File :-(, x, )
Holga Anonymous
What does /P/ think of The Holga and the kind of photos it produces?
>> Honest So You Dont Have To Be !9UISPtwBPo
>>249816

>What dose /p/ think of this over hyped, low quality, toy camera, and and insta-art, scene bullshit that gets loved up by people with no clue as to what there doing

Fixed
>> Anonymous
>>249824

Look at his name.
This tells you everything you need to know.
>> Anonymous
well i personally have seen some amazing images taken with these plastic cameras. Yeah a lot of it is pretentious art fags on the insta art scene. But I own one and it's fun to get away from digital every now and then.
>> Anonymous
Zomg you guys are just douche faces.
The only thing better than 35mm black and whites are 120mm black and white.

You just dont know man, you just dont know.
>> Anonymous
It doesn't matter what camera you use as long as you can produce fantastic images. Be it a point-and-shoot, TRL, SLR, medium or large format, it doesn't matter.
>> Anonymous
>>249877
$15 pin hole camera rly?
>> eagle
     File :-(, x)
>>249860
i like my prints sharp
i borrowed a Mamiya 7, no i cant afford one

Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2008:07:31 21:03:52
>> eagle
also how do you scan the negitives? its hard to get them to lay flat
>> Anonymous
>>249881
The lines in this are extremely impressive.
>>249883
http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ProductCatIndexAct&fcategoryid=120

What type of scanner are you using? Negative scanners are fairly afordable
>> eagle
>>249885
epson v500
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
CLACK FUCK YEAH!

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon PowerShot A630Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS2 WindowsMaximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution180 dpiVertical Resolution180 dpiImage Created2008:04:13 21:47:53Exposure Time1/60 secF-Numberf/2.8Lens Aperturef/2.8Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length7.30 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width360Image Height480RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Anonymous
>>249860
True, but only when you use a real camera. 120 on a holga is worse then black and white on a decent 35mm compact.

>>249857
You can make a great picture with the crappiest of cameras if you know how to make a good composition and know what makes a good subject. That does not mean you should. For the price of a Holga you can get a decent 120 camera. It IS nice to get away from digital, but there's a million more ways then this piece of junk.
>> Anonymous
I've played around with a Holga. It's fun just for the hell of it, but don't be expecting to get quality work from it. The shutter speeds are fun, and it's an easy way to get double exposures.
>> eagle
     File :-(, x)
heres another from the Mamiya 80mm

Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 MacintoshImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution0 dpiVertical Resolution0 dpiImage Created2008:07:31 21:54:39Color Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width6527Image Height5208
>> Anonymous
>>249881
you can totally afford one, if you sold you 0.95...
>> eagle
>>249906
thems fightin words
>> Anonymous
Medium format turns me the fuck on.
I wish I wasn't a total poorfag or I'd buy a TLR.
I play around with a Holga sometimes, but it's not enough.
>> eagle
>>249924
you can get a decent TLR for under $200
>> sage
>>249924
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost-classifieds/showproduct.php/product/12272/limit/recent
>> Anonymous
what? HOLGA is sexy! if it was a person i would kidnap her and ducktaped her all over.
>> Anonymous
>>249880
$15 for a fucking pin hole?
>> Anonymous
>>249896
>then
>> Mutt !!mIF4ZkWn+B/
>>249881
Bangkokfag here.
Where is this?
>> Anonymous
Holga = fuckwin
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Low quality shit, I prefer some manual 35mm SLR, at least you can get some quality glass. Old canon/nikkors/rokkors are out of this (consumer) world.
Also if you want 120, you can get something better than this plastic junk. Get some lubitel or pentacon six if you are on low budget.

Unless you are some artsy trash that likes to pay 15$ for pinhole and overpay for expired films.
>> Anonymous
>>250273
seconded.

make a pinhole camera out of junk like everybody else
>> Anonymous
>>251033Old canon/nikkors/rokkors are out of this (consumer) world.

