Why Holga?

The second pic is my dog Dallas after our snow storm last night. She doesn't like snow.....a great dog lol. The first pic was shot through my window to add still more haze.
 
Last edited:
+1 for Holga's positive influence on film sales.
+1 for enjoying the Holga now and then (once or twice per year).
+1 for not becoming emotional over another stranger's camera preference

why not holga?
81.jpg
 
All cameras are toys.
Unless you happen to be one of the very small percentage of paid professional photogs here.

Assuming you're not a professional, Photography should be about having fun and documenting the world around you in your own way.
I can tell you that I have just as much fun making pictures with my Diana or my Lomo LC-A as I do with one of my Leicas or Nikons.
They all have their place.

flamer.jpg



hd.jpg



foys.jpg
 
taskoni said:
You are right Steve, some people can really do it! It will be lovely if you can post some of your Holga pictures.
Click to expand...

I don't have any Holga pictures, but I think its an credibly narrow minded attitude to think that instinct isn't a part of pre-visualisation. Where would the worlds reportage photographers be if they didn't anticipate the action and be ready for it without the need to ask everybody to hold still while they frame it? Reportage pictures are often taken 'on the hoof' without precise framing. So what is different about doing that with a Leica or a Holga?

But while you ask 'where are my Holga pictures?', I do have a link to some of my photographs at the end of my posts. Its only right that if I have an opinion I try to back it up with something. Would you agree? From what you are saying and doing it appears you have bought into the Leica dream world of hard core serious photographer without having anything much to back it up with. Clearly that must be wrong or you wouldn't suggest it. A link to your work, any work, would be nice?

Steve
 
I have an advantage because Perry Dilbeck told me why he shot "Last Harvest" with Holgas.

I will say the work is excellent, not because of the Holga image quality, just great photography. It could excellent shot with any camera. And Perry is very capable shooting with any camera and owns everything. (He is a photo instructor at Art Institute of Atlanta)

All this photography was done right around where he grew up. "Butterbean" owned the farm next to his family's farm.

Perry said using Holgas gave him a different mind set when photographing. Nothing technical or relating to image quality at all. Just a different way of thinking. Everyone here is off thinking technical things. But the real answer is as simple as the camera influencing the way the photographer interprets the subject.

taskoni said:
And BTW, what you think is so special about The Last Harvest shots that are shot with Holga?
You can get the same or better pictures with normal film camera. I don't see any advantage or superiority over any normal camera in any way... The look is not so special - something you can do in the dark room, no?
What would be your reason of using Holga for traditional photography? Cheap?
Click to expand...
 
It's just about getting different look isn't it? I don't see how using a Holga is so different from using a Thambar or similar, some people will like the look some won't. If ultimate quality is the aim, then we wouldn't shoot roll film at all.
 
Phantomas said:
On a related note - I don't use Holga or any other toy camera since I got an iPhone (and Hipstamatic). Rendered them redundant.
Click to expand...
?? What has one to do with the other ? Beside the fact, that Holga was born redundant, how much more redundant it can get in the face of virtual hipstamatic ? Film is a film, with any digital capture good operator of PS can do any fantasy.
 
Bob Michaels said:
I have an advantage because Perry Dilbeck told me why he shot "Last Harvest" with Holgas.

I will say the work is excellent, not because of the Holga image quality, just great photography. It could excellent shot with any camera. And Perry is very capable shooting with any camera and owns everything. (He is a photo instructor at Art Institute of Atlanta)


Thanks for pointing us to Perry Dilbeck, I bought his book 🙄
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Few years ago I did not understand Holga or any other Lomography stuff. I did not understand why people liked pictures that where out of focus or that had colors all wrong. I was all about technical stuff, everything had to be perfect from light to exposure to colors and all that.

Then I went to art school. I was very prejudice about art and thought the only art that was good where paintings that looked like photographs. Soon I learned that anyone can learn how to do that, just like photography anyone can learn the tech behind it. Then I learned that all those surealists and abstract painters could also paint what I felt where perfect paintings but choose to experiment with the art and simplify things. Thats where it hit me, I could do that with my photography.

Using a camera with a lot of limitations also gave me a lot of options. Being able to throw all that tech stuff away and consitrade on other things in my photgraphy really changed me as a photographer.

Today I love Holgagraphy and Lomography and it has given me a new enjoy in photography. I did not totally made a switch thoug, I still shoot other stuff and look forward to own a Leica again 😉

It took me some time to realize that its not the gear that gives the good picture, it is the photographer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom