Lomo-- did it save film? From BBC News

[Sejanus.Aelianus]

Despite what some people seem to think, there is only one rule about making a photograph for your pleasure: there are no rules.

😎

 

[Pickett Wilson]

"Famous film maker blows it"

Kodak didn't realize in time that what modern shooters were looking for was crappy outdated film. Instead, they kept improving their product. Pretty dumb, huh?

 

[f6andBthere]

Before you know it we'll all be driving Lada Nivas!

 

[pakeha]

...Pretty dumb, huh?

yeah, instead of interfering in Shantou Era they could instead have brought all the old stock and joined the party...huh? 😉

 

[pakeha]

Before you know it we'll all be driving Lada Nivas!

safer than a ford pinto and better build quality than that bloody jeep cherokee i did well to get rid of😀

 

[Rangefinderfreak]

We know them in Finland: get three Lada Nivas, dismantle them, rebuild one with precision, get a good western Diesel engine and you have a durable, well functioning one with a lot of spares...

http://www.ladaniva.co.uk/baxter/Gallery/Specalist_and_Custom/index.html

http://www.nettiauto.com/lada/niva

 

[jwicaksana]

Not sure if it saved film, but it does introduce film photography to more people, my sister including, also some high schoolers that regularly buy films from me.

 

[bjornkeizers]

It's not just Lomo, but more the trend in its entirety. Instagram, lots of discussion online, etc. I started shooting film again this january. I'm 30, so for most of my adult live, I've been shooting digital.

What got me interested was the realization that digital pictures are not my pictures - the camera takes them, I'm just the idiot holding the box. This led me to doing some research, and I decided to get a Canon GIII QL17. I also discovered Lomography, but it struck me as 80% marketing hype, 20% actual photography. So rather then buying overpriced camereas, I decided to research and buy good, cheap cameras that would still take superb pictures. Like the Minox 35, Canon EOS 5, Minolta X570 - all cheaper and better then most of those plastic contraptions.

I do respect Lomography for their guts in developing their own cameras now and bringing back odd formats. If it wasn't for them, I never would've been able to buy and shoot my Pentax 110 for example. For that, i support them.

 

[ray*j*gun]

My Cherokee was the second worst car I ever owned....yuk

 

[Pickett Wilson]

"What got me interested was the realization that digital pictures are not my pictures - the camera takes them, I'm just the idiot holding the box."

And how is that different than a film camera. You can make a digital camera as dumb as a rock if you prefer that.

 

[jsrockit]

Has film been saved?

 

[NicoM]

I believe that Lomo did keep the film industry up and running. I was introduced to Lomography 4-5 years ago, when I was still a freshman in highschool. It was huge back then, even way before Instagram, or even the iphone was out in the market. Good times.

 

[JohnTF]

it's not VPut who has saved film but the Austrian art students (I'm a patriot 😉) 😀 - funny story though.

From your Avatar, you may be helping the Czechs too. ;-)

I was in Linz for the eclipse, took the train down from Prague, many on the train were coming for the event, good ice cream on the hill, eclipse weather not perfect.

Nice looking town.

BTW, got the link from Igor, though he is very happy to be an American Citizen.

I have a spring driven LOMO purchased in Prague, but it has an Industar-73 40mm 2.8, it may be recalled as it has a glass lens and it may lack the attributes of a proper LOMO?

Top is scratched, so I guess it is a "user" LOMO.

Regards, John

 

[mugent]

I think Lomography has kept film in the minds on young people, which is a great thing. film will always be attractive to some as it has an element of 'craftsmanship' to it, splashing around chemicals to get a satisfying end result is fun, and you don't need to be above 30 to get that, it's not all hipsters, it's people who want to try new things and new processes.

Digital will always be more practical than film, but film is more practical than watercolours, it won't stop folks from painting.

 

[borrel]

No, it was us!

No, it was us!

Urban legend of ignorance. Film never went away. Lomographers are a tiny group propping up a cult of vanity. First LOMO, then IMꟼOSSIBLE. Although my SX-70 has never been out of use, neither Polaroid nor IMꟼOSSIBLE have made much money on me. And yes, I admit that my interest in film waned as the first useable digital cameras became available, but my interest in film cameras re-arose proportionally with the fall in second hand prices. A lot more people can now actually afford the cameras we yearned for. My F2 is no longer alone, I use 8x11, 135, 120 and 4x5. Good scanners and printers have obviated the absolute necessity for a darkroom. So if anything has "saved film", first in line come all our "old" aunts and uncles who never trusted digital in the first place, then all the professionals who held out with medium format and cinematography until digital finally grew up, the small entrepreneurs who had the sense to see business in the pickings left by the big film producers who didn't know how to downsize, and digital itself - that left the market awash with incredible film cameras for us to pick up and use film on. Finally, companies like Fuji Film, who diversified early, made first class analog cameras, learnt to understand digital as well, and provided film - all without the ostrich-in-the-sand attitude that digital would just go away and growth is endless. And then all the other film producers and users of Eastern Europe, Russia, India, China and Japan. Without having looked at the figures, it seems the article is a curiously Eurocentric view of the importance of a vain fad. A handful of hip, overpriced LOMO shops in cool of European capitals don't make up for all the large and small camera and film shops in the cities and towns of this world.

