A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Photo Equipment » 35mm Photo Equipment
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

More mediocrity than you can shake a stick at



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old April 6th 12, 08:33 PM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Robert Coe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,901
Default More mediocrity than you can shake a stick at

On Fri, 6 Apr 2012 09:52:43 -0700 (PDT), RichA wrote:
: http://canada.shop.lomography.com/cameras

A couple of possibilities:
1. That's all they make for film these days.
2. You blundered onto a leftover April Fool's site.

Bob
  #2  
Old April 6th 12, 10:38 PM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Andrew Reilly[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17
Default More mediocrity than you can shake a stick at

On Fri, 06 Apr 2012 16:47:19 -0400, tony cooper wrote:

On Fri, 06 Apr 2012 15:33:37 -0400, Robert Coe wrote:

On Fri, 6 Apr 2012 09:52:43 -0700 (PDT), RichA
wrote:
: http://canada.shop.lomography.com/cameras

A couple of possibilities:
1. That's all they make for film these days.
2. You blundered onto a leftover April Fool's site.

Bob


Are you joking? Those are all cameras specifically sold for lomography
enthusiasts. They each have features used by people who like this
genre.


Just checked: Flickr has 11882 lomo-related *groups*, and over a million
and a half photos tagged "lomo". So yes, they're fairly popular in
certain circles.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/lomo/interesting/

I think that some of them (photos) look pretty nice, and some of my
friends have taken great photos with them. I suspect that the sense of
achievement that must come with getting any correctly exposed frames at
all must account for some of the appeal.

Cheers,

--
Andrew
  #3  
Old April 7th 12, 02:36 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default More mediocrity than you can shake a stick at

On 2012-04-06 18:04:28 -0700, tony cooper said:

On 6 Apr 2012 21:38:08 GMT, Andrew Reilly
wrote:

On Fri, 06 Apr 2012 16:47:19 -0400, tony cooper wrote:

On Fri, 06 Apr 2012 15:33:37 -0400, Robert Coe wrote:

On Fri, 6 Apr 2012 09:52:43 -0700 (PDT), RichA
wrote:
: http://canada.shop.lomography.com/cameras

A couple of possibilities:
1. That's all they make for film these days.
2. You blundered onto a leftover April Fool's site.

Bob

Are you joking? Those are all cameras specifically sold for lomography
enthusiasts. They each have features used by people who like this
genre.


Just checked: Flickr has 11882 lomo-related *groups*, and over a million
and a half photos tagged "lomo". So yes, they're fairly popular in
certain circles.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/lomo/interesting/

I think that some of them (photos) look pretty nice, and some of my
friends have taken great photos with them. I suspect that the sense of
achievement that must come with getting any correctly exposed frames at
all must account for some of the appeal.

Cheers,


I recognize that some people like lomography and buy cameras for this
purpose. To me, they look my mistakes in regular photography.


It is not quite my idea of great photography, but I have fun playing
with some of the Lomo effects I have available with my iPhone. The
iPhone usually takes better shots than this, but as you said, some
people like the effect. ;-)
http://db.tt/o8tFegT3

No film was harmed in the production of the above shot.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

  #4  
Old April 7th 12, 07:06 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Noons
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,245
Default More mediocrity than you can shake a stick at

Andrew Reilly wrote,on my timestamp of 7/04/2012 7:38 AM:

Just checked: Flickr has 11882 lomo-related *groups*, and over a million
and a half photos tagged "lomo". So yes, they're fairly popular in
certain circles.


C'mon! You know perfectly well "film is dead".
Those numbers cannot possibly reflect any reality.

  #5  
Old April 7th 12, 02:43 PM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Robert Coe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,901
Default More mediocrity than you can shake a stick at

On Fri, 6 Apr 2012 18:36:11 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:
: On 2012-04-06 18:04:28 -0700, tony cooper said:
:
: On 6 Apr 2012 21:38:08 GMT, Andrew Reilly
: wrote:
:
: On Fri, 06 Apr 2012 16:47:19 -0400, tony cooper wrote:
:
: On Fri, 06 Apr 2012 15:33:37 -0400, Robert Coe wrote:
:
: On Fri, 6 Apr 2012 09:52:43 -0700 (PDT), RichA
: wrote:
: : http://canada.shop.lomography.com/cameras
:
: A couple of possibilities:
: 1. That's all they make for film these days.
: 2. You blundered onto a leftover April Fool's site.
:
: Bob
:
: Are you joking? Those are all cameras specifically sold for lomography
: enthusiasts. They each have features used by people who like this
: genre.
:
: Just checked: Flickr has 11882 lomo-related *groups*, and over a million
: and a half photos tagged "lomo". So yes, they're fairly popular in
: certain circles.
:
: http://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/lomo/interesting/
:
: I think that some of them (photos) look pretty nice, and some of my
: friends have taken great photos with them. I suspect that the sense of
: achievement that must come with getting any correctly exposed frames at
: all must account for some of the appeal.
:
: Cheers,
:
: I recognize that some people like lomography and buy cameras for this
: purpose. To me, they look my mistakes in regular photography.
:
: It is not quite my idea of great photography, but I have fun playing
: with some of the Lomo effects I have available with my iPhone. The
: iPhone usually takes better shots than this, but as you said, some
: people like the effect. ;-)
: http://db.tt/o8tFegT3
:
: No film was harmed in the production of the above shot.

I'd never heard of lomography until Tony replied to my comment earlier in this
thread. But I think I'm starting to get it. The stuff we submitted to the SI
"Bad Pictures" mandate a few years ago was (unintentional) lomography!

