Lomography - this is how you inspire the younger generation into film

[baachitraka]

I may never say their cameras are worse nor their films. Its the want to be an artist, who overdo with their offerings and eventually filling the flickr pits.

I personally never learned anything from them nor theirs work inspire me. But still those simple tools are powerful.

I pay for any camera for it technology et al not for that will make me a good artist.

 

[Ces1um]

To accepting more expensive film and worse cameras as the norm?

It's cheaper for me to buy film from lomography, have it shipped from the states to Canada, than it is for me to buy it from my local camera shop. The cheapest film I can buy locally is about $9 a roll plus 15% tax. If I buy lomography film, I get 3 rolls for about $16, no tax. Shipping is $15 bucks so after buying a few 3 packs I'm out well ahead. Not sure why people say their film is expensive. Film must be really cheap in the states.

 

[blockend]

Film must be really cheap in the states.

I'm in the UK, and film certainly isn't cheap here.

 

[removed account4]

if someone likes a camera made by lomo why is it any different than
someone liking a cheap camera made by nkon or olympus ?
is it the price tag ?
so what, the photographer bought something and paid a little too much for it
that is the photography disease ... i mean if you stick to 35mm people pay more $ for a leica that
looks like it was dragged behind a dirtbike for a week, or some
lens they were told will give them sunshine on a rainy day, or mf .. people pay an arm and leg
for some refurbished folder with snakeskin, or a camed RF folder .. a lot of them are
over priced and 60 years old ( not to mention vest cameras ) if you get into LF, people pay 30-100$
for a .. dark cloth when they can just go to the fabric store and buy a 3$ piece of fabric. or they will
pay $$ for a ground glass with a grid etched into it or when they can just get a sheet of acetate made
with a grid on it, for 75¢ or some sort of brass lens suggested to have mystical powers ...
or a 100$ pinhole camera ...
the only difference is that the folks who buy the leica, or the dark cloth or acid etched glass are part
of a tribe that the mainstream photrio photographer is part of, they already spent their $$ on their leica+lens
they got fleeced for their dark cloth and couldnt' believe the bill for the ground glass ( the lens was
unscrewed off the front of a 2$ folding camera and resold for $300 ) . when they could make a pinhole camera
for like $2
these folks are just part of a different club ... but if someone pays a few bucks more for a lomography camera that is plad
or some vivid color, or ( or a holga, diana, sputnik, russian junker or whatever ) ..
they are just a dope who wishes they were a photographer, im sorry a lo....gra ( wrong club )

the photographic double standards are kind of insane, no wonder why more people with lomo cameras (&c )
stay on other websites, ( flikcr insta... or ) or submit to that magazine or ...
it seems that if they were active on photrio in the gallery or in the fora, it would be an uphill battle to
keep their mouth shut 12+x a year when the " you wasted your money on the wrong stuff " people start in ..
often times ( as you can see ) it is really hard to keep one's mouth shut

 

[blockend]

often times it is really hard to keep one's mouth shut

Indeed it is.

 

[removed account4]

Indeed it is.

yup

 

[Ste_S]

It's impossible to say without hard figures. As I don't use any of Lomography's products, it's irrelevant either way. My concern is maintaining existing film production at a price I'm prepared to pay. I get through a lot of film so its important costs are reasonable.

Sure I don't have hard figures, but I can't think of any other company that caters for film shooters with a high street presence and a strong internet and social media showing.

As your concern is maintaining existing film production at a price your prepared to pay, I would of thought you'd been keen for Lomography to recruit new shooters, even if they're not your cup of tea ? Or would you prefer Lomography didn't exist ?

 

[AgX]

Sure I don't have hard figures, but I can't think of any other company that caters for film shooters with a high street presence and a strong internet and social media showing.

I ever saw 1 Lomography camera carried around, and that includes big cities and the culturall off-scene. For the rest I agree with you.

 

[blockend]

As your concern is maintaining existing film production at a price your prepared to pay, I would of thought you'd been keen for Lomography to recruit new shooters, even if they're not your cup of tea ? Or would you prefer Lomography didn't exist ?

Some of the film I use is rebranded as Lomography and sold in UK high street stores. If the promotional price in, say, Boots beats what I normally pay I'm more than happy to buy it. It's a completely pragmatic decision based on the best price I can get. That's a far cry from selling a Lubitel, which in my opinion is a glorified toy camera (and I've owned 2 of them) for £289. Even accounting for inflation the current price shouldn't be more than £60 - 70. I hope Lomography move away from their initial period of framing some not very good cameras in mystery and selling them at extortionate prices, and mature into a film supply company. As someone who rarely looks in Lomography's catalogue their approach to selling cameras is inevitably reflected in the public perception of their film products.

 

[removed account4]

i just remembered,
doesn't leica own an interest in lomo ?
it's the same thing
high prices
they just cater to a different crowd..