Seconded.
>> Anonymous
A HOLGA is a LOMO camera. Go to Flickr.com and type in LOMO and you will see what that camera takes. They arent just PINHOLE....they have some real character to them and can be really fun. I suck at making them cool but practice makes a great shot!
>> Anonymous
>>251862
Using Holga is like wining in special Olympics.
Even if you win, you are still retarded.
>> Anonymous
>>249962
>her
If holga was a person it'd be a man.
>> Anonymous
>>249860
I shoot 4x5 B&W, so HAH!

>>249896
Depends what you are looking for. The grain structure on a 120mm holga shot will allow for more enlargement than a 35mm with a real camera. Most people that use a Holga aren't doing it for sharpness. The larger format also allows a wider angle view without making the camera so thin it is uncomfortable.

On that note, I've never used a Holga, but have friends that have. They can take a good (though low image quality) shot, but they don't make a shot good like many people seem to think.

I do use a pinhole that I made though. I love it, but I think I'll go back to using a lens again soon.
>> Anonymous
>>252150
Holga is a female name...
>> Anonymous
>>251033
>>Old canon/nikkors/rokkors are out of this (consumer) world.

This is a tired cliche. Not all "Old canon/nikkors/rokkors" are great or even vg lenses. Age is not a deciding factor. There's plenty of shit out there and by now plenty of very overprice shit that people are hawking on guys who believe this tired cliche.
>> Anonymous
>>249896
>>The grain structure on a 120mm holga shot will allow for more enlargement than a 35mm with a real camera.

totally untrue - people don't shoot a lot of film believe this because they think that grain is the deciding factor on how much you can enlarge something, but if you have fine grain but you have poor sharpness because of poor lenses and poor film flatness, etc, large prints look bad. One of my biggest prints was shot using Ilford Delta 3200, which about as grainy a film as I would use.
A Holga is not a poor camera. It is a toy
>> Anonymous
Holga fucks up consumer economics with their shitty plastic cameras and fad hungry rich kids driving up prices of film cameras.
>> Anonymous
>>251862
HOLGA is a brand just like Lomo. Lomography is a commercially coined term by a company that couldn't build cameras for shit but where amazed when people got all "artsy" with the blurred and colorful images they got from the shitty cameras they built. Go figure.
>> Anonymous
>>252178
I shoot film all the time. Grain is not "the" deciding factor, but it is the one that is going to cause the most loss of quality as you get larger.

Poor sharpness is going to show up at any size other than extremely small. Also, people shooting with a holga not only expect poor sharpness, but it is often part of the reason for using a holga.

I assume you mean poor film flatness in the camera? That doesn't matter in a pinhole other than for distortion of the image. If you have poor flatness while scanning/enlarging, then you are doing it wrong.

Same goes for people that shoot with Delta 3200. They not only expect a lot of grain, they want it most of the time. If you want a grainy image, then it doesn't matter if you enlarge the grain.

Also, plenty of things that are toys can be used for serious work. And in art, the act of using a toy as a tool can be part of the artwork.

Having a larger piece of film is like having a larger sensor. There is simply more data there. And when your goal is a soft, vignetted, low-fi image, you can have all that on a larger print with a larger piece of film. Holga's can take good photographs, even though they have a low technical quality.
>> Anonymous
>>252181
>>I shoot film all the time. Grain is not "the" deciding factor, but it is the one that is going to cause the most loss of quality as you get larger.

Simply not true - compare an inexpensive folder from the 1930's that takes 6x9 - simple 1 or 2 element uncoated lens, no special provisions for film flatness, then compare that to a shot done with a Leica, with the same film. The latter will allow much greater latitude. Another example - SOME 100 speed films produce negs with soft edges, even though they have small grain to 400 speed with sharper edges

>>holga not only expect poor sharpness, but it is often part of the reason for using a holga.

