• Lomography - Film cameras aint' so bad after all
    124 replies, posted
[QUOTE=dgg;25549315]Still life is quite often still. Trees ain't still, people ain't still, but buildings and landscapes are. I don't see why you wouldn't want to carry with you a tripod anywhere you go when you take with your camera in the first place.[/QUOTE] Landscapes usually consist of moving grass, moving trees, moving bushes, moving animals... And I don't drag with me anything that I don't really need. Even with 2 lenses it often feels I have 50% too much. Sure, I sometimes might take a tripod when just driving with a car very late and composing those regular dull landscape-pictures. With digital cameras you can push the iso to 400 or 800 and still have perfect results even in low light. [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/49599407@N03/4944377251/][img]http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4096/4944377251_72c2bcf117.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/49599407@N03/4944377251/]Little road, and the big brother[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/49599407@N03/]OM-1n[/url], on Flickr This is one of those pictures that I made with a tripod underneath the camera. [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/49599407@N03/4863493771/][img]http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4138/4863493771_cc9ec1bd8d.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/49599407@N03/4863493771/]3/365[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/49599407@N03/]OM-1n[/url], on Flickr This one on the other hand I didn't have tripod, climbing 20 metres of rock wall and having 10cm of foothold and a 200m drop to the mines doesn't really make you want to carry a fucking tripod. (and 5 lenses and a spare body and all other useless shit) By the time you have set your tripod up, I have taken 3 pictures and weren't restricted with the few lousy angles a tripod offers. And if the horizon is few degrees to the side, I just straighten it at the same time I crop the picture, big whoop.
Yes evilking, your pictures are lovely. We get that. We got it. Oddly enough, not everyone likes what you do. I'm a lover of the old 1910 films and the German expressionist movement around at the time, alot of the films were made with all these weird affects and it offers a very interesting perspective. 'Hispter' is just a movement combining elements from the past that people label themselves as, much like being a 'geek'. It's non-existent bullshit that people need to get over themselves.
[QUOTE=MrEndangered;25550102]Oddly enough, not everyone likes what you do. 'Hispter' is just a movement combining elements from the past that people label themselves as, much like being a 'geek'. It's non-existent bullshit that people need to get over themselves.[/QUOTE] What a shocker. Almost all lomo-shots I've seen on the internet or made by friends are boring hipster shit with people having stupid faces etc. You could try posting some good ones you have seen, you know, like to keep the discussion going on instead of it turning into a circlejerk. A hipster with a lomo and glasses with huge frames and a single speed bicycle with pastel colour is still a hipster
[QUOTE=evilking1;25550277]What a shocker. Almost all lomo-shots I've seen on the internet or made by friends are boring hipster shit with people having stupid faces etc. You could try posting some good ones you have seen, you know, like to keep the discussion going on instead of it turning into a circlejerk. A hipster with a lomo and glasses with huge frames and a single speed bicycle with pastel colour is still a hipster[/QUOTE] Did you just ignore my post and then compare German expressionists to 'hipsters'? Rated you tool for being a tool.
[QUOTE=MrEndangered;25550845]Did you just ignore my post and then compare German expressionists to 'hipsters'? Rated you tool for being a tool.[/QUOTE] Jeeze, try to read my post and then yours, and then not get butthurt. I didn't compare your precious German expressionists to anything.
[QUOTE=evilking1;25550277]A hipster with a lomo and glasses with huge frames and a single speed bicycle with pastel colour is still a hipster[/QUOTE] yeah just like someone with a lomo camera who is not a hipster is stil not a hipster. seriously don't assume you know the personality of everyone ever who has a lomo camera
[QUOTE=BassB;25552117]yeah just like someone with a lomo camera who is not a hipster is stil not a hipster.[/QUOTE] yeah, makes sense
calling it LOMOgraphy is so pretentious. Because they are fucking LOMO cameras. These aren't GOOD film cameras. These are overly expensive pieces of shit. Buy a Nikon or a Canon from the 1980's those are REAL SLR cameras. These are just weird looking cameras that have negligible image quality.