 

[zanxion72]

Funny, I know none that has been attracted into film photography by lomography. On the contrary, I know quite many that have discovered lomography after getting into film photography.

 

[AgX]

i just remembered,
doesn't leica own an interest in lomo ?

There is no hint at such.

 

[baachitraka]

They were interested in instant fotos (Leice Sofort).

 

[AgX]

Leica offers a camera to take Instax Mini film.
With a lot of detail-similarities to the Instax Mini 70 and Mini 90 cameras...

 

[macfred]

At least those 'lomographers' have no reservations on Leica : I named her Gretel - https://www.lomography.de/magazine/222384-leica-if-the-lomo-leica

 

[Ste_S]

I ever saw 1 Lomography carried carried around, and that includes big cities and the culturall off-scene. For the rest I agree with you.

I rarely see anyone carrying around a film camera to be honest. I've seen one Fuji Instax in the wild (despite their sales figures), had a teenager with a skateboard stop me to talk about the Pentax ME Super I was carrying (he had an Olympus OM2). I always get stopped when I'm carrying my Mamiya C330 by people wanting to talk about it (handy for grabbing portraits ). Apart from that though it's all phone cameras, DSLRs/Mirrorless/Bridge etc

Some of the film I use is rebranded as Lomography and sold in UK high street stores. If the promotional price in, say, Boots beats what I normally pay I'm more than happy to buy it. It's a completely pragmatic decision based on the best price I can get. That's a far cry from selling a Lubitel, which in my opinion is a glorified toy camera (and I've owned 2 of them) for £289. Even accounting for inflation the current price shouldn't be more than £60 - 70. I hope Lomography move away from their initial period of framing some not very good cameras in mystery and selling them at extortionate prices, and mature into a film supply company. As someone who rarely looks in Lomography's catalogue their approach to selling cameras is inevitably reflected in the public perception of their film products.

Absolutely agree about the prices for Lubitel (and the LC-A). I like the idea of the Bel Air too - a toy camera 120 X-Pan/folder cross ! But again at too high a price for me.
Their Instax cameras seem fairly priced though, and I've just got the better half a Diana

 

[4season]

The biggest difference with Lomography's "magazine" (and books!) is that they're crammed with photos! Since no one else has done so, I'll post a couple now.

One taken with a Lomo LCA 120

And another taken with a Lomo LC-Wide:

I've had fun with these things. But yes they are pretty expensive for what they are, and they're not going to be everyone's cup of tea.

 

[removed account4]

There is no hint at such.

in this thread someone alludes to a relationship
https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/leica-bought-westlicht-auction-house.116073/
i've poked around to see whats what ..
but have come up empty, maybe you're right?
in any case whether they own part of lomo or not, its the same marketing stratagy
i'm not sure what the leica credo is though, i like the lomo one " don't think, just shoot "
sounds good to me ! ( gets people using FILM )

 

[wyofilm]

At least those 'lomographers' have no reservations on Leica : I named her Gretel - https://www.lomography.de/magazine/222384-leica-if-the-lomo-leica

I've only ever named a camera when I'm mad at it! As in, "You &&#^@%!"

 

[AgX]

jnanian, I totally forgot about that thread, your memory is better than mine... but still their are no hints at Leica investing in Lomography.

But as that disguised Instax camera shows Leica is looking at other markets, but that has been their policy for quite some times as those phone-cameras show.

 

[wyofilm]

i like the lomo one " don't think, just shoot "
sounds good to me ! ( gets people using FILM )

Right! TIme to energize the people over at Lomography to embrace full auto.

(Recently, my 11 yo boy was blasting away with my Nikon F4 at balance rock down in Moab. I did my best to point out to that it wasn't exactly a fast moving object.)

 

[macfred]

jnanian said: ↑
i like the lomo one " don't think, just shoot "
sounds good to me ! ( gets people using FILM )

For me Lomography's key message is that gear-does-not-matter - you can even use a Leica to take nice photographs ...

 

[faberryman]

I was reading through the Lomography Manifesto and ran across this: "Nowadays trends are not recognised in art by their content." What do you have in photography but the content, by which I understand "the image" .Is it the act of photographings, or the acts surrounding the photographing.

 

[faberryman]

jnanian said: ↑
i like the lomo one " don't think, just shoot "
sounds good to me ! ( gets people using FILM )

For me Lomography's key message is that gear-does-not-matter - you can even use a Leica to take nice photographs ...

If the gear does not matter, why do they brand (and rebrand) and sell expensive toy cameras. If the gear does not matter, why does the movement (for lack of a better word) insist on using film?

 

[macfred]

If the gear does not matter, why do they brand (and rebrand) and sell expensive toy cameras. ...

That's their -legit- way to earn money. The price of a product and its value are two quite separate things and cannot be equated. For many people the offered products are of value and they are willing to pay the price.