Are lomography camereas good?

[Mot]

I took these photos with the Smena using some cheap Kodak colour film, the kind you'd probably find in most lomo cameras. It's been scanned using a Hasselblad X1

LOL. That's awesome. You scanned images from a $13 camera on a $13,000 scanner!

Yeah, I suppose it's quite a contrast! I see better results when I'm scanning my 5x4 transparencies! I have a cheapy scanner that's basically a lightbox and webcam inside another box but that has terrible results as can be seen below, it's been processed only to disguise that JPEG architectural goodness that I just love.I use it to check which photos are worth scanning on the Hasselblad.

Shot on the Smena and scanned with my £20/$30 scanner:

[TPF Sponsor]

[unpopular]

You have the oddest assortment of equiptment.

[Timoris]

I will always have trouble understanding Lomographers here in [neglected] Canada.

Why do you ask?

Simple, if you order film stock off the lomo website, the duty / border fees equal the amount you pay for the film in the first place. You might as well just buy it at Urban Outfitters or Lozeau, where it costs literally 25-30$ or more (taxes) for a pack of 3x36 rolls of 35mm or 120mm depending on colour, b/w, iso, regular, xpro or not.

That's not all, Red shifted film costs 50% more than regular film, even though it's the same exact stock but rolled up backwards.

Then we get to the X-Pro film. All labs I have found that do cross processing add an extra 6$. That is on top of the development and printing, which more than doubles in price (for obvious reasons) of merely printing out digital. (25¢ digital vs 68¢ 35mm colour. Calculated for 36 shots at 4x6 with 4 day printing selected) (Say 15-25$ for 36x35mm depending on location)

So, Overpriced plastic cameras instead of getting better and often cheaper metallic vintage 35mm or 120mm bodies, Overprice "speciality" film (again, for Canada), then processing and printing is more expensive than processing in a darkroom yourself.

So why on earth you would use Lomo in Canada, I have no clue. Have you seen the shots they post on the official website? It's a Waste, imo.

In the long run a cheaper, better solution would be to CHDK a cheap Canon Powershot, or even invest in a low end SLR and Lensbaby. Shoot RAW and modify in Lightroom. It's cheaper, you have more control, mistakes are undoable and you end up with better results even if your target is to make it look cheap and on the fly, you can still do that.

In no way should this be taken as condoning Lomography, they offer a certain style, like weight watchers. If you do not mind the investment, it's one way to obtain that special 'Hipster' look and feel... and call yourself a Photographer on Facebook.

[murlis]

I will always have trouble understanding Lomographers here in [neglected] Canada.

Why do you ask?

Simple, if you order film stock off the lomo website, the duty / border fees equal the amount you pay for the film in the first place. You might as well just buy it at Urban Outfitters or Lozeau, where it costs literally 25-30$ or more (taxes) for a pack of 3x36 rolls of 35mm or 120mm depending on colour, b/w, iso, regular, xpro or not.

That's not all, Red shifted film costs 50% more than regular film, even though it's the same exact stock but rolled up backwards.

Then we get to the X-Pro film. All labs I have found that do cross processing add an extra 6$. That is on top of the development and printing, which more than doubles in price (for obvious reasons) of merely printing out digital. (25¢ digital vs 68¢ 35mm colour. Calculated for 36 shots at 4x6 with 4 day printing selected) (Say 15-25$ for 36x35mm depending on location)

So, Overpriced plastic cameras instead of getting better and often cheaper metallic vintage 35mm or 120mm bodies, Overprice "speciality" film (again, for Canada), then processing and printing is more expensive than processing in a darkroom yourself.

So why on earth you would use Lomo in Canada, I have no clue. Have you seen the shots they post on the official website? It's a Waste, imo.

In the long run a cheaper, better solution would be to CHDK a cheap Canon Powershot, or even invest in a low end SLR and Lensbaby. Shoot RAW and modify in Lightroom. It's cheaper, you have more control, mistakes are undoable and you end up with better results even if your target is to make it look cheap and on the fly, you can still do that.

In no way should this be taken as condoning Lomography, they offer a certain style, like weight watchers. If you do not mind the investment, it's one way to obtain that special 'Hipster' look and feel... and call yourself a Photographer on Facebook.

As beautiful as your rant is, it is very strange to even believe to think that film from UO is good, the fact is eBay is he source of most lomographic film, I bought 11 rolls for £14 last week, which is... $22, and we Get processed photos for £6 + scansThe digital/darkroom debate will never end, but there is nothing like holding a film camera in your hands and shooting on it. I can't say anything for the holga and Diana cameras as they are nothing but overpriced plastic, still cheaper than a DSLR but for gods sake, use a real film camera!!! Witt clockwork mechanism and steel bodywork, not a toy!

[Timoris]

As beautiful as your rant is, it is very strange to even believe to think that film from UO is good, the fact is eBay is he source of most lomographic film, I bought 11 rolls for £14 last week, which is... $22, and we Get processed photos for £6 + scansThe digital/darkroom debate will never end, but there is nothing like holding a film camera in your hands and shooting on it. I can't say anything for the holga and Diana cameras as they are nothing but overpriced plastic, still cheaper than a DSLR but for gods sake, use a real film camera!!! Witt clockwork mechanism and steel bodywork, not a toy!

I have a few film Cameras, medium and 35. I compleatly agree with what you are saying. A good film camera feels very good, especially if they have a heft to them. I was ranting towards Lomos.

Heck, my Kodak Retina IIa cost me less than 50$, is metal and has more control and features than any Lomo.
I obtainned a near-mint Yashica 635 with the adapter for less than 180$! The Lomo Lubitel costs 300 and over!

I am not against film, not by a long shot. Just people investing in Lomos and portraying themselves as artsy photographers despite not knowing one lick about how cameras work. Damn upper Middle Class kids. Turning film and Geeks into a fashion.

I would not ship any film from anywhere - I'd be afraid of those heavy x-ray scanners having their way with the package.