Lomo Photography

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/av/docs/20011003/lomo.jpg

Im dying to get one of thoe Lomo camera's - i looked at the site

http://www.lomography.com/

and the pics look so seductive and lovely. The one i want is about £90 (the lomo classic automatic) and im a bit reluctant to fork out the cash - someone said to me you DO get lovely pics, but that only about 1 or 2 per roll tend to work out well and most just look crap. Any Lomographers out there got any advice? Anyone tried it and think its overrated?

http://impactvibe.com/lomo/images/pic25.jpg

― jed_e_3 (jed_e_3), Sunday, 31 August 2003 15:27 (twenty-two years ago)

I prefer the Holga

― ModJ, Sunday, 31 August 2003 15:35 (twenty-two years ago)

doesnt that use a kind of hard to find film type thats expensive to process though?

― jed_e_3 (jed_e_3), Sunday, 31 August 2003 15:36 (twenty-two years ago)

More to the point, the quality of pictures always hinges on the person behind the camera, not the machine itself. That said, some machines are better than others on a base design/science level. The Lomo is just a tool, and the hype or gospel attached to them is rooted somewhat in the lo-fi-ishness of it all.

And a tool doesn't do you any good if it sits on a shelf.

So if you have the money to spend, and you think you're going to run a roll of film through it every few weeks or so, dude, embrace it. I support you.

― ModJ, Sunday, 31 August 2003 15:38 (twenty-two years ago)

Not at all -- the Holga uses 2 1/4 inch film stock -- very very common (just not from the drug store). It runs about 2.50 US/Roll and is processed at any lab (just not the drug store). The fun comes from the light leaks and unpredictable advance mechanisim.

― ModJ, Sunday, 31 August 2003 15:40 (twenty-two years ago)

They are well overpriced for what they are, i.e. very cheap cameras with gimicky flashes or lenses. That said my personal favourite is the camera with selectable colour filters for the flash. 2 1/4 = 120 stock which is easily the mos popular film format after 35mm and APS.

I'd much rather put the money in the buy Ed a Leica D-Lux fund.

― Ed (dali), Sunday, 31 August 2003 15:44 (twenty-two years ago)

I'd much rather put the money in the buy Ed a Leica D-Lux fund.

― Ed (dali), Sunday, 31 August 2003 15:45 (twenty-two years ago)

Embracing the true Lomo philosophy would be buying piece o shit cameras and tinkering with them, but that is clearly not going to make Lomo any money.

― Ed (dali), Sunday, 31 August 2003 15:47 (twenty-two years ago)

I've wanted to shoot with a Leica rangefinder for quite some time now. I've used the lenses on shitty film cameras with C-mounts, and Leica makes the lenses for the Panasonic DVX 100, but as for the actual machine itself...

― ModJ, Sunday, 31 August 2003 15:48 (twenty-two years ago)

Also, you can try and pick up one of the Yashica Rollei knockoffs -- the 2 1/4 TLR box cameras. You can get those for around 50 US, depending on where you look, and it makes a nice desk ascessory when yr not using it

― ModJ, Sunday, 31 August 2003 15:50 (twenty-two years ago)

D-Lux is their very high quality pocket digital camera that makes me drool. If you want a cheap range finder you need to get to Russia or get someone going to Russia to get you one. You can get both 30s and 40s originals and Cameras made using the Leica Plant Shipped off to Russia at the end of the second world war for much less than western equivalents. The quality isn't quite as good but it is still good. i kind of wish I hadn't been seduced by my Hasselblad copy Kiev 88 and bought one of these Leicas instead, even though a $50 OK quality medium format camera is pretty useful too.

― Ed (dali), Sunday, 31 August 2003 15:53 (twenty-two years ago)

I've heard different stories from people with Kievs. I also know people who can lend me their Hassies, so it doesn't matter... Heh.

― ModJ, Sunday, 31 August 2003 15:55 (twenty-two years ago)

Build quality and optical quality are merely OK for the Kievs, for instance my body won't wind on my back. However for a mere amateur such as myself I would never have spent more than $50 on a medium format camera and the Kiev does just fine for my purpose.

― Ed (dali), Sunday, 31 August 2003 15:59 (twenty-two years ago)

I can't believe how much they go for, I picked up a couple last year for about $5 each.

― s1utsky (slutsky), Sunday, 31 August 2003 16:15 (twenty-two years ago)

Buy a disposable 35mm.
£8.99 in boots for 27 shots on decent Fuji film including 1 hr processing.

Bargain!

― mei (mei), Sunday, 31 August 2003 17:46 (twenty-two years ago)

What they don't mention on that Lomo photo that was posted is the amount of digital manipulation (which looks to be quite heavy).

120 film is a bit more expensive to develop/print. For $2.50 you get 12 shots at 6x6 (which is where you achieve the Holga 'look'), and it's not something you can drop off to be developed and printed at the local 1hr. I rarely use my Holgas, though - I can't come up with the word I'm aiming for, but they're,uh, too easy. Like "who cares about content and composition, I'll get some neat vignetting and soft-focus effects!"

For the same price as a new Kiev, I got a Bronica SQ-A w/ WL finder and 80mm lens from KEH (www.keh.com), they've got some great bargains. All of their equipment ratings are low - if you buy something near-mint from them, it'll probably be flawless.

My hankering is for a Hasselblad X-Pan rangefinder or the Fuji equivalent (at about half price). It does 35mm film as normal, or in the panoramic mode (2.7ish:1) on the same roll. I'd like to crop slightly and get a true CinemaScope aspect for still film with a handheld camera.

― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Sunday, 31 August 2003 18:16 (twenty-two years ago)

Lenny posts on Lomo and doesn't use their cameras. Should he be arrested?

― Al Ewing (Al Ewing), Sunday, 31 August 2003 22:04 (twenty-two years ago)

If you are not averse to digital manipulation, I've found a little time in Photoshop (increasing saturation, moving level sliders mostly) does a great job simulating 95% of what I used to get from my LC-1. On the other hand, I do like my Lomo, practicality be damned.

If you're going to go ahead and buy a Lomo, I'd suggest looking at ebay for a used one. I picked up mine for about US$50 and aside from not having proper Soviet batteries (3 watch batteries stacked don't seem to quite make the connection) I've never had any problems with it.

Also, I wouldn't buy anything but an LC-A. Most of the Lomo's on the lomography site are expensive pieces of crap with really bad plastic lenses (the LC-A has a nice glass lens whose coating gives a lot of Lomo-style effects to photos) If your going to buy shitty cameras to tinker with, you shouldn't have to pay huge amounts of money.

― Jacob Barss-Bailey (Jaacob), Monday, 1 September 2003 00:32 (twenty-two years ago)

one year passes...

i just got back my first roll of film from my Lomo (the one posted in the question upthread), and they're all really shitty. because of the automatic shutter speed, they're all blurry messes. i need to figure out what to do to make them look better. i don't want to be stuck using that camera only during the day.

― JaXoN Hole (JasonD), Thursday, 3 March 2005 21:01 (twenty years ago)

Keep your elbows in. Like taking a proper jump shot.

Also, buy some sticks.

― Jimmy Mod Has Returned With Spices And Silks (ModJ), Thursday, 3 March 2005 21:07 (twenty years ago)

four years pass...

http://www.1854.eu/Lomography_Gallery_Store_Interior_Shot2v700.jpg Lomography has opened its official store in London.

― James Mitchell, Tuesday, 15 September 2009 10:25 (sixteen years ago)

toy camera app on iphone is a good approximation

― cozwn, Tuesday, 15 September 2009 10:28 (sixteen years ago)

those photos are suspiciously of high quality

― Randy will be autographing copies of his fascinating autobiography (dyao), Tuesday, 15 September 2009 10:32 (sixteen years ago)

ironically I've only ever seen Lomo sold in high-end boutiques and trend stores at pretty high prices

― Randy will be autographing copies of his fascinating autobiography (dyao), Tuesday, 15 September 2009 10:34 (sixteen years ago)

I've had a Lomo fisheye for a few months and really enjoy it. I've shot about 3 rolls so far and have some fun pictures. Need to get a scanner though to get them online.

