The Crappy Point and Shoot Thread.

Stephanie Brim · Feb 23, 2006

Yes, I have a crappy point and shoot. This is what came out of the first roll I shot in it.

Yes, we have snow.

Someone still believes in love.

Hungry?

Humble throne.

View on my walk to work.

From behind and from the hip.

Don't forget.

Muse?

Light.

Taken with one of these cameras. Maybe I should buy up tons of them and resell them to the Lomo crowd.

Dave Parker · Feb 23, 2006

Nice shots, but I am a bit confused, you are a subscriber, why are you posting your images in a thread, as a subcriber, you have quite a bit of storage space in the gallery section of the website, that is what the gallery was set up for..

Dave

Stephanie Brim · Feb 23, 2006

I have TONS of webspace. Almost literally. There's no real need for me to use the gallery. It just uses up more bandwidth if I do...so I can use my space and keep costs down here in my own little way.

If the photos are too large I can always repost links to them instead of the actual images. The purpose of this thread is to get people to post photos from their crappy cameras. We all have them (or I'm guessing we do). I really should have used this one before now...it's kind of neat.

FrankB · Feb 23, 2006

Stephanie,

I saw a quote recently (no idea where from, might be an APUGger's sig) - "It's not the arrow, it's the Indian!"

Thanks for proving the adage so conclusively.

All the best,

Frank

david b · Feb 23, 2006

So what paper are these printed on?

Stephanie Brim · Feb 23, 2006

No paper yet...I figure that I'll print a couple (the one of the girl doing the paper route and possibly the first one of the snow covered ground with the reflection) once I get my enlarger. So they'll most likely be crappily done at first. But crappy prints from a crappy camera kind of works.

david b · Feb 23, 2006

So these are scans of the negs?

Andy K · Feb 23, 2006

Hi Stephanie, I have many hundreds of photographs taken with a crappy point n shoot
here.

Although it is probably almost two years since I last uploaded anything there.

Andy.

Stephanie Brim · Feb 23, 2006

Yeah. I don't have a flatbed (though I may be grabbing one soon so that I *can* scan prints) or my enlarger yet. So these are negative scans. Which is why they look halfway decent. If they were scans of my first prints they'd look about as horrible as the camera they were taken with does.

Stephanie Brim · Feb 23, 2006

HAHA! Andy's a lomographer. Awesome.

david b · Feb 23, 2006

So then a few of them are heavily photoshopped, right?

Stephanie Brim · Feb 23, 2006

Um..no.

Removing dust is all I did. I don't heavily Photoshop anything...these are straight and untouched from the scanner and no correction was done in the scanner either.

david b · Feb 23, 2006

Well that scanner does a wonderful job of selective burning on some of those photos.

BTW, great composition.

Stephanie Brim · Feb 23, 2006

It isn't selective burning...the lens vignettes. You can even see it in the negs. It also has one shutter speed and one aperture.

david b · Feb 23, 2006

The auction ad says it can do panoramics. Have you done any that way? I would love to see those.

Andy K · Feb 23, 2006

Stephanie Brim said:
HAHA! Andy's a lomographer. Awesome.

You'd be surprised

Dead Link Removed

Dead Link Removed

Dead Link Removed

Dead Link Removed

with a Lomo LC-A...

Stephanie Brim · Feb 23, 2006

That was just for reference, really...mine is similar. This one doesn't have the ability to do panoramics...or anything else, really. Plastic fantastic.

I'm going to put some Tri-X and then some Reala in it next and see what I get. I may take some shots inside with the Tri-X and then use semi-stand development techniques to push it to 6400 in Rodinal and see what I get...considering the one aperture, I have to have some pretty fast film to do anything with the camera in normal inside conditions.

Stephanie Brim · Feb 23, 2006

Andy K said:
You'd be surprised

Dead Link Removed

Dead Link Removed

Dead Link Removed

Dead Link Removed

with a Lomo LC-A...

Yeah, I want one...but the $2 I paid for this camera is more in my price range.

Andy K · Feb 23, 2006

Stephanie Brim said:
Yeah, I want one...but the $2 I paid for this camera is more in my price range.

Don't bother, the LC-A isn't a bad little point n shoot, but the Olympus XA2

Dead Link Removed

Dead Link Removed

Dead Link Removed

Dead Link Removed,

with vastly superior battery life and reliability, for a lot less money.

Stephanie Brim · Feb 23, 2006

Eh, I like this one. I'll see what it can do with color film...I think the results will be interesting to say the least as long as they're developed properly.

FrankB · Feb 23, 2006

Like I said, it isn't the arrow...

I envy you your eyes!

Stephanie Brim · Feb 23, 2006

Someone on RFF (where these are put up in their original context - a point and shoot challenge) compared the look of the photos to that of the old box cameras. I kind of agree and I'm wondering if that's why I like the look so much. Dunno. I'm going to stop analyzing them so much and take more. I mean...I do have to use this camera for the rest of the week.

Andy K · Feb 23, 2006

Box cameras?

Yup

do

that

too

Kodak Box Brownie model No. 2.

Stephanie Brim · Feb 23, 2006

I need to get my Kodak box working again. The idea was to turn it into a pinhole...but I don't know if I'll do that or not.

mark · Feb 23, 2006

truely a great thread title.

The Crappy Point and Shoot Thread.

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency