Lomography: a blessing or a curse?

Bill Ward · Feb 1, 2015

I thought I'd do a search for 'out-dated, or expired' film, on eBay, to test my growing collection of vintage and classic cameras without exceeding my limited budget. I was horrified to discover that such material is more expensive than fresh stock, because it's been made trendy (or cool) by Lomography, who sell the stuff (eg. verichrome exp. 1966, twice the price of brand new film!).

I realise Lomography is keeping film alive, but at what cost? What do the rest of you think?

Bill Ward (64)

BrianShaw · Feb 1, 2015

Lomo is a blessing; it supports photographic imagemaking. If one wants cheaper film it might be better to buy fresh than outdated. The world turns and times change. Don't villianize lomo. Shoot less but higher quality if funds are tight.

DWThomas · Feb 1, 2015

I agree with Brian, -- paraphrasing -- a rising film use floats all cameras! And buying expired film does nothing to keep current film producers in business. Given that the film itself is only a portion of my photography expenses -- there's chemistry, travel, etc. -- I would rather buy new film, even if less of it, and not add any unnecessary risks to my final results. But that's me ....

frank · Feb 1, 2015

+3

It's not my thing, but I wouldn't criticize how others choose to express themselves creatively, or do for a hobby.

blockend · Feb 1, 2015

One section of the film market reduces its price when the sell by date looms, the other raises it for being sub-optimal. Put the film on a radiator for a month, get lousy quality and save money!

Richard S. (rich815) · Feb 1, 2015

I wish I bought old mustangs and other classic 60's and 70's cars before they rocketed in value and interest in the last 5-8 years. These things happen in many areas. You'd rather the film market be in more jeopardy of a future so you can buy expired film a little cheaper?? That said I nailed a load of expired and expiring 120/35 B&W film when pros we're going digital and dumping their fridges and freezers. Often less than a buck a roll and 100' bulk film spools for $20 or less. Need to get a lock for my dorm freezer...

bsdunek · Feb 1, 2015

DWThomas said:
I agree with Brian, -- paraphrasing -- a rising film use floats all cameras! And buying expired film does nothing to keep current film producers in business. Given that the film itself is only a portion of my photography expenses -- there's chemistry, travel, etc. -- I would rather buy new film, even if less of it, and not add any unnecessary risks to my final results. But that's me ....

Yep! My thoughts exactly. I think Lomo is fun, and it keeps people interested in film. One of the reasons I have a couple of Holgas.

snapguy · Feb 1, 2015

Do people who buy oil paintings of Elvis on velvet help promote the arts? Don't know, don't care.

Richard S. (rich815) · Feb 1, 2015

snapguy said:
Do people who buy oil paintings of Elvis on velvet help promote the arts? Don't know, don't care.

If they do it might help sell more paint overall.

AgX · Feb 1, 2015

Bill Ward said:
I thought I'd do a search for 'out-dated, or expired' film, on eBay, to test my growing collection of vintage and classic cameras without exceeding my limited budget.

Off topic, but: there is life beyond Ebay.

ME Super · Feb 1, 2015

35mm color negative film can be had at the local Wally world for cheap - $3-4/roll. Slide film runs $10-12/roll for the Fuji stuff. If you don't want to deal with the mask of the color negative film when evaluating the negatives, either shoot the slide film or get yourself some B&W negative film. B&H has Kentmere 100 in 35mm for under $3/roll, Kentmere 400 for $3.50/roll. Or there's my personal favorite panchromatic B&W film, HP5+ for $3.99/roll. Oh and Tri-X can be had for $4.35/roll.

And Lomography is a blessing if it gets more people to shoot film. If they buy the expired stuff and decide to switch to fresh stuff, then this does support the manufacturers of film.

frank · Feb 1, 2015

ME Super said:
And Lomography is a blessing if it gets more people to shoot film. If they buy the expired stuff and decide to switch to fresh stuff, then this does support the manufacturers of film.

And additional users of expired film support increased need for new film. Somehow.

Sirius Glass · Feb 1, 2015

frank said:
+3

It's not my thing, but I wouldn't criticize how others choose to express themselves creatively, or do for a hobby.

+1 = 4

Richard S. (rich815) · Feb 1, 2015

frank said:
And additional users of expired film support increased need for new film. Somehow.

Sales of existing houses does not help demand for builders and developers of new housing, but if sales of existing houses goes up they plan on building more new houses.

(Does this analogy apply here? Who knows? Sounds darn good though, eh?)

removed account4 · Feb 2, 2015

Bill Ward said:
I thought I'd do a search for 'out-dated, or expired' film, on eBay, to test my growing collection of vintage and classic cameras without exceeding my limited budget. I was horrified to discover that such material is more expensive than fresh stock, because it's been made trendy (or cool) by Lomography, who sell the stuff (eg. verichrome exp. 1966, twice the price of brand new film!).

I realise Lomography is keeping film alive, but at what cost? What do the rest of you think?

Bill Ward (64)

hi

i read somewhere that most of the film sold ( new? ) was for people using lomo, hola, diana and other similar cameras.
personally i have no problem with people who
shoot from the hip using "fun" cameras ( lomo &c ) they seem to be more creative, have more fun and more willing to
use film and make mistakes than people who use "non fun" cameras.

we need more people using LOMO cameras and other things like that ! ( and with that attitude ! )
even though there are others within the film community that denigrate them make nasty comments
make it seem like they are sub-human &c, its pretty terrible how narrow minded people can be.

bottom line, expired film too expensive, use fresh film.

good luck !
john

ozphoto · Feb 2, 2015

I always have to smile when I see fresh film specifically branded and sold as "lomo-photography" film - the price is rather crazy (in AU anyway). Compared to regular 120 it's quite pricey.

Cashing in on the trend? Yes, most probably, but if it keeps film alive (and the users are too stupid to check the price against regular 120) that's a good thing,

Personally, I'll buy dull and boring 120 film over "Lomo 120" and put it in my pseudo Lomo camera - what hipsters don't know about the type of film I use, won't hurt them.

Lomography: a blessing or a curse?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency