Author Topic: Lomography /Low-tech 35mm  (Read 3748 times)

LEE

  • "Shut Up Jens" - Legs.
Re: Lomography /Low-tech 35mm
« Reply #25 on: March 04, 2018, 11:39:45 pm »
We'll, since posing the original question, I've accumulated around 50 (yes fifty) film cameras!
My top limit has been £15 (including any postage) and I've not yet had one that doesn't work (although there are a few that have 'quirks').
Most are 35mm, but I've also got some 110 cameras (including the Pentax 110 SLR), a 828 Kodak bought by accident, and a small handful of 120 medium format cameras.
There's some dull plastic boxes from the 80s but some great hefty lumps from the 50s & 60s.
I've learned about dodgy photocells (and I've now got an Olympus Trip 35, and FED 50, with working cells - both have just come back from the Arctic Circle); I've also discovered the reasons to avoid cameras needing Mercury batteries (but I also took my Practika MTL5 away).
I've found a great team for processing & scanning my films (Snaps in Bournemouth).
I'm trying to stick to European cameras from now on, and am limiting myself now to cameras sold with cases.
I've learned a great deal with loads more avenues unexplored, and am having a ball!

Sent from my Moto E (4) Plus using Tapatalk

I'm fighting the addiction you seem to have acquired.

Even if you never use them you have some beautiful ornaments.
Some people say I'm self-obsessed but that's enough about them.

MikeFromLFE

  • Previously known as Millimole
Re: Lomography /Low-tech 35mm
« Reply #26 on: March 05, 2018, 06:41:25 am »
It takes N+1 to a whole new level!

Sent from my P01W using Tapatalk

Too many angry people - breathe & relax.

Gattopardo

  • Lord of the sith
  • Overseaing the building of the death star
Re: Lomography /Low-tech 35mm
« Reply #27 on: March 09, 2018, 10:46:13 am »
I have a flavour of lomo that takes 120 film. DIana?

Seems like I haven't even put a film through it.  The cost of development and printing are really high.

MikeFromLFE

  • Previously known as Millimole
Re: Lomography /Low-tech 35mm
« Reply #28 on: March 11, 2018, 01:51:36 pm »
I have a flavour of lomo that takes 120 film. DIana?

Seems like I haven't even put a film through it.  The cost of development and printing are really high.
£5 + postage both ways, for colour develop & scan to CD, doesn't seem high to me  ??? ?*
OK print costs are extra, but they are effectively the same whether the source is medium format, 35mm or digital.
* Costs from Snaps in Bournemouth (  https://www.snapsphotoservices.com/medium-format-colour-film-processing-scanning.html  ) who I regularly use as they are reasonably priced, reliable and nice people.
Too many angry people - breathe & relax.

windy

  • Sitting on a bog in the North Atlantic
    • My Instagram
Re: Lomography /Low-tech 35mm
« Reply #29 on: March 11, 2018, 01:58:27 pm »
I've played with Holgas in the past

https://flic.kr/s/aHsjtyFiJL

LEE

  • "Shut Up Jens" - Legs.
Re: Lomography /Low-tech 35mm
« Reply #30 on: March 11, 2018, 02:54:46 pm »
I've played with Holgas in the past

https://flic.kr/s/aHsjtyFiJL

I must admit that I don't get it.

I'd rather have a nice quality image that, if I wanted to, could be put through a Holga-type  filter in order to degrade it for that specific look.
I use Instagram and Snapseed a lot ... but generally on high-quality images.

Each to their own though.
Some people say I'm self-obsessed but that's enough about them.

windy

  • Sitting on a bog in the North Atlantic
    • My Instagram
Re: Lomography /Low-tech 35mm
« Reply #31 on: March 11, 2018, 04:29:57 pm »
I've played with Holgas in the past

https://flic.kr/s/aHsjtyFiJL

I must admit that I don't get it.

I'd rather have a nice quality image that, if I wanted to, could be put through a Holga-type  filter in order to degrade it for that specific look.
I use Instagram and Snapseed a lot ... but generally on high-quality images.

Each to their own though.

I use instagram

I don't understand why you'd want to degrade a quality image - as you say each to their own

LEE

  • "Shut Up Jens" - Legs.
Re: Lomography /Low-tech 35mm
« Reply #32 on: March 12, 2018, 09:09:02 pm »
I've played with Holgas in the past

https://flic.kr/s/aHsjtyFiJL

I must admit that I don't get it.

I'd rather have a nice quality image that, if I wanted to, could be put through a Holga-type  filter in order to degrade it for that specific look.
I use Instagram and Snapseed a lot ... but generally on high-quality images.

Each to their own though.

I use instagram

I don't understand why you'd want to degrade a quality image - as you say each to their own

Holga/Lomo is basically the same thing.  Taking hi-resolution film and running it through an optical "degrader" (aka a Holga camera) for a certain effect.  The difference with doing it via an App (such as Instagram) is that you still have a hi-res original to use for other looks or effects.

Frustrates me a little *, when I think about the sheer amount of detail (and potential) being lost when shooting 120 film through one.  It seems to cry out for 110 film/cameras not medium format.