Sorry I don't know a whole lot about doing anything shitty on purpose. If there are people out there who want shitty results maybe they should just take a dump on a pieces of paper and then use their dicks as brushes to paint a picture
>> Anonymous
actually I just though of an even better example -
try looking the same film developed in Accufine vs. D76 (which I am not a real big fan of). Accufine will produce negs with very fine grain vs D76, but the prints look muddy and don't look good very big. In fact to tell you the truth they don't look that great at any size.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>252184
/Truth

About making pics on medium/large format. You don`t really need a costly equipment.
Pic related, made with LOMO Lubitel 166 + Velvia 100F (by my friend). You can get Lubi for ... less than 50$ and for such price the results are awesome.
>> Anonymous
>>252186
Lubitels actually have a pretty decent quality tessar-type single coated lens that is capable of very good results especially stopped down. The main failing of Lubitels is the screen, which transcends crap. If you don't mind it, or don't mind using the hyperfocal method or scale focusing, they're great cameras.
>> Anonymous
>>252184
There are a lot of people that try to avoid grain. I guess all that stuff you shot with Delta 3200 is shit by default, and you should just burn it.

A soft image is not always a shitty image. Neither is a distorted image or anything else done intentionally, or even on accident aside from fucking over the entire frame horrifically in some way or another.

Back to the idea of grain for enlargement, most of the other issues are apparent at any size, and don't change the feel of the image as you enlarge. The grain can be so small you need a magnifying glass to see it. Since it is really the only thing that is that unnoticeable at small sizes, it is also the only one that will become noticeable as you enlarge.

All I am arguing is that grain is one of the few things that can be completely unnoticeable if you don't enlarge. Almost any flatness issue, focusing issue, distortion, or anything else will be noticeable even as a contact print.

>>252186
You realize the post you referred to is the guy that is saying you do need good equipment, right?
>> Anonymous
>>249924
You can get a Chinese Seagull TLR for about $40-$60. It's a rather good knockoff of the old Rolleis. The lens isn't excellent but it's a real camera for less than LOMO will have you pay for a Holga. I haven't run film through mine yet because I just got it recently, but I will soon.

That said, my favorite MF camera is a little Voigtlander Perkeo folder. It's smaller than any 35mm SLR and fits in your pocket, but it shoots 120 film, and has a lovely little Voigtlander Vaskar 75mm lens. THere's something extremely satisfying about pulling out the lens, setting the shutter with a little catch, and guessing the distance and metering. And you can load it with Pan F 50 and have a sharper image than any digital camera in existence.

tl;dr there are medium-format cameras out there that are made of real metal and glass and take excellent photos for a lot cheaper than a holga.
>> Anonymous
I shoot Arax 60 MLU (modified Kiev60 that actually works). Zeiss 50/4, 120/2.8 and 180/2.8 + cheap 80/2.8 normal. Image quality kicks serious ass although I haven't printed really large, only up to 20x20".

Medium format b&w - oh yes!
>> Anonymous
btw: That 180/2.8 medium format lens is fucking huge. Image quality is up there with the best but the weight, uhh... I've used it handheld couple of times though.
>> Anonymous
>>252273
>You realize the post you referred to is the guy that is saying you do need good equipment, right?
Lubi isn`t good equipment, its decent.
I`m just saying you can pay as much or even less that you pay for holga and get decent camera.
>> Anonymous
>>252306
As a matter of fact it's usually cheaper to not buy Lomo cameras...>>252294has it right.

You can get some very good old used MF cameras, like folders and TLRs, for almost nothing because the hipsters haven't found out about them yet. And they have real lenses and construction meant to last.
>> Anonymous
ITT too many digifags who can't shoot pics as good as they shoot their mouths.
As for other 120 cameras, yeah their technicaly better cameras but Holgas do have their own charm. Plus they're light and fairly reliable.
>> sage !i/euDJmWr2
>>252388
>>fairly reliable

10/10, would lol again.
>> Honest So You Dont Have To Be !9UISPtwBPo
>yeah their technicaly better cameras but Holgas do have their own charm

I assume by "charm" you mean, THEY DONT WORK!

Every fucking page you see about holga comes down to charm, and "each one is slightly difrent", you know why, coz everyone is flawed!!! just in a difrent fuckign palce!!

