I found Lomography film in a store.

[keithwms]

Much.

 

[ME Super]

A wise Canadian IT guy once told me "If they demand crap, make sure that you at least give them wholesome crap." If a plastic film camera which most serious analog photographers would call crap gives the user what they want at a reasonable cost and quality, then I think we should consider it to be "wholesome crap." I have a Kodak digi-P&S and have taken some amazing shots with it, so by that definition it's "wholesome crap", just as disposable Kodak/Fuji film cameras could be called "wholesome crap."

The same could be said about lab processing. At least make sure what you give us back looks good, even if our subject matter or composition is less than stellar.

ME Super

 

[E. von Hoegh]

How many less-than-knowledgeable customers have picked up a lomo, used it, and realised that damn near any cellphone camera will give much better results, thus forming the opinion that film sucks? The marketing of such dreck as a tool for fine art is just inexcuseable. And, every one who spends money on such dreck is supporting it. Lensbabies? Another gimmick. They're about the lowest quality tools available, and any skilled craftsman - in any field - knows that you don't give crappy tools to someone just getting off the toe of the learning curve. You can often get a Calumet monorail with lens for the price of a new lensbaby, and the view camera is a tool one can learn with, unlike the gimmick.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Lomography is about relaxing technical expertise, knowledge of process, and endlessly refined prints.
Some people just enjoy taking the picture, and don't give a rats rear end about the technical merits of the resulting prints.
Darkroom rats like you and I are the exception.

 

[keithwms]

How many less-than-knowledgeable customers have picked up a lomo, used it, and realised that damn near any cellphone camera will give much better results, thus forming the opinion that film sucks? The marketing of such dreck as a tool for fine art is just inexcuseable. And, every one who spends money on such dreck is supporting it. Lensbabies? Another gimmick. They're about the lowest quality tools available, and any skilled craftsman - in any field - knows that you don't give crappy tools to someone just getting off the toe of the learning curve. You can often get a Calumet monorail with lens for the price of a new lensbaby, and the view camera is a tool one can learn with, unlike the gimmick.

Sorry to be blunt but you may need to get over yourself. They're marketing it as fun. And cool. And modern. I've never known a teenager to walk into a store looking for the right tool to do Fine Art (whatever that is).

People need to stop emulating the Famous Photographers and follow their own creative vision. With soupcan pinhole or magnifying glass prints on leaves or Tri-X in rodinal... whatever.

Furthermore, if we're going to talk about bang for the buck... well we'd better not going there.

 

[rco3]

Sorry, E., but you're still full of crap about the Lensbaby. If you're calling them the lowest-quality tools available, then you simply don't know. Pontificating from a position of ignorance makes you look like a fool.

 

[himself]

but it's not a question of the validity of "low-fi" techniques surely? to fixate on that one aspect is missing the point...

selling or using crap is fine, but selling crap as gold is when you start to cross the line in my book.

oh and Keith you are dead on and as someone mentioned earlier, perhaps Kodak would be wise to give those guys over at lomo a ring, because if you can sell that for that much you must be hella good at your job.

 

[eurekaiv]

Avoiding Lomography does not mean avoiding film altogether.
You think it is positive to buy overpriced crap film because at least you are buying film?
That is completely absurd.

Have you used any or all of the film? Why do you think it's crap? At what point do you consider it fairly priced?

 

[michaelbsc]

...just as disposable Kodak/Fuji film cameras could be called "wholesome crap."

Frankly the decent disposables really aren't crap. They're actually pretty damned good. Even the plastic lens has a lot of research that went into it.

 

[Aristophanes]

but it's not a question of the validity of "low-fi" techniques surely? to fixate on that one aspect is missing the point...

selling or using crap is fine, but selling crap as gold is when you start to cross the line in my book.

Depends.

Who else makes a sprocket rocket camera?

It is obviously a very, very niche product with small demand and so requires a higher price and obviously some cost-cutting on the actual design and materials. It's $80.

But the photos are unique, interesting and fun. Check them out on Flickr:

http://www.flickr.com/groups/1529248@N20/

Is it worth $80. Obviously 567 Flickr sprocket rocket pool members think so.

What's the price of gold right now?