― krakow, Tuesday, 15 September 2009 10:37 (sixteen years ago)

One from a friend, from a few days ago. Red filter over the flash. Love it.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3464/3905676097_8cf30b7178_b.jpg

― or have I become completely absurd? (kenan), Tuesday, 15 September 2009 10:41 (sixteen years ago)

Need to get a scanner though to get them online.

Could one take the film to Snappy Snaps, Boots or whatever and get them put on a CD-ROM?

― James Mitchell, Tuesday, 15 September 2009 12:09 (sixteen years ago)

Don't have a Lomo or Holga, but my wife does have one of these:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3077/3161401294_a91253e646.jpg

A Blackbird Fly (or rather "blackbird, fly"), which we've still to run a complete film through. I'm hopeful I can find a lab who will overscan the negative, because one of the cute things about this 35mm TLR is that it'll shoot 35x35 square format, hence exposing right over the sprocket holes to the edge of the film.

There's nothing in Lomo imagery that you can't fake in Photoshop but I think the appeal of the camera is its inherent unpredictability. It engenders a complete different approach to digital spray'n'pray (click'n'hope?).

― Michael Jones, Tuesday, 15 September 2009 12:23 (sixteen years ago)

Need to get a scanner though to get them online.
Could one take the film to Snappy Snaps, Boots or whatever and get them put on a CD-ROM?

That one could. But I'm going to get a scanner sooner or later, so I'll save the money and wait it out.

― krakow, Tuesday, 15 September 2009 14:55 (sixteen years ago)

ooh - i like the red filter!

i was in Uruguay a while back and tried out a mock-lomo look o all the pics and think i nailed it pretty decent.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3363/3425135417_8db1706f2e.jpg

― The Cursed Return of the Dastardly Thermo Thinwall, Tuesday, 15 September 2009 20:33 (sixteen years ago)

ppl who use these things should be killed immediately

― plax (I know, right?), Tuesday, 15 September 2009 20:37 (sixteen years ago)

cameras?

― The Cursed Return of the Dastardly Thermo Thinwall, Tuesday, 15 September 2009 20:39 (sixteen years ago)

modern art museum gift-store crap

― plax (I know, right?), Tuesday, 15 September 2009 20:40 (sixteen years ago)

you're right. they are horrible people.
just horrible.

― The Cursed Return of the Dastardly Thermo Thinwall, Tuesday, 15 September 2009 20:45 (sixteen years ago)

two months pass...

I want a Lomo camera! I want something with flash so I can use it indoors, and I'm leaning towards the Holga 120 CFN since it's only $40, and a Diana with a flash is well over double. Any suggestions/recommendations? I already have a compact developing tank and will be attempting to develop the film on my own. Just need chemicals (any recommendations welcome).

Thoughts? What's the best way to get prints from 120 negatives these days?

― Udon Nomi (Stevie D), Thursday, 3 December 2009 21:32 (fifteen years ago)

Don't do it! I know, right will wish death upon you.

― & other try hard shitfests (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Thursday, 3 December 2009 22:37 (fifteen years ago)

i stand by this

― plaxico (I know, right?), Friday, 4 December 2009 00:27 (fifteen years ago)

-----i just got back my first roll of film from my Lomo (the one posted in the question upthread), and they're all really shitty

Well, that is the idea. Pretty baffling trend tbh

― The reverse TARDIS of pasta (Niles Caulder), Friday, 4 December 2009 01:32 (fifteen years ago)

buy one from eBay! don't pay full retail. have you ever held one? it's about 25 cents worth of parts.

― 囧 (dyao), Friday, 4 December 2009 01:35 (fifteen years ago)

It's like a Viewmaster basically

― The reverse TARDIS of pasta (Niles Caulder), Friday, 4 December 2009 11:27 (fifteen years ago)

http://artandmobile.com/toycamera/

― Tracer Hand, Friday, 4 December 2009 11:37 (fifteen years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.