File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
Whats /p/'s views on the lomography cameras?
If you don't know they're remakes of some classic SLR's anybody own one / got any pictures?
>> Anonymous
go die in a fire
>> Anonymous
nah I have one its better than my D3
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
They're not remakes of classic SLRs. They're remakes of classic plastic toy cameras along with some totally new plastic toy cameras. They all give pretty poor photographic results.

I like the cameras, hate the company. Shooting with a crappy camera for artistic reasons is completely valid. Selling a crappy camera that was designed to be extremely cheap *by 1950s China standards* for $50-100 specifically *because* it's crappy is made of total fail. If you find one of the cameras the Lomography society sells at a flea market or something for $5, go ahead and buy it. Don't buy one new.
>> Anonymous
my friend had one of the fisheye ones which was pretty fun to use, but when we got the pictures developed they came back really small and all shitty. Get a nikkor fisheye lens for an SLR about 100000000x better
>> Anonymous
Shooting with a crappy camera for "artistic reasons" makes you an idiot. A shitty picture isn't suddenly a great picture because it has been half ruined.

Idiot art students who expect OMG INSTANT ART are the market for these pieces of shit.

Buy a decent old manual camera and some lenses at a fleamarket for half the price and then learn how to be a real photographer rather than hide your lack of skill behind shitty defects.

It is exactly the same sort of stupidity that causes people to hide their lack of skill behind Photoshop filters and HDR madness. "Add enough lens flare and filters and will be AWESOME!!!!!"
>> Anonymous
>>159062
what AC said. I'm a fan of a lot of the cameras myself but I won't buy the majority of their products due to the way LSI operates.

The only Lomo camera I own is the original Fisheye that I bought for $30, all of my other toy cameras and P&S cameras were bought in thrift shops or from overseas. Currently have a Canon AutoBoy, an Ansco 135, a Holga 135, and several of those really old, really crappy Kodak Instamatic cameras, all of which were acquired through thrift stores excepting the Holga.

>>159068
Yeah, if you think that taking a picture with a toy camera automatically makes it art like 90% of LSI's consumers do then you're pretty stupid, but you're equally stupid if you think a toy camera can't produce good pictures if the photographer knows what he or she is doing.
>> Anonymous
>>159080

Why not cut your leg off and then try to run a marathon too? Just because a cripple can manage it you shouldn't think that one legged people can't be good runners too if they know what they are doing. Same for one armed boxers or anything else you want to pull out of that moronic pile.

Such a stupid point to use to support these heaps of shit.
>> Anonymous
>>159088
Oh, don't get all pissy. I didn't say I run around calling myself a lomographer, I just said that if you honestly think a competant photographer can't utilize a toy camera to make a good picture then you're as dense as the LSI fans.

For the record though, you really suck at making analogies. Like, really badly suck. The real alure of using toy cameras for experimenting is because they are (or, should be. fuck you, LSI) extremely cheap and the problems of the camera sometimes translate into unique qualities to a picture that can be utilized and incorporated into the piece once the photog figures out the cameras quirks. Sure, you can duplicate almost any of those effects in Photoshop, but what's the point of that? You can duplicate it with a LensBaby, but who the fuck is stupid enough to pay for that when you can just start with a bad camera for the same results?
>> Anonymous
>>159099Sure, you can duplicate almost any of those effects in Photoshop, but what's the point of that?

There is no point to them. That is today's lesson, child. They are for the clueless monkeys of the world.
>> Anonymous
>>159113
the point of photoshopping in effects that are not native to the camera the image was shot with, dipshit.

You're part of that camp that thinks all photography is about is the technical aspect, aren't you? Otherwise I simply can't fathom how you could sincerely believe that toy cameras serve absolutely no purpose. Of course they aren't something you should use to do your studio work or shoot a wedding, ololol, they're plastic and liable to break any minute. They're still fun to use and cheap enough to easily experiment with, though.