There shit, they leek light to fuck, enjoy your hipster faggotery and failed lifes
>> Anonymous
>>252398

You can get that same charm on your EOS camera:
http://holgamods.com/xt/xt.html
Just need to poke some holes for light leaks, spray the inside metallic silver for some reflections, and choose a random white balance and color temperature for each shot.
>> Anonymous
personally i like the vignetting and the loss of focus towards the edges if shooting the right picture.
I havent managed a really good double exposure but I have seen others take some really cool shit.
I know its totally against what turns gearfags on and tbh Ive seen more shit shots here and on flickr with state of the art digital gear as I have shot by 'lomo' cams
>> sage !i/euDJmWr2
>>252414
most of those vapid kids who talk about how much they love their Holgas are nothing but lo-fi gearfags. Personally, if I'm gonna talk to a bunch of gearfags, I'd rather it be people who know what they're talking about, not someone who bought a Holga because they bought into Lomo's marketing.
>> Anonymous
>>252425

BOOM
>> Anonymous
>>252425
aint gonna argue on that one. All lomo forums are mainly made up of posts from excited faggots who are waiting for their lomos to arrive.
Once they arrive and they either realise they cant get 120 prints anywhere without effort on their part or they get their first blurry, badly exposed prints you never hear from them again.
Aside from those cocks though, there are some attractive images being shot with them.
>> Anonymous
>>252180
just noticed this. LOMO made fucking military optics you cocksucker. If you don't know shit, don't say shit.

The institute of Lomography or whatever those faggots call themselves hardly make any of their cameras, the're just rebranded and repriced cams from other manufacturers.
Only fairly recently did they start commissioning their own stuff.
Have to tip my hat tho, they are fucking good at marketing.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
o lawd, is dat sum actual GOOD CHEAP MF CAMERAS

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS DIGITAL REBELCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 WindowsMaximum Lens Aperturef/infSensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution180 dpiVertical Resolution180 dpiImage Created2008:09:11 17:28:42Exposure Time0.4 secF-Numberf/0.0ISO Speed Rating200Lens Aperturef/infExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo FlashFocal Length0.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1536Image Height1024RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Anonymous
>>252273
>>There are a lot of people that try to avoid grain. I guess all that stuff you shot with Delta 3200 is shit by default, and you should just burn it.
this comment makes no sense at all.
>>Back to the idea of grain for enlargement, most of the other issues are apparent at any size, and don't change the feel of the image as you enlarge. The grain can be so small you need a magnifying glass to see it. Since it is really the only thing that is that unnoticeable at small sizes, it is also the only one that will become noticeable as you enlarge.
All I am arguing is that grain ... or anything else will be noticeable even as a contact print.

...and this is not true. focus - Do an experiment. Take a portrait and focus bracket, with a longish lens, wide open. Chin-nose-iris. Take a look at the contact - at least in 35mm, and most likely 6x6. You will not be able to tell which is the best focus. Distortion - not a film issue at all Film flatness - I took a shot I really liked and printed it 6" by 6". I hung it on my wall and loved it so I figured I print it 12" by 12", and found out the the film had a flatness issue for that frame and it looked marginally out of focus on the lower right. Totally undetectable in the 6x6. I couldn't even seen it on the neg on a light box and a loupe.
If you print fairly large print and are critical, you will reject more prints for other reasons than for grain.
>> A soft image is not always a shitty image.
and a grainy image is not always a shitty image. What's the point? My comment was premised on the idea that many photo. don't want soft.

>>Since it is really the only thing that is that unnoticeable at small sizes, it is also the only one that will become noticeable as you enlarge
is is just downright silly. How many times is the finished print the size of a single frame contact??
You have to base your decision on how big you might print, not what it will look like on a contact sheet.
>> Anonymous
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qK5u0NcNYA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qK5u0NcNYA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qK5u0NcNYA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qK5u0NcNYA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qK5u0NcNYA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qK5u0NcNYA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qK5u0NcNYA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qK5u0NcNYA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qK5u0NcNYA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qK5u0NcNYA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qK5u0NcNYA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qK5u0NcNYA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qK5u0NcNYA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qK5u0NcNYA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qK5u0NcNYA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qK5u0NcNYA
>> Anonymous
>>252471
>Sorry I don't know a whole lot about doing anything shitty on purpose. If there are people out there who want shitty results maybe they should just take a dump on a pieces of paper and then use their dicks as brushes to paint a picture
>and a grainy image is not always a shitty image. What's the point? My comment was premised on the idea that many photo. don't want soft.
You claimed that anyone using a Holga is trying to do something shitty. Lofi != shitty. It's just another aesthetic choice that, like HDR, has lately been used terribly. The people that shoot with a Holga do want soft. They also tend to enjoy the randomness of what part of the camera might fail. Again, it comes down to aesthetic choice. It's not inherently wrong to want to use a camera that leaves more up to chance as long as you make the right choices later when editing down to the shots you want to keep.

