- Messages
- 1,076
- Name
- Mike
- Edit My Images
- Yes
OK, I know what it IS... well as far as any-one can.
Russian LOMO cameras, low tech, low clarity cameras, preferably of the cheapest antiquest, retro-ist kind; getting out, using it, loosing all pretentions about resolution, precision, or clarity, concentrating on the subject, seeing what you get, and if you get any bizarre effects from that camera.... rather than slating the camera for them... calling it 'charecter' and going off and seeing what you can do to exploit that 'technical defect' creatively.
This was not a novel concept, when the Lomo society was formed, or the term 'coined'.
NOW.... my Grandad died in 1997, and families being what they are, the camera he bequeathed to me, only came into my possession last year, and sorting through some 'stuff' I decided to go give it a whirl. This is incidental to the question.... except to explain my ponderings.
This camera, is Kodak Retinette manufactured sometime, probably around 1958/59ish, and was, to my Grandad, a "Wonderful Camera". He would spend many hours NOT taking photo's with it; messing with his tripod, wandering around with his light meter; peering through the accessory range-finder.... giving up.... going and hunting out a tape measure.... messing with the light meter again...... trying to round up his subjects once more who'd all gone to make a cup of tea, watch a TV program, play golf...... you get the idea!
BUT, to My Grandad with his 1950's head on; it was a prized possession. It was a 35mm camera, for a start off; which meant it was better than any of those 'old fasioned things' that used roll film, or horrible cheap and nasty things that took cartridges. 'Proper Camera' this. Precision German Engineering. an 'Expensive' camera... and for the era, it WAS.
To my mind.. this is NOT, a cheap, low-tech, inherent aboration striken 'LOMO' camera.....
So... why when I googled it, to see if I could find any hints and tips before using it.... did I find so many articles or blogs, where people referred to it so? Look at my 'Lomo gallery' all taken with $5 Kodak Retinette, or "Here's my LOMO adventure with a Retinette 1A"
Were even a couple, that clumped pictures taken with an Olympus Trip, or a Pentax K1000 as 'Lomo'!?!?!?
Is it that people don't understand what lomo is? Or has the idea now been stretched 'beyond', and encompasses almost any experimental photography on film as 'Lomo'?
So... what is Lomo?
Is it merely the philosophy or practice, of experimenting with imperfection?
Is it merely a 'style'?
Can you really make Lomo-photos in a digital dark-room?
Or should they really be created ONLY with a low-tech, aboration riden camera?
Are 'good' photo's taken with a lomo camera devoid of significant aborations, STILL 'lomo'?
Does any one have any strong opinions?
Does it really matter, as long as pictures get taken?
Whats your thoughts on the topic?
Russian LOMO cameras, low tech, low clarity cameras, preferably of the cheapest antiquest, retro-ist kind; getting out, using it, loosing all pretentions about resolution, precision, or clarity, concentrating on the subject, seeing what you get, and if you get any bizarre effects from that camera.... rather than slating the camera for them... calling it 'charecter' and going off and seeing what you can do to exploit that 'technical defect' creatively.
This was not a novel concept, when the Lomo society was formed, or the term 'coined'.
NOW.... my Grandad died in 1997, and families being what they are, the camera he bequeathed to me, only came into my possession last year, and sorting through some 'stuff' I decided to go give it a whirl. This is incidental to the question.... except to explain my ponderings.
This camera, is Kodak Retinette manufactured sometime, probably around 1958/59ish, and was, to my Grandad, a "Wonderful Camera". He would spend many hours NOT taking photo's with it; messing with his tripod, wandering around with his light meter; peering through the accessory range-finder.... giving up.... going and hunting out a tape measure.... messing with the light meter again...... trying to round up his subjects once more who'd all gone to make a cup of tea, watch a TV program, play golf...... you get the idea!
BUT, to My Grandad with his 1950's head on; it was a prized possession. It was a 35mm camera, for a start off; which meant it was better than any of those 'old fasioned things' that used roll film, or horrible cheap and nasty things that took cartridges. 'Proper Camera' this. Precision German Engineering. an 'Expensive' camera... and for the era, it WAS.
To my mind.. this is NOT, a cheap, low-tech, inherent aboration striken 'LOMO' camera.....
So... why when I googled it, to see if I could find any hints and tips before using it.... did I find so many articles or blogs, where people referred to it so? Look at my 'Lomo gallery' all taken with $5 Kodak Retinette, or "Here's my LOMO adventure with a Retinette 1A"
Were even a couple, that clumped pictures taken with an Olympus Trip, or a Pentax K1000 as 'Lomo'!?!?!?
Is it that people don't understand what lomo is? Or has the idea now been stretched 'beyond', and encompasses almost any experimental photography on film as 'Lomo'?
So... what is Lomo?
Is it merely the philosophy or practice, of experimenting with imperfection?
Is it merely a 'style'?
Can you really make Lomo-photos in a digital dark-room?
Or should they really be created ONLY with a low-tech, aboration riden camera?
Are 'good' photo's taken with a lomo camera devoid of significant aborations, STILL 'lomo'?
Does any one have any strong opinions?
Does it really matter, as long as pictures get taken?
Whats your thoughts on the topic?