Bob
  #6  
Old April 7th 12, 03:24 PM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Alan Browne
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,640
Default More mediocrity than you can shake a stick at

On 2012-04-06 21:04 , tony cooper wrote:
On 6 Apr 2012 21:38:08 GMT, Andrew


Just checked: Flickr has 11882 lomo-related *groups*, and over a million
and a half photos tagged "lomo". So yes, they're fairly popular in
certain circles.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/lomo/interesting/

I think that some of them (photos) look pretty nice, and some of my
friends have taken great photos with them. I suspect that the sense of
achievement that must come with getting any correctly exposed frames at
all must account for some of the appeal.

Cheers,


I recognize that some people like lomography and buy cameras for this
purpose. To me, they look my mistakes in regular photography.


Some of them look better than many people do with DSLR's. But then
photography is not about the camera.

--
"I was gratified to be able to answer promptly, and I did.
I said I didn't know."
-Samuel Clemens.
  #7  
Old April 7th 12, 04:37 PM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default More mediocrity than you can shake a stick at

On 2012-04-07 06:43:09 -0700, Robert Coe said:

On Fri, 6 Apr 2012 18:36:11 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:
: On 2012-04-06 18:04:28 -0700, tony cooper said:
:
: On 6 Apr 2012 21:38:08 GMT, Andrew Reilly
: wrote:
:
: On Fri, 06 Apr 2012 16:47:19 -0400, tony cooper wrote:
:
: On Fri, 06 Apr 2012 15:33:37 -0400, Robert Coe wrote:
:
: On Fri, 6 Apr 2012 09:52:43 -0700 (PDT), RichA
: wrote:
: : http://canada.shop.lomography.com/cameras
:
: A couple of possibilities:
: 1. That's all they make for film these days.
: 2. You blundered onto a leftover April Fool's site.
:
: Bob
:
: Are you joking? Those are all cameras specifically sold for lomography
: enthusiasts. They each have features used by people who like this
: genre.
:
: Just checked: Flickr has 11882 lomo-related *groups*, and over a million
: and a half photos tagged "lomo". So yes, they're fairly popular in
: certain circles.
:
: http://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/lomo/interesting/
:
: I think that some of them (photos) look pretty nice, and some of my
: friends have taken great photos with them. I suspect that the sense of
: achievement that must come with getting any correctly exposed frames at
: all must account for some of the appeal.
:
: Cheers,
:
: I recognize that some people like lomography and buy cameras for this
: purpose. To me, they look my mistakes in regular photography.
:
: It is not quite my idea of great photography, but I have fun playing
: with some of the Lomo effects I have available with my iPhone. The
: iPhone usually takes better shots than this, but as you said, some
: people like the effect. ;-)
: http://db.tt/o8tFegT3
:
: No film was harmed in the production of the above shot.

I'd never heard of lomography until Tony replied to my comment earlier in this
thread. But I think I'm starting to get it. The stuff we submitted to the SI
"Bad Pictures" mandate a few years ago was (unintentional) lomography!

Bob


There you go!

Lomography is producing the image we work to avoid, but which some,
with deliberately scuzzy cheap equipment, and some via questionable
(but fun) post processing manage to produce.

....and then there are those who seem to produce those shots without any
cheap cameras or deliberate PP. ;-)


--
Regards,

Savageduck

  #8  
Old April 8th 12, 04:58 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Noons
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,245
Default More mediocrity than you can shake a stick at

tony cooper wrote,on my timestamp of 7/04/2012 4:30 PM:


Just checked: Flickr has 11882 lomo-related *groups*, and over a million
and a half photos tagged "lomo". So yes, they're fairly popular in
certain circles.


C'mon! You know perfectly well "film is dead".
Those numbers cannot possibly reflect any reality.


Lomography is a film genre, but many people take digital images and
apply lomographic effects to them. This is a digital image taken of
my grandson several years ago, but with a Lomo effect added in
Photoshop with a set of Lomo Effect Actions:


And of course that "proves" all the lomography forums in flickr are from digital
images...
  #9  
Old April 8th 12, 05:00 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Noons
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,245
Default More mediocrity than you can shake a stick at

Ryan McGinnis wrote,on my timestamp of 8/04/2012 1:23 PM:

I'd never heard of lomography until Tony replied to my comment earlier in this
thread. But I think I'm starting to get it. The stuff we submitted to the SI


You need to get out more -- while I'm not a Lomo shooter, it's been a rather
widespread "thing" for almost 20 years now.


What, and be away from the "expertise" of the Usenet?
Never!
  #10  
Old April 9th 12, 03:56 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Noons
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,245
Default More mediocrity than you can shake a stick at

tony cooper wrote,on my timestamp of 8/04/2012 2:11 PM:

Where do you get that? I said it is a film genre, but many people
apply lomographic effects to digital images. I didn't say "all" were
from either medium. I didn't say anything about Flickr since I don't
bother with Flickr.


I dispute your statement that "many people" apply lomographic (WTH does that
word mean?) effects to digital.
You got no proof whatsoever of that, other than wishful thinking. At best, it
is imbecile to use digital for lomography.
And if you like photography, you could do a lot worse than "bother with Flickr":
for example, you could waste time with the inbred crap on the SI?
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Join the challenge of mediocrity Ray Fischer Digital Photography 2 April 15th 09 06:51 PM
Kodak ups stakes in mediocrity war RichA[_4_] Digital Photography 31 January 17th 09 05:36 AM
As if anyone cares - more mediocrity anonomous individual 35mm Photo Equipment 14 December 30th 05 12:38 AM
Sony Memory Stick PRO versus regular Memory Stick (speed factor) eb7g Digital Photography 8 December 9th 04 11:51 PM
Differences between Sony Memory Stick & memory Stick Pro vs Memory Stick Duo? zxcvar Digital Photography 4 November 28th 04 10:48 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:07 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2022 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.