A Lomo scanner at Kickstarter for your cellphone?

[JRG]

Anyone else notice this Kickstarter project?

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects...-film-scanner#IsMySmarCompWithTheSmarFilmScan

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

I wouldn't donate a cent to them. Lomography is a profitable company, they do not need donations. Kickstarter is supposed to be a way of funding individual artists or groups of artists working together, not for profitable corporations.

Lomo has made a fortune selling junk cameras for 6 times what they're worth, let them reinvest some of that in their own business. Coming from them, this scanner will cost twice what a Nikon Coolscan 9000 does anyway!

 

[f16sunshine]

I wouldn't donate a cent to them. Lomography is a profitable company, they do not need donations. Kickstarter is supposed to be a way of funding individual artists or groups of artists working together, not for profitable corporations.

Lomo has made a fortune selling junk cameras for 6 times what they're worth, let them reinvest some of that in their own business. Coming from them, this scanner will cost twice what a Nikon Coolscan 9000 does anyway!

Yeah, I don't think you quite understand how kickstarter is being used by business and, the sarcasm is less than charming.

It's a good way to gauge support for a product idea and to get commitments from customers. Not enough commitments the project gets none of the funding (no money lost by anyone contributing).
Enough commitments and the project goes onward with those "Kicking in" Receiving value in exchange for their dollars.

In this case Lomo is offering different Dollar levels for different value.
It looks like $50 gets you the "scanner".

 

[keytarjunkie]

Coming from them, this scanner will cost twice what a Nikon Coolscan 9000 does anyway!

Now I completely agree with you that Lomography has no business making a kickstarter, but I don't think you have a clue what you're commenting on. This is a product that you can receive by "donating" $60 to their kickstarter page, and they'll send it to you (the $50 pricepoint sold out). It isn't even a scanner - it's a little holder for your smart phone, I assume with a curved lens element to focus the cameraphone closer...and a smartphone app. That's all. If they charge more than what they're asking now, I somehow doubt it will ever cost twice as much as the Coolscan 9000, which sells for $~2000+ used on ebay. So before you go making your judgemental remarks, why don't you take a look at what you're talking about.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

Now I completely agree with you that Lomography has no business making a kickstarter, but I don't think you have a clue what you're commenting on. This is a product that you can receive by "donating" $60 to their kickstarter page, and they'll send it to you (the $50 pricepoint sold out). It isn't even a scanner - it's a little holder for your smart phone, I assume with a curved lens element to focus the cameraphone closer...and a smartphone app. That's all. If they charge more than what they're asking now, I somehow doubt it will ever cost twice as much as the Coolscan 9000, which sells for $~2000+ used on ebay. So before you go making your judgemental remarks, why don't you take a look at what you're talking about.

I was being sarcastic about the price.

 

[jsrockit]

I understood that Chris. What kills me is that they are receiving cash from people. I feel the same way as Chris does... this is kind of slimey.

 

[k__43]

I second Chris' opinion too
anyway: as long as it gets people into shooting film and companies into stopping to end production of films I love, I'd bless anything.

 

[zauhar]

I think the product looks kind of interesting, but I agree with Chris about kickstarter. This is an example of a profitable company pulling in money upfront for a product that does not really exist yet, and might never exist.

This is a new 'business model' (i.e. a new way to f-ck people). I suspect it is coming out of B-schools; here in Philly the Wharton crowd is trying out this sort of thing from various angles, including kickstarter.

Randy

 

[f16sunshine]

Come on guys!

Come on guys!

Haters! So much negativity for LOMO. It's hypocritical and ignorant.
No one needs to support them but, why are they being "slimy" or "F*cking" anyone over by using this platform to launch a project?
This is a smart move for them as a trendy company. Seeking trendy "financing" from end users fits exactly in with their Lomography "Community" concept.
The Lomo group obviously knows what they are doing.
They have been around for a while now with more enthusiast coming. I think it's time to stop saying it's a trend and accept it as here to stay.
No need to be such Haters!

From the kick starter website

What's Kickstarter?
Kickstarter is a funding platform for creative projects. Everything from films, games, and music to art, design, and technology. Kickstarter is full of ambitious, innovative, and imaginative projects that are brought to life through the direct support of others.

 

[jsrockit]

f16sunshine, perhaps we just don't agree with their methods of overpricing everything they sell compared to other stores. And, since they overprice everything they sell, shouldn't they have cash to finance this project on their own as a company? I thought the spirit of kickstarter was to fund projects that would otherwise not receive funding.

How is that hypocritical?

 

[matthewm]

I'm with Chris on this one, too.

I support Lomo and what they do. They actually make some decent cameras and I think getting as many people as possible involved in shooting film is a great thing. But I like to see Kickstarter reserved for people that don't have the funding to create stuff on their own.

Lomography could build 10,000,000 of these, sell them for $50 each and still make money. Every hipster with an iPhone and a Holga 135 would be clamoring to get in the doors of their local Urban Outfitters to pay 3 or 4 times that. They don't need to "gauge the market" or figure out if it garners enough interest. They're doing this for advertising. Nothing more. I personally find it a little silly that they're using Kickstarter. They didn't use it to release their line of stupid 110 cameras. Or their new Belair cameras. Or the Diana Mini. So why now? For publicity. For marketing. It's a game. And Kickstarter obviously will make a killing off of this (don't they get like 7% or something?) so allowing a huge, multinational corporation to do a "startup" on their site makes them a ton of money.