* But then it's not me doing it so I'm not really frustrated.

Some people say I'm self-obsessed but that's enough about them.

windy

  • Sitting on a bog in the North Atlantic
    • My Instagram
Re: Lomography /Low-tech 35mm
« Reply #33 on: March 12, 2018, 11:00:19 pm »
As you say each to their own.

MikeFromLFE

  • Previously known as Millimole
Re: Lomography /Low-tech 35mm
« Reply #34 on: March 13, 2018, 09:42:46 am »


Quote from: LEE

Frustrates me a little *, when I think about the sheer amount of detail (and potential) being lost when shooting 120 film through one.  It seems to cry out for 110 film/cameras not medium format.

* But then it's not me doing it so I'm not really frustrated.

Indeed.
As far asI can tell it was a case of the inventors of Lomography discovering cheap (& incidentally crappy) cameras being made in China, a ready supply of inexpensive film - and they happened to be 120.

If 126 cartridges were still made then that would be a happy medium.

Lomography do sell 110 stuff at their usual mark up. I've got a few 110 cameras that all produce pretty dreadful results - I'm going to give my Pentax 110 SLR a whirl in the summer before writing it off completely.

Sent from my P01W using Tapatalk

Too many angry people - breathe & relax.

LEE

  • "Shut Up Jens" - Legs.
Re: Lomography /Low-tech 35mm
« Reply #35 on: March 13, 2018, 02:48:50 pm »

I'm going to give my Pentax 110 SLR a whirl in the summer before writing it off completely.


I bought my Wife the boxed set of Pentax 110 SLR kit (must have been about 1980).  I have some of the resultant prints from it to hand.  Bloody awful.  Not the camera's fault, just that awful concept of 110.

Remember the DISC film?  Take a crappy small 110 negative and reduce its size even further.

Good for the LowTech look though I bet.
Some people say I'm self-obsessed but that's enough about them.


windy

  • Sitting on a bog in the North Atlantic
    • My Instagram
Re: Lomography /Low-tech 35mm
« Reply #37 on: March 13, 2018, 10:29:37 pm »

windy

  • Sitting on a bog in the North Atlantic
    • My Instagram
Re: Lomography /Low-tech 35mm
« Reply #38 on: March 13, 2018, 10:34:47 pm »


Holga/Lomo is basically the same thing. 


Not exactly - Holga is a make of camera, Lomography is a style of photography using 'toy cameras' derived from  Lomographische AG.

LEE

  • "Shut Up Jens" - Legs.
Re: Lomography /Low-tech 35mm
« Reply #39 on: March 13, 2018, 10:59:47 pm »
http://www.stephenschaub.com/Image.asp?ImageID=2557345&apid=1&gpid=1&ipid=1&AKey=9LPV946V


Each to his own

Really nice, interesting, work.  Wasn't aware of him.  Not exactly low-tech though, he's pushing the boundaries with film by the looks of it (as well as some exotic printing materials).
Some people say I'm self-obsessed but that's enough about them.

Re: Lomography /Low-tech 35mm
« Reply #40 on: March 13, 2018, 11:22:07 pm »


Holga/Lomo is basically the same thing. 


Not exactly - Holga is a make of camera, Lomography is a style of photography using 'toy cameras' derived from  Lomographische AG.

Lomo is a make of camera. Lomography concentrates on the copy of the Cosina CX2 that they made. I've got access to both, and they are capable of acceptable images if used correctly.

https://www.lomography.com/magazine/92695-cosina-cx-2

windy

  • Sitting on a bog in the North Atlantic
    • My Instagram
Re: Lomography /Low-tech 35mm
« Reply #41 on: March 13, 2018, 11:34:03 pm »
My mistake/misunderstanding - the term 'lomography' now seems to be used for all lo-fi photography. I have various 'toy camera' not one bought from a 'Lomography' shop. You can pick up a plastic camera from Ebay for a 1/4 of the price.

Re: Lomography /Low-tech 35mm
« Reply #42 on: March 14, 2018, 06:29:24 am »
'Lomography' is a community like any other, but it's a commercialised one. It's possible to share Lomo Lca pictures outside the Lomography envelope.

We can compare images made using the Olympus XA family, https://www.flickr.com/groups/olympusxa/pool/page2
with those made using the Lomo Lca
https://www.flickr.com/groups/lomolca/pool/page2


Re: Lomography /Low-tech 35mm
« Reply #43 on: March 14, 2018, 01:52:20 pm »
http://www.stephenschaub.com/Image.asp?ImageID=2557345&apid=1&gpid=1&ipid=1&AKey=9LPV946V


Each to his own

Really nice, interesting, work.  Wasn't aware of him.  Not exactly low-tech though, he's pushing the boundaries with film by the looks of it (as well as some exotic printing materials).

That’s probably true, but I tend to think that’s where film is today, rather than being a simple snapshot medium. Probably I inhabit the wrong circles, though I wish I was makIng work as nice as Stephen’s!

I use my Pentax dale to ‘scan’ and an person to print, albeit currently stored while I make some room.