[QUOTE=evilking1;25551943]Jeeze, try to read my post and then yours, and then not get butthurt. I didn't compare your precious German expressionists to anything.[/QUOTE] I'm a toooool. Repeat after me.
[QUOTE=MrEndangered;25553918]I'm a toooool. Repeat after me.[/QUOTE] You can PM me your off-topic hatred, but try to keep on topic or at least reason your posts.
Why must film cost so much to develop? I have 6 rolls sitting at home waiting, although I'm not going to pay what I did last time... ($16 or so for 36 exp...)
[QUOTE=Killerelf12;25554116]Why must film cost so much to develop? I have 6 rolls sitting at home waiting, although I'm not going to pay what I did last time... ($16 or so for 36 exp...)[/QUOTE] Develop it yourself, or send it through the mail to a cheap developer.
[QUOTE=Trogdon;25552790]calling it LOMOgraphy is so pretentious. Because they are fucking LOMO cameras. These aren't GOOD film cameras. These are overly expensive pieces of shit. Buy a Nikon or a Canon from the 1980's those are REAL SLR cameras. These are just weird looking cameras that have negligible image quality.[/QUOTE] yes because clearly photography is all about the price and quality of your equipment and nothing else
[QUOTE=Doriol;25554636]yes because clearly photography is all about the price and quality of your equipment and nothing else[/QUOTE] those SLR:s cost the same as lomos though
[QUOTE=evilking1;25555086]those SLR:s cost the same as lomos though[/QUOTE] that's not exactly my point though
I love photography; I hate photographers. This thread. Stop arguing.
[QUOTE=evilking1;25549841] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/49599407@N03/4944377251/][img_thumb]http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4096/4944377251_72c2bcf117.jpg[/img_thumb][/url] [/QUOTE] Wait, that looks just like the first level on Dark Carnival, lemme find a pic... [img]http://www.worldofleveldesign.com/categories/left4dead2_mapping/images/visual-gameplay-guide/072-left4dead2-campaign.jpg[/img] When you exit the highway, ^see pic, and if you then turned around to look back where you came from... am I right?
My analog camera's, like the Diana the most, it's too expensive though. [IMG]http://i54.tinypic.com/wv252s.jpg[/IMG] The 2nd from the left and the 1st from the right where €3,- , the 3rd one from the left was free. I like the Diana mini the most because of it's size, i can take it everywhere with me, and when the light is just right get shots like this: [IMG]http://i51.tinypic.com/30ub67m.jpg[/IMG]
What OLY is that
[QUOTE=evilking1;25549841]Landscapes usually consist of moving grass, moving trees, moving bushes, moving animals... And I don't drag with me anything that I don't really need. Even with 2 lenses it often feels I have 50% too much. Sure, I sometimes might take a tripod when just driving with a car very late and composing those regular dull landscape-pictures.This one on the other hand I didn't have tripod, climbing 20 metres of rock wall and having 10cm of foothold and a 200m drop to the mines doesn't really make you want to carry a fucking tripod. (and 5 lenses and a spare body and all other useless shit) By the time you have set your tripod up, I have taken 3 pictures and weren't restricted with the few lousy angles a tripod offers. And if the horizon is few degrees to the side, I just straighten it at the same time I crop the picture, big whoop.[/QUOTE] Moving grass, trees and bushes aren't a problem when taking landscape shots because they're usually so far away it doesn't matter. Seldom you would want animals in your landscape shots too. You've never heard of Gorilla tripods (or whatever the fuck those were called)? Small tripods you can pretty much put in your pocket and place on top of a door, at the edge of a house or anywhere you can make it tighten it's three feet. Basically I can take a shot almost as fast as you with almost all the same angle abilities, but with more perfection in terms of reduced shake and possible fuck ups and I also have the possibility to take long exposure shots without making it one big blur.
I have a Gorillapod, it's awesome.