At this point, I'd be willing to bet the next iPhone will be on there and Kickstarter will pocket an easy $2M.

Chris is right. I like Lomo, but this is kinda sketch.

 

[JRG]

I understand the view that this is "kind of slimey" and, to a degree, concur. On the other hand, Kickstarter did (apparently) approve this project. So, isn't the slime on the Kickstarter "brand" --- in a popular use of that word?

 

[f16sunshine]

How are they overpricing? Like Nike, Sony, Apple, McDonalds.... Leica?

If someone will pay the price and is happy to do so It's not overpriced.
To me it's hypocrisy to say thank you Lomo for helping save film but, I still hate you for ???? What? Succeeding as a profitable business at the same time. It's just too much hater attitude towards this company.

Here they use kickstarter to get commitments for a product they are offering at $50.
If they funded the project from their coffers... would they need to charge much more to cover their investment up front? That is what other companies do (Leica).
I see nothing slimy about doing smart business and, this mode for Lomo is obviously smart business.

 

[matthewm]

How are they overpricing? Like Nike, Sony, Apple, McDonalds.... Leica?

If someone will pay the price and is happy to do so It's not overpriced.
To me it's hypocrisy to say thank you Lomo for helping save film but, I still hate you for ???? What? Succeeding as a profitable business at the same time. It's just too much hater attitude towards this company.

Here they use kickstarter to get commitments for a product they are offering at $50.
If they funded the project from their coffers... would they need to charge much more to cover their investment up front? That is what other companies do (Leica).
I see nothing slimy about doing smart business and, this mode for Lomo is obviously smart business.

I think it's because Kickstarter is typically reserved for in-house projects from smaller companies or individuals. Not multinational corporations. Kickstarter sort of got their "kickstart" by helping small projects get funded. A friend of mine has a hand-printed poster on there right now. He needed close to $1000 to get the project underway (materials, inks, screens, frames, lights, emulsion, etc.) so he put it on Kickstarter. If not for that, he wouldn't have gotten the publicity he got or the funding and the project wouldn't have worked.

If Lomo didn't get a single backer on Kickstarter, they'd still have the funding to make their project work. Probably at a higher price point than the "early bird KS specials", but still, they could make it happen.

I think it's a little taboo that they're using a site that is sort of assumed to be for the little guys. It's not wrong... it's just a little taboo.

It would be like eating at the free soup kitchen, when you have enough money in your pocket to buy a sandwich. Just because you CAN, doesn't mean you SHOULD.

 

[thegman]

I don't think it's much like a soup kitchen, there you're taking something you don't need. Lomography is not taking anything from Kickstarter, in fact Kickstarter takes 5% of the money, so I doubt they're complaining.

The truth is Kickstarter and Lomography are both there to make money, which they will do. So who is being wronged here? Customers? Because they were offered a product at a known price, and known conditions?

I think closer to the truth is that people just like to moan about companies that they, for whatever reason, have take a dislike to.

 

[zauhar]

Andy, I don't hate them. Their products are not overpriced - after all, people buy them, which means they are not overpriced.

What I don't like is for them to seek 'investors', the payoff for whom will be a sample of the product - which will be produced if Lomo decides they have received enough funding.

It's a great business if you can get it. Apparently you can, since a lot of people have signed on. I suppose I can't blame the company if people are signing on with their eyes open, but I wonder if they really understand that kickstarter projects do not need to return anything to the funders?


Randy

 

[matthewm]

I don't think it's much like a soup kitchen, there you're taking something you don't need. Lomography is not taking anything from Kickstarter, in fact Kickstarter takes 5% of the money, so I doubt they're complaining.

It's sort of an understood rule that Kickstarter is not for big corporations.

But whatever. I agree that neither of the companies is doing anything wrong. Kickstarter will make a small fortune, Lomo will make a large fortune and hipsters everywhere will have their pocket scanner. Instagram will probably shut down sometime in April 2013 from the sheer volume of 35mm scans being uploaded from this gadget.

If you look at Kickstarter, 99.9% of what is on there are small-time productions. Music artists trying to release an album, photographers trying to release a book, machinists trying to release a unique writing instrument, etc.

Lomo has the funding to make this project happen and they have the retail outlet backing to push it (B&H, Adorama, Urban Outfitters, American Apparel, etc.). They don't need Kickstarter to "kickstart" anything. So it's just a little bit frowned upon by those that do use Kickstarter.

 

[jsrockit]

If someone will pay the price and is happy to do so It's not overpriced.
To me it's hypocrisy to say thank you Lomo for helping save film but, I still hate you for ???? What? Succeeding as a profitable business at the same time. It's just too much hater attitude towards this company.

Well, I called them slimey and I really don't care what they supposedly do for film. I am allowed to believe what I believe, believe it or not.

 

[Harry Lime]

The Lomo stuff is way, way overpriced. But they do motivate a huge amount of film sales and that's a good thing for all of us.That's all I really care about.

I'm intrigued by the 'scanner', because it looks like a dirt simple way to check negatives for picks. I realize it will be overpriced and is nothing more than a holder for the phone and negative, but I don't have the spare time to screw around and throw something together myself.

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

If anybody's great at profiting by tapping Westerners' sense of nostalgia, it's the former Soviets.