Here is the BBC article from 2012
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-20434270
"Did the Lomo camera save film photography?"
What the writer did not mention is that the Lomo is copy of a Cosina camera.
No Cosina camera, No Lomo camera, No Lomography.
OK, I think the BBC gave a bit too much credit to film's popularity to Lomo,
still, Lomo sold an unbelievable amount of film cameras and film!
Stephen
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-20434270
"Did the Lomo camera save film photography?"
What the writer did not mention is that the Lomo is copy of a Cosina camera.
No Cosina camera, No Lomo camera, No Lomography.
OK, I think the BBC gave a bit too much credit to film's popularity to Lomo,
still, Lomo sold an unbelievable amount of film cameras and film!
Stephen
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
It amuses me that a camera with all the issues that a Lomo has ... light leaks, vignetting etc not to mention using colour reversal film, can capture the imagination of all sorts of photographers and have them 'oohing' and 'ahhing' at everything the plastic box with it's crap lens can produce!
Poor old Leica produces a camera with a sensor that delaminates and provides every bit as sh!tty an image that a Lomo can ... and we complain and go wimpering back to our DSLRs and mirrorless compacts!
Go figure?
Poor old Leica produces a camera with a sensor that delaminates and provides every bit as sh!tty an image that a Lomo can ... and we complain and go wimpering back to our DSLRs and mirrorless compacts!
Go figure?
tunalegs
Pretended Artist
I would wonder, would Cosina really want that sort of credit? :angel:
JoeV
Thin Air, Bright Sun
It amuses me that a camera with all the issues that a Lomo has ... light leaks, vignetting etc not to mention using colour reversal film, can capture the imagination of all sorts of photographers and have them 'oohing' and 'ahhing' at everything the plastic box with it's crap lens can produce!
Poor old Leica produces a camera with a sensor that delaminates and provides every bit as sh!tty an image that a Lomo can ... and we complain and go wimpering back to our DSLRs and mirrorless compacts!
Go figure?
Well, obviously Keith that's because those who bought troublesome Leicas paid thousands, while Lomo owners spend far less, have less invested at stake.
As for Lomos, I own a few myself. My biggest complaint is lack of exposure control. No, I don't have the LC-A (the Cosina copy), they're overpriced compared to used cameras of far better quality, but the cheaper Lomos only give you two apertures and one shutter speed (I don't count bulb as a true shutter speed, despite Lomo's advertising to the contrary). The biggest thing Lomo could do to improve their cameras is a real multi-speed leaf shutter module.
Alas, my Lomos also function properly and have no light leaks, so in that regard they're pretty reliable.
~Joe
NeeZee
Well-known
Well, Lomo probably helped keeping film affordable and available. I just wish they wouldn't promote cross processing (a.k.a 'the film crowd's HDR') because it's a waste of beautiful slide film and I hate to watch the E-6 process dying.
DominikDUK
Well-known
Please people stop calling the lomographic society LOMO. Lomo makes and made great phototechnical products some of them would make Leicas look like a cheap toys.
The lomographic society acknowledges the paternity of the LOMO LC see http://www.lomography.com/magazine/94178-lc-a-big-book-chapter-80-the-forefathers-of-the-lomo-lc-a
The Cosina was more than a little inspired by the Minox Gl so the Lomographic society should credit them as well imo.
The lomographic society acknowledges the paternity of the LOMO LC see http://www.lomography.com/magazine/94178-lc-a-big-book-chapter-80-the-forefathers-of-the-lomo-lc-a
The Cosina was more than a little inspired by the Minox Gl so the Lomographic society should credit them as well imo.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
"Nervous time for film photography in 90's"
This statement is stupid to me. Maybe in UK, but for where I was film was dominant through all of the 90's. My family only switched to digital in 2007, simply because of demand for more frames for less money, while film was widely available.
No, LOMO, didn't saved the film, because it was safe in 90's
This statement is stupid to me. Maybe in UK, but for where I was film was dominant through all of the 90's. My family only switched to digital in 2007, simply because of demand for more frames for less money, while film was widely available.