Since you can't see the flatness issue with a loupe, it's very possible that the flatness issue was during printing. Using a glass negative carrier and/or a higher aperture on the enlarger can help avoid this. I've even run into this issue on 35mm negatives on occasion.

Contact printing isn't silly when you shoot large format.

I'm still standing by the fact that you will maintain the image quality you have up to a larger size with a 120mm Holga than a 35mm camera with a lens. I've seen people pull off lo-fi medium format images printed at 30x30, you just have to know what works.
>> Serenar !m827jEgWi.
>>252180
Uh no that's not where Lomography came from. LOMO was actually a pretty respectable optics company in the Soviet Union, but it hit hard times with the breakup of the USSR. Two Austrian students came by while on holiday and decided they liked the LC-A. They then became the official distributors for the LC-A in Europe and started up their marketing machine, which is where the Lomography shit was invented. LOMO of course doesn't care as long as it brings in big bucks.
>> Anonymous
Fuck you, you fags.

I'm going out with my Hasselblad to take shit awesome photos.
>> Anonymous
>>252652
I suggest you take some marketing 101 lessons before you believe stories like that that you read on their website.

>>252697
Win. I'm going out later today for some portraits with my 500C/M <3
>> Serenar !m827jEgWi.
>>252711
What part of my story are you disputing? LOMO did exist before and did produce actual decent stuff. And then it was run into the ground with hipster marketing bullshit after the fall of the USSR. It's not like the only place to find that out is on their website.
>> Anonymous
>>252721
He has an unreasonable hate for the company and their product, and is incapable of believing the holga was made the way it is on purpose.
>> Anonymous
>>252597
with each post you're sounding more and more stupid. I never said that people using Holgas were trying to do somthing shitty. I said that the camera is a toy and you can't get (what I call) good results with it.

>>Since you can't see the flatness issue with a loupe, it's very possible that the flatness issue was during printing.

wtf is wrong with you??? I have the neg, I have the prints. After I made the large print I put the heng back in the enlarger and looked at it. The neg has the problem. Are you such a noob that you don't believe that anyknow knows what they're doing?

>>Contact printing isn't silly when you shoot large format.
This comment is so stupid, that I am starting to think you are a troll. We were talking about 35mm vs 6x6 JACKASS

>>120mm Holga than a 35mm camera with a lens

Spoken like a true beginner. If you think that poor quallity med format can keep up with high quality 35mm, your not only out of your mind but blind.
Every penny pinching idiot think that there is some magic camera that costs only $20-$50 that will allow them to shoot with the big boys. Sorry - it doesn't exist
>> Anonymous
>>252749
Uh...they weren't. Holga's were made to be an inexpensive camera, the problem is that the 'engineers' didn't know how to make a camera.
>> Anonymous
>>252793
The basic idea of the argument was that a low quality camera with a larger piece of film can still be enlarged more than a good camera with a small piece of film. That idea is not limited to 35mm and 6x6.

I hope you don't really think it is impossible to get good results with a Holga. Either you are a commercial photographer, and I agree the holga can't get the kind of results commercial work needs, or you are one of those artists that think that anyone not doing what you are doing is wrong.

You were talking about people using holgas in the quote in my last post.

You never said you took the negative out and put it back in after printing the 12x12 print. Try this, put a piece of film in a negative carrier and tell me if it sits flat. Unless it's an old negative that's been in storage long enough to flatten out, it has a natural curve that can cause a buckle in the carrier. This can result in exactly what you described before.

I never said the holga can "keep up" with a high quality 35mm. I said the 120 film will allow for more enlargement. You'll still have the flaws from the camera. A holga is a different kind of camera, you would use it differently. If anyone tries to use a holga in a situation that calls for a well made camera, then they are idiots.