I shoot with a F90x [url]http://www.camerahobby.com/Review-F90x.htm[/url] Can anyone recommended a good film scanner? [editline]23rd October 2010[/editline] [QUOTE=Doriol;25537876]The amount of smug in this thread is unbelievable. Just because hipsters do something doesn't mean you'll magically become one if you do it yourself. Film photography is nice and very rewarding if you develop your own techniques and styles, and you never quite know how your photos will turn out until you get them developed or develop them yourself. It's much more intimate than simply snapping a picture with a DSLR and seeing it on your LCD right away. Also, It doesn't matter what film or camera you use, nor does it matter why. Get the fuck over yourselves (not talking about everybody in this thread).[/QUOTE] I've been following you for quite a while, all you do is moan and bitch. It's an internet forum, get the fuck over yourself.
[QUOTE=codenamecueball;25537888]iirc in a test done between two photos one on an top end DSLR and a top end [U][B]35mm camera[/B][/U], the DSLR came out top when they scaled them up to the side of a building. But yeah, people shoot movie on film because it looks better than can be scaled up on the big screen with perfect clarity.[/QUOTE] There's your problem, they should have done it with 120 film. [QUOTE=codenamecueball;25533612]i have a pentax me super SLR, really taught me the joy of film, i love it. I wish I could try the multiple exposures thing but i have to wind on[/QUOTE] Gets old really fast. [IMG]http://i52.tinypic.com/14xz5t4.jpg[/IMG]
The Diana gives very warm kind of photos. The colours are vibrant in the light and muted in the shadows. It's a rather lovely look
[QUOTE=Doriol;25554636]yes because clearly photography is all about the price and quality of your equipment and nothing else[/QUOTE] No photography is about pictures, which these cameras do a shit job of doing. I picked up a Canon AE-1 Program SLR for $11 at goodwill. This is an example of the pictures it can take [img]http://ic2.pbase.com/g6/50/291550/2/80015388.EPBS5wsw.jpg[/img] [img]http://i.pbase.com/g4/31/818131/2/92083773.Y827dcoG.jpg[/img] See how this camera takes pictures that don't look like shit? Film quality is amazing, but with cameras like these you won't ever get shots like this, and you will spend more (and not to mention not get versatility, you can't change lenses). These "lomography" cameras are glorified disposable cameras, with about the same image quality.
image quality doesn't matter unless you're a commercial photographer. and even then there are some circumstances where it does not
[QUOTE=Doriol;25631262]image quality doesn't matter unless you're a commercial photographer. and even then there are some circumstances where it does not[/QUOTE] but it's still fun to know if the picture is about the nipple of Sarah Palin or a rural landscape on the Moscow outskirts.
[QUOTE=Doriol;25631262]image quality doesn't matter unless you're a commercial photographer. and even then there are some circumstances where it does not[/QUOTE] so hey let's just buy nikon coolpix cameras for $50 used and liek 7 megapixels because that's like better than a DSLR because image quality doesn't matter xD
[QUOTE=dgg;25572427]Moving grass, trees and bushes aren't a problem when taking landscape shots because they're usually so far away it doesn't matter. Seldom you would want animals in your landscape shots too. You've never heard of Gorilla tripods (or whatever the fuck those were called)? Small tripods you can pretty much put in your pocket and place on top of a door, at the edge of a house or anywhere you can make it tighten it's three feet. Basically I can take a shot almost as fast as you with almost all the same angle abilities, but with more perfection in terms of reduced shake and possible fuck ups and I also have the possibility to take long exposure shots without making it one big blur.[/QUOTE] Well it's a matter of taste and composing of the picture, but sometimes I think that an animal in the right place might bring that something to landscapes that would otherwise look slightly dull. And I have heard, I've had one of those smaller ones, just couldn't ever put it anywhere decent to take a shot, and moving it around while mounted was just plain awful, so I switched to Slik tabletop tripod, especially after shooting some video clips. Although I haven't really figured out where to really mount it while taking pictures on the move... My camera goes to Iso 12,800 and lens goes down to 1.8 so light is not so big deal lol.
I wish I could buy film :( It's illegal for stores to sell film here, because it's been used for arson. It ignites easily.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.