Now please to be no more failfaggotry from you today.
>> Anonymous
>>159121WAAAAAAAAAAAH

Fixed.

You said nothing but a meaningless rant, little one. When you have a point or any kind of defence for your faggotry, let me know.
>> Anonymous
First, let me say, inb4artfag.

I shoot with a Holga occasionally for it's simplicity. It's fun, and you can usually get some interesting results. I usually tape my Holga so I don't get any of those "artsy" light leaks, because I personally feel that a huge red splotch just fucks up a picture.

As a company (or a "society," as they call themselves), Lomography is bullshit. The idea of forgetting any elements of composition is just a ridiculous attempt to sell shitty cameras so that the hipster faggots can make instant art by carrying around a LOMO LC-A (which aren't even made in Russia anymore anyway). They plaster artsy cross-processed pictures all over their crappy site to bring in the hipsters. It works. It's capitalism.

However, I think that there is nothing wrong with using low-fi equipment, and I also feel that pictures made with some of this equipment can turn out great. There are groups of people who like using low-fi equipment like the Holga and the Diana to take pictures, and most of them denounce the lomography trend as well. Most of these people also don't take themselves seriously as photographers, because they also realize that they are using toys for equipment.

TL;DR:
Lomography (the company) is shit.
Low-fi and retro equipment is fun and has a lot of followers, but they're more lighthearted and don't take themselves seriously as these self-pronounced "lomographers" do.
>> Anonymous
>>159124
You sound like you're 15, quit calling people "little one" or "child". 1/10, it doesn't make you seem wise.

Also, I'm pretty sure I've been fairly clear in my defense of toy cameras. You're the one bawwwing on and on about one armed boxers and telling people they have to buy a certain type of camera and learn a certain way to be a true reels photog OG.

>>159125
This times a thousand.
>> Blackadder !!bSWRwu/NqzQ
The worst thing for these cameras (although not big $$$ sales) is "lomographers" and the societies as 159125 mentioned. It causes a lot of resentment and a bad impression as they are the most vocal users. Other people that use them will not be so noisy or noticeable as they are trying them out with their main film/digital SLRs or something.

Not my thing, but they are okay as toys. That is their purpose. Let people have their harmless fun. Just like I like driving, but I think karts and remote controlled vehicles can be fun too. It's not mutually exclusive. I'd expect to be mocked if I was silly and sat on my little toy car and insisted it was the real deal for serious racing or for driving to work though (/o/ shitfest ahoy). If someone does that, then just ignore them as they are obviously stupid. Is it worth arguing with such people?

Be happy, have fun, take pictures. Hurrah, the world is good again.
>> Anonymous
>>159134

and then john was a faggot
>> Blackadder !!bSWRwu/NqzQ
>>159145

Classy.
>> Anonymous
>>159125
Hello, my young cub. I see you mentioned art fag. Well, let me leave you with this little one;

art... is art... is art.

Yes my young cub, ponder that.
>> Anonymous
>>159143
^This is me. I am this guy.

>>159125
I agree with you! I love taking a toy cam with me when I am somewhere where nice equipment is likely to get damaged. Toy cams are light, too, so they aren't much of a bother to take anywhere. They're good for the fun factor, and also the memory factor. Some shots can have some appeal to them, but these shots would have appeal from any camera.

TL;DR: Toy cams are fun. Every once in a while, you'll get a nice picture from them, but that's usually because it's a nice picture, not because of the toy cam.
>> Blackadder !!bSWRwu/NqzQ
>>159159

Unless I am having a mental breakdown, you are not me.
>> Anonymous
>>159163
Ahh, but my young cub. You are me and I am you and we art.... Ponder that my young cub.
>> Anonymous
>>159163

Oh damn, my bad. Wrong message.

>>159125
^^That's me.
Sorry.
>> Anonymous
>>159169
Ahh, but my young cub... WE ARE ALL ART! Ponder that my young cub... ponder that.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
CAN I HAS FLAMING NOW PLZ?