I'm not trying to find a cheap camera that can "shoot with the big boys." I already own film cameras that can, and I have free access to digital cameras that can. I also own ~6 other cameras of lower quality, some of which I still use quite often depending on the results I am looking for.
>> Anonymous
>>253023

Bing, what are you still doing here? I thought I told you to go fuck your mother...

>>I hope you don't really think it is impossible to get good results with a Holga.

No, I don't "think" that I know it. Please come back and talk to me when you've use 1) a REALY good 35mm camera and 2) a really good MF camera
>> Anonymous
>>
This chestnut, I will always remember fondly:

>>A holga is a different kind of camera, you would use it differently.

Yes, you are right; I'd wipe my ass with it or use it to hold the door open.
>> Anonymous
>>253031
I've used a really good 35mm, and I skipped MF and went straight to large format. In fact, I liked large format so much, that I only shoot large format now. I've never even used a holga.

Anyone that thinks you have to have a certain quality of gear to make art with is a worthless artist. Are you the kind of guy that cries when when a painter uses a synthetic brush instead of the real deal? How about when someone carves their own brush from a stick when using ink? It's all about using whatever tool is necessary to get the aesthetic you want.

See>>249877
That poster is infinitely smarter than you.
>> Anonymous
Oh, wow. Massive tl;dr incoming.

I started using a Holga before it was cool. From a teaching perspective, it's a good starter-camera for individuals -- especially students -- who want to try medium format at a low (low) cost. From an artistic perspective, the Holga (and Diana, and similar cameras) creates a very interesting aesthetic, as each camera has its own, unique imperfections and nuances. And from a general perspective, the popularity of the Holga has brought more people into the traditional, film-photography market.

That said, it's unfortunate that places like Urban Outfitters and Lomo are turning this camera into overpriced, customized hipster trash. It's also unfortunate that many Holga users think that anything and everything they take pictures of will automatically be art.

However, before anyone criticizes the camera, they really need to use it. The Holga is no replacement for quality medium format cameras -- case in point, I use both a Holga (and Diana), alongside my Hasselblad. A lot of photographers I know don't WANT to use "quality" medium format -- or well-made cameras of any film size -- and stick to "toy" cameras instead. It's all about the unpredictability and frankly that's a really appealing factor to a lot of people.
>> Anonymous
>>253040

Yes, because they want to hide their lack of talent behind random effects and crap from the camera. Like morons using PS filters for digital. Using a quality camera would demand that the picture itself as set up by the photographer is interesting, but the Holga and PS filters lets them hide it behind layers of crap.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>253044
Because everything, ever, should be in perfect focus and photography should never be about chance.

Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS2 MacintoshImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2006:08:07 17:47:26Color Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width466Image Height668
>> Anonymous
>>253023
>Either you are a commercial photographer, and I agree the holga can't get the kind of results commercial work needs, or you are one of those artists that think that anyone not doing what you are doing is wrong.

Or mayby I want to use equipment that gives me a full control and has no flaws. Why does everyone has to be an artist ? I`m a PHOTOGRAPHER.

In short , arftags gtfo from my /p/
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>253048
>> Anonymous
>>253048
If your photographs are neither art nor commercial work, then you are on par with the people that consider themselves photographers because they take pictures of their family while on vacation.

If you are taking aesthetics into account, then you are entering the realm of art. Commercial work uses the same basic rules, but has some of it's own, and doesn't allow as much bending of rules.

WTF do you take pictures of if you are only a photographer, and nothing else.

BTW, I'm a fine arts major about to graduate. Everyone doesn't have to be an artist, but I would expect everyone in a photography forum to fall into one or more of the categories that photography exists in.

Even most hobbyists usually consider their work fall into the category of art, commercial-style (there are many types), family, or any combination.
>> Anonymous
>>253059
Seconded, thirded, etc.
>> Anonymous
>>253045

Nice try at a strawman. He didn't go out and get a piece of shit camera to hide his lack of skill though.

I give you 1/10
>> Anonymous
>>253059
a lot of words but no content. get a real degree and maybe you'll have something worthwhile to say.
>> Anonymous
>>252721
The two Austrian students part.