 

[ME Super]

I agree that the disposable cameras are pretty good. I've even taken some good pictures with them. However, I have more flexibility and control with my SLR than I do with a disposable. Try getting a photo of a city skyline at dusk with a disposable, then with an SLR. You'll get the shot with the SLR because there are a variety of shutter speeds/apertures. Disposables don't have this. There are situations in which the SLR can get the shot where the disposable cannot. In those situations the disposable could be thought of as "crap." Hence the designation "wholesome crap." Good for what it does (even excellent if you're taking a float trip with a waterproof disposable), but not as good as an SLR (or rangefinder, or whatever) in some situations.

But I digress. This thread is about Lomography tools being available in stores like American Eagle. Heck, even Wal-Mart has Fuji print film. If the Lomo tool does what they want it to, great. If not, then someone should tell these guys to check out KEH or Craigslist or wherever and get a good used camera.

ME Super

 

[himself]

Depends.

Who else makes a sprocket rocket camera?

[...]

Is it worth $80.

Nobody else makes a sprocket rocket, no, but you could just by any old medium format camera with a manual winder (folding/tlr) and run a roll of 35mm through it (expired for the colour) and get the exact same effect... hell, you would even have more shutter and f/ stop choices so you can use it in a variety of situations and the build guilty is going to be far better.

pretty sure I could get a good one under $20 too never mind $80

so I don't think it's worth $80, no

 

[Aristophanes]

Nobody else makes a sprocket rocket, no, but you could just by any old medium format camera with a manual winder (folding/tlr) and run a roll of 35mm through it (expired for the colour) and get the exact same effect... hell, you would even have more shutter and f/ stop choices so you can use it in a variety of situations and the build guilty is going to be far better.

pretty sure I could get a good one under $20 too never mind $80

so I don't think it's worth $80, no

Where i live you would be lucky to see 1 local MF folder per year for sale. Most are thrown in the trash.

So eBay, with all those risks and added costs, and it's not exactly a worthwhile comparison.

 

[redrockcoulee]

Sorry to be blunt but you may need to get over yourself. They're marketing it as fun. And cool. And modern. I've never known a teenager to walk into a store looking for the right tool to do Fine Art (whatever that is).

People need to stop emulating the Famous Photographers and follow their own creative vision. With soupcan pinhole or magnifying glass prints on leaves or Tri-X in rodinal... whatever.

Furthermore, if we're going to talk about bang for the buck... well we'd better not going there.

No surely if young people want to go and take some photos with film at a party or a weekend outing they would like to take a monorail.

I do not think that people who are buying a camera that advertises itself as being less than ideal quality will come with up with the option that film is crap. I mean there are Holga aps on their iphones to simulate Holgas. So if some one pays $50 for a camera that is worth really only 20 and they use it for just 2 years they have spent over one dollar a month extra. Compare that to bottled water.

 

[himself]

Where i live you would be lucky to see 1 local MF folder per year for sale. Most are thrown in the trash.

So eBay, with all those risks and added costs, and it's not exactly a worthwhile comparison.

where are you from if you don't mind my asking?

and ebay is no problem, certainly no hidden costs or anything like that

 

[keithwms]

No surely if young people want to go and take some photos with film at a party or a weekend outing they would like to take a monorail.

LOL

 

[Aristophanes]

No surely if young people want to go and take some photos with film at a party or a weekend outing they would like to take a monorail.

Like in Springfield...or Seattle? Or Disneyland?

 

[eurekaiv]

Like in Springfield...or Seattle? Or Disneyland?

I took my 8x10 to Disneyland once but the jerks working Space Mountain wouldn't let me on the ride with it.

 

[himself]

I took my 8x10 to Disneyland once but the jerks working Space Mountain wouldn't let me on the ride with it.

