought was a more reasonable cost of $12.00. I purchased a Holga through freestyle to avoid insane charges as well. how did you manage this? im assuming vigilate style, taking a price tag off one thing and putting it on another. Spot-On brother...my main point (which I think was lost in my garbage of mumbling) is that for as "Cheap" as everybody in this thread says they are...they really aren't as cheap as they should be for what You're actually getting, these things can't cost more than $2-$3 bucks to produce, they're not a limited run, they certainly don't go through any quality control (as Holga says in their booklets that every Holga is different), I would go as far as to say that the packaging that Lomos come in cost the same if not more to produce Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motorbike Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 HA! here is another quick question since i have never used a film type camera. about how much does it cost to get this stuff developed and when you do can you get a cd with the photos or is it strictly prints? i say the camera is cheap but in the long run not so much if film and photos cost a lot. i just want to keep up with the good times and have gotten bored with my digital camera. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonesomexloveus Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 HA! here is another quick question since i have never used a film type camera. about how much does it cost to get this stuff developed and when you do can you get a cd with the photos or is it strictly prints? i say the camera is cheap but in the long run not so much if film and photos cost a lot. i just want to keep up with the good times and have gotten bored with my digital camera. it's around $4 or $5 for a roll of film, plus $10 to $15 to process a roll of film. you can have a cd made of the prints, too. that's usually like $5 or $6 extra. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdwell Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 HA! here is another quick question since i have never used a film type camera. about how much does it cost to get this stuff developed and when you do can you get a cd with the photos or is it strictly prints? i say the camera is cheap but in the long run not so much if film and photos cost a lot. i just want to keep up with the good times and have gotten bored with my digital camera. dunno...I only do bulk load true Black and White, then hand develop and print in a dark-room...never done the color route Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lex Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 The only thing that puts me off getting one is the cost of film and developing it. That's why I went with a digital SLR. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonesomexloveus Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 i have both. but if i had to choose, i'd be my D300 hands down anyday, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kyle Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 HA! here is another quick question since i have never used a film type camera. about how much does it cost to get this stuff developed and when you do can you get a cd with the photos or is it strictly prints? i say the camera is cheap but in the long run not so much if film and photos cost a lot. i just want to keep up with the good times and have gotten bored with my digital camera. dunno...I only do bulk load true Black and White, then hand develop and print in a dark-room...never done the color route This is what I do. Except I do shoot some color, and have it processed at a local film lab (usually about $6/roll) and then just scan it at home. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motorbike Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 i figured there had to be a cheaper route than $10 a roll. how many pictures are in a 120 film roll? 12-16? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonesomexloveus Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 dunno...I only do bulk load true Black and White, then hand develop and print in a dark-room...never done the color route This is what I do. Except I do shoot some color, and have it processed at a local film lab (usually about $6/roll) and then just scan it at home. whoa that's really cheap for developing film. i used to work at ritz and it was around 9.99 a role for single prints. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kyle Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 This is what I do. Except I do shoot some color, and have it processed at a local film lab (usually about $6/roll) and then just scan it at home. whoa that's really cheap for developing film. i used to work at ritz and it was around 9.99 a role for single prints. Sorry, it's $4-6 for processing only. If I have a lab process my film I get a contact sheet but no prints. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonesomexloveus Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 whoa that's really cheap for developing film. i used to work at ritz and it was around 9.99 a role for single prints. Sorry, it's $4-6 for processing only. If I have a lab process my film I get a contact sheet but no prints. aahhhh i gotcha. i was momentarily confused/surprised, haha. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdwell Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 how many pictures are in a 120 film roll? 12-16? yes, pending on whether you're shooting square format or rectangular Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minty Posted July 2, 2009 Author Share Posted July 2, 2009 Got drunk and pulled the trigger on the Mr Pink Diana F+...and bought some lomography 35mm film to go with it. Gonna have to mod the film to use it with the camera, but it's so much cheaper!! STOKED. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kyle Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 Got drunk and pulled the trigger on the Mr Pink Diana F+...and bought some lomography 35mm film to go with it. Gonna have to mod the film to use it with the camera, but it's so much cheaper!!STOKED. 35mm might be cheaper than 120 but because the film area is so much smaller you lose most of that dramatic "lomo" effect. Panaramic sprocket hole photography is pretty cool too, but you'll get much more usable images with 120 and it will be easier since the camera was designed for it. I've tried 35mm in a Holga and while it works it is a huge pain in the ass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minty Posted July 2, 2009 Author Share Posted July 2, 2009 I'm not counting out 120 film altogether, 35 was just cheaper and will be easier for me to get developed around here...plus I can just play around with it a bit and get a feel for how the camera really works. I'll be saving the 120 stuff for special times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leerobert Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 I have the lomo fisheye camera, takes some great shots but it's only really at its best on sunny days, needs a lot of light in the lens. I love it. do you use/have the flash? The flash on it is wack. I have the first fisheye camera they did, I know they have a second one with a better flash & a few functions like double exposures. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lydiawesome Posted July 3, 2009 Share Posted July 3, 2009 I have a bunch of the lomo cams that I like to mess around with, but lately I've been fooling around with Japanese plastic cameras that superheadz put out. The other cool thing about working with these cameras is trying out a bunch of different kinds of film to really tweak with the existing effects that the cameras can cause. My local film dudes always give me an extra roll or two of film to experiment with, so I think that's pretty cool. The lomography website also now has an instant back for the Diana, and it works with Fuji mini instax film that you can buy in bulk from ebay for a decent price. Kinda stoked on all that. Anyway this is one that I have started to play around with and will be taking out this weekend. Superheadz Babylon: It has four different modes, not just the shoot 4 in a row that you'd expect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markbutlerftw Posted July 3, 2009 Share Posted July 3, 2009 I have a holga 135 bc. Its pretty awesome and takes sweet pictures I havent really been using it a lot anymore so if anyone is interested in buying it from me shoot me a pm here's a link to my flickr where you can see pictures ive taken http://www.flickr.com/photos/28291639@N06/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
go Posted July 3, 2009 Share Posted July 3, 2009 is anyone here into lomography? yes you can see a selection of my pictures here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/mstrlss or a little more here: http://www.lomography.com/homes/mstrlss Anyone else got a Lomohome? Minty do you have one? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minty Posted July 3, 2009 Author Share Posted July 3, 2009 Wow I am very impressed!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steventangent Posted July 4, 2009 Share Posted July 4, 2009 It's stupid and trendy and dorky for other kids to do things that I like to do, but totally cool when I do it, because I do it for the right reasons, and they do it just to seem hip! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
go Posted July 6, 2009 Share Posted July 6, 2009 Wow I am very impressed!! thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.