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeHPCamera ModelHP psc1310Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution200 dpiVertical Resolution200 dpiColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width671Image Height690
>> Anonymous
>>159174
Oh young cub, we do not flame art. Art is far too beautiful to flame. Your piece is.. art my young cub.

Ponder that my young pack.
>> Anonymous
>>159176

Ok who invited Andre Breton
>> Anonymous
>>159068
Distortion is part of any artist's toolkit. Multiple and/or unreliable narrators in literature. Low-fi recording equipment and actual distortion effects in music. 8mm film and shaky camera work in cinema. All the various non-realistic styles painters use.

And in photography- limited depth of field, wide angle and telephoto effects, motion blur, black and white, obvious grain and noise are all distortions, too. Just we're more used to them than light leaks or HDR.

And very few people use *any* of these effects well, in any of the mediums. But used well, not as cool-form-to-get-attention but to communicate the work's message, they're often very good.
>> Anonymous
>>159189
I lol'ed.

But Andre Breton wasn't an idiot.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>159194
You're my new hero.
>> Anonymous
>>159189
I would have to say:

Who invited the art? Our hearts, my young cub. Our hearts yearn for art.

Ponder that my young pack.
>> Anonymous
>>159194

shame that never happens though. it's just flickr faggotry instead.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>159201
Dave Burnett and his Pulitzer would like a word with you.

"You try to do something different, but not for the sake of doing something different."- David Burnett
>> Anonymous
>>159206

That picture would have been okay without the vignetting. The toy camera added nothing.
>> Anonymous
>>159212
No, then it would be just another picture of a sweaty Al Gore campaigning the day before the 2000 presidential election was held.
>> Anonymous
>>159169
>>159159
>>159125
^Me.

>>159212

That is exactly the point.
Good pictures can be taken on toy cameras, but the picture shouldn't depend on the camera. It should be a good picture anyway, just like this picture. I don't see anything wrong with the vignette being there though.
>> Anonymous
>>159218
With the exception of those things Man Ray called Rayographs (I forget what the non-pretentious name for them is) a photograph does depend on a camera, a sensor, and something to direct light to the sensor for its very existence. The properties of that combination and the composition of time, space, and subject the photographer chose are the photograph.
>> Anonymous
>>159218
Young cub, you've said it.

Art will be art will be art.

Yes ponder that my young pack.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>159225
>Rayographs [...] non-pretentious name
Photograms.
>> Anonymous
>>159225

Eh, you knew what I meant.
A good photograph can be taken on a Holga just like a good photograph can be taken on an expensive DSLR.
Happy?
>> Anonymous
Why not just use a better camera? These ones aren't cheap, so it isn't cost.
>> Anonymous
>>159234
A camera does not make art my young cub. Art comes from... the heart.

Ponder that my young cub.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>159234
See>>159194

There is a school of thought that a photograph should look as close to the scene as it was actually seen as possible, with extrem sharpness and as much resolution as possible.

This is not, however, the only school of thought.
>> Anonymous
>>159234

If you use your brain, they are. I got my Holga for $15 at a flea market. You can also get them on amazon for a little over $20 if you don't buy the one with the built in flash.

Other low-fi equipment can be found for just as cheap. Vintage stuff is picked up at garage sales and estate auctions, and is also found laying around at grandparents/parents houses.
>> Anonymous
>>159242

What about the school of thought that says I will rape you until you die from internal bleeding?
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>159247
Well, that's not really photography related. Unless you take pictures, I suppose...
>> Anonymous
>>159218

That I can agree with, that good photographers can produce good work with any camera. But people choose specific cameras for a reason.

Allen Ginsberg could've written awesome epic poems in iambic trimeter. Instead, he wrote awesome, very personal poems in "long breath" free verse. That's how he felt most able expressing whatever, just like Cartier-Bresson with a Leica and a 50mm lens or Ansel Adams with a view camera.

>>159229
Thanks.