>>252749
This was my first reply in this thread, so I doubt you know anything about my views on the Holga. tl;dr: stfu.
>> Anonymous
>>253045
No, but because taking photographs is about being in control of your photograph. Especially in the case of Cartier-Bresson, so I suggest you read up before using him as an example and saying it's about chance. Especially that picture.

>>253059
>>A photographer is a person who takes a photograph using a camera.
If you take pictures, you're a photographer.
Statements like "I know a lot of photographers that..." are pretty much crap anyway, heck, I know photographers that do not even care about composition.
Doesn't mean you should not care either.
>> Anonymous
>>249962
protip: tape is used for ducts not ducks

don't get me wrong, i enjoy the metaphor
>> Blackadder !!bSWRwu/NqzQ
     File :-(, x)
>>253091

Duck tape is a real brand though.
>> Anonymous
All you fags that think photography is all about technical perfection and equipment need to learn2art.
I seem to remember Picasso's work not being perfectly true representations of his subject but I heard some people consider it art.
>> Anonymous
>>253097

fail again. his was a deliberate style that was created entirely through his own imagination and skill. not through the random failure of a pos camera. his efforts were nothing like these hipster failures.
>> Anonymous
>>253097
Seriously, almost NO ONE here says it's about technical perfection. Just because we don't think you should use a crap camera with 'effects' that make it insta-art, doesn't mean we want technical perfection.

Also, I laugh at all the examples. You use big names in art and photography, and fail at knowing ANYTHING about them in the first place.

This is what is wrong with the holga: It's users.
>> Anonymous
its not insta art. an ill conceived shot is gonna be a shit photo whatever you shoot with.
The right shot can benefit from the soft focus, vignetting, colour rendition characteristics of the camera and film combination.
If you can't accept a decent Holga shot can be artistic and aesthetically pleasing then GTFO and taek up accountancy.
>> Anonymous
>>253104

but that's the problem, isn't it?

the overwhelming majority of holga crap that i've seen comes from people who aren't worried about getting a good shot. they just take any random shit photo, or in your own words, 'ill conceived shot' and seem to think that the insta-art failiures of the holga/etc will make up for it.

Don't blame us for criticizing, blame the users for being fuckhead artfag retards.
>> Anonymous
>>253111
I've said it before, theres no denying theres shit loads of clueless cunts who think a Holga is gonna churn out mountains of super cool photos if they just load velvia film and x-process.
Just as there are countless idiots who churn out nothiing more that snapshots with their top of the range DSLRs.
Fact of the matter is that a Holga can produce intriquing and attractive images. Anyone who dismisses them out of hand really needs to take a good hard think if they wern't better off collecting stamps instead.
>> Anonymous
>>Fact of the matter is that a Holga can produce intriquing and attractive images. Anyone who dismisses them out of hand really needs to take a good hard think if they wern't better off collecting stamps instead.

oh please shut up. Yow know less than nothing.
>> Anonymous
>>253125
show me what you know, you cock smoking faggot.
>> Anonymous
>>253136
I know how to fuck your mother's anus while rubbing her nibbles. Just ask her homo!
>> Anonymous
>>253138
>rubbing her nibbles
>rubbing her nibbles
>rubbing her nibbles
>rubbing her nibbles

way to fail shithead. Now you've shown me what you know get back to kindergarten you stupid child.
>> Anonymous
>>253142
who's your daddy???

maybe you don't know. It could be me or any number of bus drivers.
>> Anonymous
>>253048
>Why does everyone has to be an artist ? I`m a PHOTOGRAPHER.

This has to be the dumbest statement in all of /p/. Spoken like a true gearfag.
>> Anonymous
>>253095
invented as an excuse for a common mispronunciation
>> Anonymous
Resident lomofag here, same as always!