 

[film_man]

1. Lomo stuff is for "hipsters" what Leicas are for the old farts. The bling factor is the same, the end result is not that much different (I've seen plenty of horrible "amazing photos" made with Leicas) but at least the Lomo crap cost $100 instead of $5000.
2. People buying this stuff in clothes stores? Why not. They are indeed fashion accessories and they are supposed to be "fun". You know, "I turn up at a party with this stupid camera and take some photos and 2 where even almost ok and they look kewl on facebook" kind of fun. Or maybe no, you don't know that kind of fun. I mean back in 1700 "fun" was ballroom dancing with a 50-piece suit, high heels and a wig. For the men. Times change.
3. Lomo film? Overpriced? Says who? This is a "fashion accessory". If people really wanted proper or even expired film to run through their Holgas the internet can get you lots more for a lot less. In the end, you buy a camera and film in a clothes shop. It is a convenience and a spur of the moment purchase. Like buying bottled water at the arrivals hall of an airport. You could have brought your own water to drink while waiting for your aunt to come out of the luggage area but you couldn't be bothered and ended up paying $5 for a small bottle that costs 50c at the supermarket.
4. What's wrong with a lensbaby? It is brilliant. I had two, they were brilliant with dSLRs. Are they expensive? In what terms? Expensive compared to bread? Yes. Expensive as in it is a fun T/S+PC lens that can be setup in 2 seconds by using 2 fingers? No it is not because there is nothing like it. The nearest thing to that is a $2k T/S lens from Canon/Nikon or a 5kg LF rig that takes a good 5 minutes to setup. If you can't see that then...whatever.
5. Is Diana/Holga a piece of crap? Don't know. Technically my Diana F+ is junk next to my Hasselblad. But the photos I've made with the Diana I'll never be able to do with a Hasselblad. Not even if I scan the film and work on it for a couple of hours in Lightroom. Most of them are indeed crap. But some are brilliant. Especially that roll of 120 I exposed with frames overlapping and then printed really wide. It is cool.

It is just FUN. Photography doesn't have to be serious all the time.

Peace

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

It is just FUN. Photography doesn't have to be serious all the time.

:confused: What do you mean?

The whole post is great, and I agree with you 100%. If you're not having fun while shooting, or at least enjoying it immensely, then what's the point?

 

[Klainmeister]

1. Lomo stuff is for "hipsters" what Leicas are for the old farts. The bling factor is the same, the end result is not that much different (I've seen plenty of horrible "amazing photos" made with Leicas) but at least the Lomo crap cost $100 instead of $5000.
2. People buying this stuff in clothes stores? Why not. They are indeed fashion accessories and they are supposed to be "fun". You know, "I turn up at a party with this stupid camera and take some photos and 2 where even almost ok and they look kewl on facebook" kind of fun. Or maybe no, you don't know that kind of fun. I mean back in 1700 "fun" was ballroom dancing with a 50-piece suit, high heels and a wig. For the men. Times change.
3. Lomo film? Overpriced? Says who? This is a "fashion accessory". If people really wanted proper or even expired film to run through their Holgas the internet can get you lots more for a lot less. In the end, you buy a camera and film in a clothes shop. It is a convenience and a spur of the moment purchase. Like buying bottled water at the arrivals hall of an airport. You could have brought your own water to drink while waiting for your aunt to come out of the luggage area but you couldn't be bothered and ended up paying $5 for a small bottle that costs 50c at the supermarket.
4. What's wrong with a lensbaby? It is brilliant. I had two, they were brilliant with dSLRs. Are they expensive? In what terms? Expensive compared to bread? Yes. Expensive as in it is a fun T/S+PC lens that can be setup in 2 seconds by using 2 fingers? No it is not because there is nothing like it. The nearest thing to that is a $2k T/S lens from Canon/Nikon or a 5kg LF rig that takes a good 5 minutes to setup. If you can't see that then...whatever.
5. Is Diana/Holga a piece of crap? Don't know. Technically my Diana F+ is junk next to my Hasselblad. But the photos I've made with the Diana I'll never be able to do with a Hasselblad. Not even if I scan the film and work on it for a couple of hours in Lightroom. Most of them are indeed crap. But some are brilliant. Especially that roll of 120 I exposed with frames overlapping and then printed really wide. It is cool.

It is just FUN. Photography doesn't have to be serious all the time.

Peace

Win!

 

[Aristophanes]

:confused: What do you mean?

The whole post is great, and I agree with you 100%. If you're not having fun while shooting, or at least enjoying it immensely, then what's the point?

Money.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Money.

If you're a professional photographer, would you use a Lomography camera?

 

[Aristophanes]

If you're a professional photographer, would you use a Lomography camera?

I believe John Canlas uses a Holga at weddings with x-processed slide film.