No, LOMO, didn't saved the film, because it was safe in 90's
gb hill
Veteran
Keith you sound like one of those 'Leica Snobs' who think photography has to be tack sharp & perfect.It amuses me that a camera with all the issues that a Lomo has ... light leaks, vignetting etc not to mention using colour reversal film, can capture the imagination of all sorts of photographers and have them 'oohing' and 'ahhing' at everything the plastic box with it's crap lens can produce!
Poor old Leica produces a camera with a sensor that delaminates and provides every bit as sh!tty an image that a Lomo can ... and we complain and go wimpering back to our DSLRs and mirrorless compacts!
Go figure?
Photography is, or should be fun. Light leaks, vignetting, etc is interesting. & I love my 'crappy' plastic lens on my Holga. I'm starting a project with my Holga soon. I'm going to set it on a tripod & take portraits of people on the street. My friend owns a vinyl record store & his bench will make an interesting backdrop. Who knows what the results will turn up but that's going to be the fun of it.
burancap
Veteran
SAVE is a big word. I don't think the media has reached a level of needing salvation, yet. That said, it will be a great day when I see a new Fotomat going up in my closest Piggly Wiggly parking lot.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Quite. But over-dramatized articles by people who don't quite know what they are talking about are a regrettably but perennially successful form of click-bait.
Cheers,
R.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
You don't need to be a "Leica snob" to believe in conventional photographic quality: merely mainstream. Of course there is room for imperfect photography. Some of it is even quite good. But branding anyone who wants sharp pics without light leaks as a "Leica snob" is an odd form of inverse snobbery.Keith you sound like one of those 'Leica Snobs' who think photography has to be tack sharp & perfect.
Also, there are plenty (me among them) who do not regard overpriced, trendy, defective-out-of-the-box cameras as "fun". A second-hand Lyubitel (I have two, one free, the other having cost me £2/$3) is from my point of view much more fun.
Cheers,
R.
gb hill
Veteran
This is posted in today's Facebook group Film Is Not Dead. Also APUG is alive & doing well. Sean does a great job with it. We who buy film & shoot film are saving analog photography. There are many Google+ film groups & most of the shooters are young, grew bored with digital & are excited about analog photography. Lomo is only a small part of the equation.
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-32337778
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-32337778
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Huss
Veteran
The 1 hour photo for film processing at my local Costco has a 4 day wait. It's been like that for weeks now. The worker bees there (a great team that has done me right so many times - John, Nas, Frank, Dennis, Ashantay, Ingrid ) are frazzled with the work load.
Film is definitely not dead!
Film is definitely not dead!
Solinar
Analog Preferred
That's good to hear. There's a dearth of competent film processing where I live. So, the remaining two camera shops in my part of town are usually pretty busy.
15 years ago, every Walgreens and CVS pharmacy had in-store processing. Even the local grocery store had in-store Fuji processing back then. Now, those operations are extinct.
Huss
Veteran
I think places like Walgreens and CVS actually were the reason in the decline of film photography. Their employees are paid really poorly and treated as such, so they could not care less about the quality of their work. Film/pictures that I got back from those places were so bad that it dissuaded you from photography. If you could crap results (through no fault of your own), why would you want to continue? Especially with digital photography becoming available.
Costco pays its employees really well, they are happy, they have pride in what they do. I think this is also reflected in the independent film processors that are left. So you get decent results, which makes you want to use more film.
Judging by their traffic, it seems that the word has got out.
Kent
Finally at home...
One must not confuse "Lomo" with "Holga".
Huss
Veteran
And now they are gone... i did not matter to mgmnt how many people used the film services at my local Costco, they decided that nationwide all Costcos should offer the same services. So, no more film processing at mine.
:bang:
Godfrey
somewhat colored
"Did the Lomo camera save film photography?"
Likely not.
G
Likely not.
G
Huss
Veteran
I disagree. Just got to the lomography website and see the huuuge fan base.
Their community has uploaded over 12 million photos to the site so far! That is 12 million film photos.
No-one else, neither Leica, Nikon, Zeiss etc etc has recently promoted film photography like them. And to save film they did it by not appealing to us old crusty farts, but to the young crowd that matters for the future of film.
Make it fun, cheap, hip and cool. Embrace the flaws and have fun with it!
Sounds better than pixel peeping and moaning about sensor flaws doesn't it?