Damnit, all this talk about Holga and none about Diana. I own both, and personally I enjoy shooting with my Diana more. Especially now with the new lenses coming out (ie: fisheye, 55mm wide angle, 38mm wide angle, and close up lenses) there's a shit-ton more you can do.All I have for my Holga 120 CFN are the colored and the soft focus filters, along with the ringflash. I also own a SuperSampler, Fisheye2, and of course the LC-A+. I actually know a thing or two about "proper" photography so I can actually produce half decent images.
>> Anonymous
>>253091

Duck tape was invented in WWII, and was named so because it repelled water like the feathers on a duck.

lrn2history.
>> Anonymous
>>253221
>(ie: fisheye, 55mm wide angle, 38mm wide angle, and close up lenses)
>angle, and close up lenses
>close up lenses
>close up


lol
>> Anonymous
>>253221

this should become pasta.
>> Anonymous
>>253086
Bresson's work was about chance. He just made sure that chance was in his favor. The talk of Bresson reminded me that I missed a category for photographers, Photojournalists. I might have missed more, but my point still stands.

>>253086
I've painted and would never consider myself a painter. Same goes for drawing, web design, programming, writing, etc. Few people consider themselves to be something simply because they have done it.

>>253111
You have all along been using blanket statements against the camera, assuming you are the guy I've been talking to. It's not the camera that is a problem, and some people can use it well.
>> Anonymous
>You have all along been using blanket statements against the camera, assuming you are the guy I've been talking to. It's not the camera that is a problem, and some people can use it well.

is it so hard to see that the main issue here is not that some people can use it well, which i don't disagree with, but rather, that an overwhelming majority cannot but believe that the aesthetics of shooting with the camera itself will make up for it?
>> Anonymous
>>253302
Correct, however, it is the fact that Bresson knows where his chances are, how to use them, and how to find them. This does not mean he went out and shot completely random, and got a good picture out of chance. Bresson is not really about chance, it's about his understanding of it. If you can see something coming about fifteen seconds before it happens, it's not chance anymore.

There is a difference between the terms of a painter and a photographer. A photographer is just someone who takes pictures, whilst a painter is an >artist< using paint as his medium.

Also, I'm not>>253111

I do not dismiss the fact that you can take good pictures with a holga. However, I think you can take good pictures with any camera, since it's not about shitty filters or high sharpness or creamy bokeh. It's about subject matter. A shitty picture will be a shitty picture on every camera, holgas unique light leaks won't fix that. A good picture will be a good picture because of the subject, but then why would you use a holga in the first place?
If the Holga takes such great pictures, how come you haven't simply showed us one to proof it?
>> Anonymous
saying holga takes good pictures is rubbish, it's the photographer that takes the pictures.
>> Anonymous
>>253330
>>saying holga takes good pictures is rubbish, it's the photographer that takes the pictures.

and I suppose you've seen photographer shoot without camera...
and someone should kick you in the balls for saying "rubbish"
>> Anonymous
It's a limiting, cheap, low quality camera that can only capture an absurdly limited quality of shots, Throwing money at a hipster toy won't make you cool, it won one award, just ONE when shot with a very experience photographer, it's popular because of a hipster movement with some really good marketing, and it's good for kids but not for people buying film and film camera gear for serious work because it drives prices up.
>> Anonymous
>>253314
Not sure if you are the same person, but I think you are:
>>I hope you don't really think it is impossible to get good results with a Holga.

>No, I don't "think" that I know it.

and then...

>is it so hard to see that the main issue here is not that some people can use it well, which i don't disagree with, but rather, that an overwhelming majority cannot but believe that the aesthetics of shooting with the camera itself will make up for it?

To answer the question, yes, it is hard to see that, since you only recently changed your mind.

>>253324
There are more painters that are not artists than that are. That's not be being judgmental either, I'm talking about what they consider themselves to be. Photography, unfortunately, seems to have bridged the gap between craft and art more so than anything else I can think of.

As far as the holga goes, I've even said I don't own one; never shot one. I've seen work from them that was good, but that was in print form, I don't even bother wading through the shit online.
>> Anonymous
>>253480

you're quoting like 3 different people there.

i know because i'm the one who you think has changed his mind, but not the others.
>> Anonymous
>>253482
Very first was me, second was the guy I was arguing back and forth with forever. I guess he left.
>> cloud !!WK+Lu8k4giy
>>253222
</thread>
>> Anonymous
>>253359
and I suppose you just put your camera on the floor and wait till it starts taking awesome pictures on it's own. your counter-argument is flawed, and I'll say it's rubbish whenever I want.