Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
is it gay or gay-reat?
if it's a pretty clear photograph, or solid and non-fuzzy, but with all the lights happening in it, then it's gay-reat.
but if it's just a completely blurry photograph with the light all swooshy, then it's pretty gay.
made josh drunk and then he proclaimed his love for me on the public domain. he will never forgive you.
I have very mixed feelings about lomography. On the one hand, the lomo society was what got me interested a couple of years back in film photography in general and in the wonderful world of vintage/plastic cameras in particular. On the other hand, the prices are extortionate, they operate a near total monopoly on cameras like the lc-a, they are oh so self-consciously "kooky" and adopt that annoying innocent smoothies-esq "matey" corporate persona. And worst of all, the "lomo philosophy" is responsible for a lot of terrible, terrible photography. Just as bad as the bland point-and-shoot out on the lash photography that facebook is full of. And at least bland point-and -shoot photography has no pretensions to "art." Having said all that, the lomographic society has it's uses- they sell a wide range of film pretty cheaply, and the interest in film that they are generating is (partly) what is keeping film from going the way of polaroid.
but if it gets people experimenting with film and photographic expression - its all good surely!
I love my polaroids cameras (if i can ever afford the film), Holgas and LC-A! Gets you experimenting with concepts of reportage...maybe
but can rarely afford the development.
my housemate usually develops the films themselves for me at her college, but getting prints from the photos is a killer, it's like 3 quid a photo at snappy snaps, which is one of the few places i've found that'll even print medium format, and because of the nature of a lomo camera, it's rare that you get a ratio of more than 1 good photo to 3 useless ones.
can anyone point me in the direction of somewhere better/cheaper?
black and white photography, you can do developing at home, and you don't even need a dark room- a changing bag will do.
Colour is more difficult and probably not worth trying to do at home.
But even so *don't* bother getting prints from the negatives - just buy a decent scanner (eg. Epson 4490) and scan the negatives. That way you can see your pictures without having to pay for priting, and if you happen to take a particularly fantastic shot you can pay to get that sigle shot printed and enlarged from the negative.