LEE

  • "Shut Up Jens" - Legs.
Re: Lomography /Low-tech 35mm
« Reply #44 on: March 14, 2018, 06:17:01 pm »
'Lomography' is a community like any other, but it's a commercialised one. It's possible to share Lomo Lca pictures outside the Lomography envelope.

We can compare images made using the Olympus XA family, https://www.flickr.com/groups/olympusxa/pool/page2
with those made using the Lomo Lca
https://www.flickr.com/groups/lomolca/pool/page2

The XA was a quality camera.  Those images prove it still is.

The Lomo images look very much like my Gran's holiday photos from the 1970s, double exposures and all.

When I think of Lomo images I tend to think of things like this..

(Taken on my Samsung Galaxy S7)
Some people say I'm self-obsessed but that's enough about them.

windy

  • Sitting on a bog in the North Atlantic
    • My Instagram
Re: Lomography /Low-tech 35mm
« Reply #45 on: March 14, 2018, 07:51:55 pm »
Some Holga 120 (TLR & N) images - £15 cameras off ebay choice of f8 or f11, 1/100sec exposure or bulb - no auto mode or aperture priority to help you get exposure right.

Pacific Orca - Copenhagen by ian, on Flickr

Connel Bridge by ian, on Flickr

North Beach St by ian, on Flickr

Elf, Kibble Palace, Glasgow by ian, on Flickr

windy

  • Sitting on a bog in the North Atlantic
    • My Instagram
Re: Lomography /Low-tech 35mm
« Reply #46 on: March 14, 2018, 08:11:22 pm »
'Lomography' is a community like any other, but it's a commercialised one. It's possible to share Lomo Lca pictures outside the Lomography envelope.

We can compare images made using the Olympus XA family, https://www.flickr.com/groups/olympusxa/pool/page2
with those made using the Lomo Lca
https://www.flickr.com/groups/lomolca/pool/page2

The XA was a quality camera.  Those images prove it still is.

The Lomo images look very much like my Gran's holiday photos from the 1970s, double exposures and all.



Which one is from the 'xa users group' and which from the 'lomo group'

Brussels by Artūrs Kozulis, on Flickr

Kawaii car #35mmfilm #car #stickers #olympusxa by Andrew Pinzon, on Flickr

LEE

  • "Shut Up Jens" - Legs.
Re: Lomography /Low-tech 35mm
« Reply #47 on: March 14, 2018, 10:33:30 pm »
Some Holga 120 (TLR & N) images - £15 cameras off ebay choice of f8 or f11, 1/100sec exposure or bulb - no auto mode or aperture priority to help you get exposure right.

Yebbut ..exactly my point.  These are almost well exposed, detailed, images.  I don't get the point.  What is the point of Lomo?  Is it the satisfaction of actually getting any image?

The final car image is catastrophically awful.  If you are a fan of this image then my Gran has a caseload of such crap.  The other images could all have been improved with a better camera.  A crap camera adds nothing, in my opinion of course, to these images.

OK, some Lomo/Holga is beautiful..but nothing that can't be created in "photoshop".

Why Lomo?  Why not Smartphone?  Why an overpriced and laborious process for a (technically) low quality image?*

* That can be reproduced effortlessly with a phone.

Some people say I'm self-obsessed but that's enough about them.

David Martin

  • Thats Dr Oi You thankyouverymuch
Re: Lomography /Low-tech 35mm
« Reply #48 on: March 14, 2018, 11:55:22 pm »

OK, some Lomo/Holga is beautiful..but nothing that can't be created in "photoshop".

Why Lomo?  Why not Smartphone?  Why an overpriced and laborious process for a (technically) low quality image?*

Because it is the journey, not the destination that matters. For the same reason I want to play with ferricyanide and salt prints.
"By creating we think. By living we learn" - Patrick Geddes

windy

  • Sitting on a bog in the North Atlantic
    • My Instagram
Re: Lomography /Low-tech 35mm
« Reply #49 on: March 15, 2018, 10:20:43 am »
Some Holga 120 (TLR & N) images - £15 cameras off ebay choice of f8 or f11, 1/100sec exposure or bulb - no auto mode or aperture priority to help you get exposure right.

Yebbut ..exactly my point.  These are almost well exposed, detailed, images.  I don't get the point.  What is the point of Lomo?  Is it the satisfaction of actually getting any image?

The final car image is catastrophically awful.  If you are a fan of this image then my Gran has a caseload of such crap.  The other images could all have been improved with a better camera.  A crap camera adds nothing, in my opinion of course, to these images.

OK, some Lomo/Holga is beautiful..but nothing that can't be created in "photoshop".

Why Lomo?  Why not Smartphone?  Why an overpriced and laborious process for a (technically) low quality image?*

* That can be reproduced effortlessly with a phone.



Sorry, I'm only just starting to understand what your saying - Yes (for me) it's the capture, not knowing what you've got until you develop the film and scan the negatives (I don't have a dark room to do processing). Outside of cropping, contrast and level adjustments, and desaturation I rarely do any digital processing (not even with digital images).

I like David's comment about it being 'the journey not the destination'.