 

[28mm]

A handful of hip, overpriced LOMO shops in cool of European capitals don't make up for all the large and small camera and film shops in the cities and towns of this world.

The key difference is that these Lomo shops are growing while the traditional shops are closing down. The ecosystem is changing, and it is arguable that Lomo once provided a "gateway" into film for people with its flashy cross-processing and and one-click simplicity. However, now I'd argue that Lomo is losing its appeal to the masses because it's being overshadowed by digital effects on smartphones.

My experience of my daughters attraction to film though is that it offers a more satisfying image making process than instantaneous moment of hipstermatic and instagram

I think that goes for all of the people who choose to shoot film. But I wonder if there are enough people to care about the experience of this process for companies to continue manufacturing film. Personally, I'm just enjoying this moment while we still have film. And considering the amount of Leica M cameras being sold on the classifieds here, it's indicative that even on RFF, we'll be shooting less film.

Surely the Instagram fills that need that George Eastman saw when he created the Box Brownie? A simple camera that people are not affraid to use and carry everywhere. Sure the results often suck in pure technical terms but we love them none the less. Photography at its most primitive but magical and satisfying.

Updated that for ya. 😉

 

[TXForester]

Has film been saved?

Some film has been saved, but much has been lost. Those rescued emulsions mentioned in the article can be bought elsewhere, so Lomography just helped boost sales. Much of the film from our past is gone.

The article said that the Lomo Society might try to buy the rights to produce some old emulsions and that would be good. But I won't say they saved film photography till they bring back Kodachrome. 😀

 

[Michalm]

I think to myself the minute Lomo crowd gets bored with film stuff the price of it will go up but it will be still manufactured like Vinyls are just in the lower volume.

 

[igi]

Urban legend of ignorance. Film never went away. Lomographers are a tiny group propping up a cult of vanity. First LOMO, then IMꟼOSSIBLE. Although my SX-70 has never been out of use, neither Polaroid nor IMꟼOSSIBLE have made much money on me. And yes, I admit that my interest in film waned as the first useable digital cameras became available, but my interest in film cameras re-arose proportionally with the fall in second hand prices. A lot more people can now actually afford the cameras we yearned for. My F2 is no longer alone, I use 8x11, 135, 120 and 4x5. Good scanners and printers have obviated the absolute necessity for a darkroom. So if anything has "saved film", first in line come all our "old" aunts and uncles who never trusted digital in the first place, then all the professionals who held out with medium format and cinematography until digital finally grew up, the small entrepreneurs who had the sense to see business in the pickings left by the big film producers who didn't know how to downsize, and digital itself - that left the market awash with incredible film cameras for us to pick up and use film on. Finally, companies like Fuji Film, who diversified early, made first class analog cameras, learnt to understand digital as well, and provided film - all without the ostrich-in-the-sand attitude that digital would just go away and growth is endless. And then all the other film producers and users of Eastern Europe, Russia, India, China and Japan. Without having looked at the figures, it seems the article is a curiously Eurocentric view of the importance of a vain fad. A handful of hip, overpriced LOMO shops in cool of European capitals don't make up for all the large and small camera and film shops in the cities and towns of this world.

You currently have the longest post in this thread but it's the one thriving with urban legends of ignorance.

First of all, you have cheaper film cameras because only a few is left to want them. That's why these cameras are in garage sales everywhere... because they are unwanted.

Second, Lomo introduced film photography to a whole new generation of kids who grew up with digital. Along with that, is the carefree attitude with film photography... clearing away the stigma that film is this precious little thing that should not be wasted. It definitely made film less intimidating... like the digicams they grew up with.

Now with these two reasons, you get new film cameras (because kids are buying lomos to replace the unwanted old film cameras) and a new market for film which shoots a lot of film and thus, buys a lot of film.

Of course nevermind the loads of crap that they shoot...it saved film 😀

 

[brainwood]

oment while we still have film. And considering the amount of Leica M cameras being sold on the classifieds here, it's indicative that even on RFF, we'll be shooting less film.

Does that not just indicate a healthy trade on film cameras ? There's clearly a market for them which means people are buying them ?