Did this camera save the film industry?
/forum/topic/1167907/0

1
       2       3       4       end

anthonygh
Registered: Jan 09, 2006
Total Posts: 1844
Country: United Kingdom



Interesting if longish read suggesting the Lomo kept the interest in film photography going when digital capture looked like it would make it redundant and without it film would now be dead.

My take is that many photographers are returning to film anyway and most have probably never used a Lomo.....and that many photographers coming out of college are now using film alongside digital...as are many practicing fashion, art and landscape photographers.

I was interested to see in the recent BBC documentary that Klein still uses film...and a recent programme on Bailey showed him using three different film cameras.



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-20434270



eosfun
Registered: Dec 22, 2004
Total Posts: 2120
Country: Netherlands

For the greatest part the Lomo of today is a smartphone. For some who like to experiment with film, or for those who want to be part of the subculture around Lomo, it is still a nice part of life. But for everything else it's ridiculous to state the Lomo saved the film industry. It is hardly viable and even though there is place for film as a niche, most of us already found out that film is expensive, bad for our environment and too laborious and too slow in feedback on results. Film is not dead, but it has become a very tiny segment. And the film industry has already been killed for the greatest part (Kodak, Agfa, Konica, Polaroid, etc.) not being saved by Lomo. The remaining film manufacturers still have a hard time and even though I believe we have seen the bottom now I don't expect a resurrection or recovery of the film market. Definitely not coming from Lomo.



anthonygh
Registered: Jan 09, 2006
Total Posts: 1844
Country: United Kingdom

eosfun wrote:
For the greatest part the Lomo of today is a smartphone. For some who like to experiment with film, or for those who want to be part of the subculture around Lomo, it is still a nice part of life. But for everything else it's ridiculous to state the Lomo saved the film industry. It is hardly viable and even though there is place for film as a niche, most of us already found out that film is expensive, bad for our environment and too laborious and too slow in feedback on results. Film is not dead, but it has become a very tiny segment. And the film industry has already been killed for the greatest part (Kodak, Agfa, Konica, Polaroid, etc.) not being saved by Lomo. The remaining film manufacturers still have a hard time and even though I believe we have seen the bottom now I don't expect a resurrection or recovery of the film market. Definitely not coming from Lomo.


You read the complete article?

As it happens (reported by two UK photomags this year at separate times) there has been a year on year increase in world film output for the last three years despite the problems with Kodak.

I know from UK eBay prices that quality s/h film gear isn't cheap anymore...in fact I would suggest prices are maybe double what they were 3 to 4 years ago...and I am not talking about 'collectors' items but cameras clearly bought as tools.

It might be a relatively small segment of the photographic market...but I suspect, because of the nature of the people that use it.....it will remain a strong segment.



Beni
Registered: May 31, 2005
Total Posts: 8320
Country: United Kingdom

Film is saved?



Exdsc
Registered: Sep 25, 2012
Total Posts: 200
Country: Canada

This camera [Lomo] actually killed film industry because it made it appear as if the only people interested in film are artsy teenagers, and artsy-teenager-wannabe adults.



carlitos
Registered: Feb 12, 2010
Total Posts: 282
Country: United States

Here, where I live, we keep a local film processor pretty busy with B&W, color neg, and E-6 transparency work. But the bulk of his work comes from college students. Enough so that he has made a commitment to a new processor to do all 3 types of film.



carlitos
Registered: Feb 12, 2010
Total Posts: 282
Country: United States

BTW - film is refrigerated, not saved.



ricardovaste
Registered: Jan 25, 2010
Total Posts: 3571
Country: United Kingdom

No.



rattymouse
Registered: Feb 04, 2006
Total Posts: 4504
Country: China

Ilford just reported nice profits and is doing very well making film.



eosfun
Registered: Dec 22, 2004
Total Posts: 2120
Country: Netherlands

So what are you trying to say? Do you agree with the BBC journalists Ilford was saved by Lomo?



mh2000
Registered: Oct 06, 2005
Total Posts: 7596
Country: United States

Grrrr! Hate Lomo! Gave my girlfriend a nice vintage Lubitel-2 for her birthday and avoided the whole Lomo marketing scam. She is really enjoying shooting film in it now... gift of love!

Here's a piece I wrote on the Lomo years ago:

http://www.geocities.com/markhahn2000/lomo_kompakt_automat_camera.html

Some photos I've taken with one:

http://www.geocities.com/markhahn2000/waterbury_ct.html



JimUe
Registered: Mar 26, 2011
Total Posts: 476
Country: Canada

haha... that pretty much sums it up:

"Lomography is to get photos that are "so bad they're good""



woodrim
Registered: Nov 03, 2011
Total Posts: 93
Country: United States

I'm one that hangs onto the past, but even I left film for digital with no regrets. I would expect any resurgence in film will be temporary since digital is advancing at a staggering rate and will at some point pull the retreat-ers back. If not, film will die out with the generation that once used it because they're likely the ones who have gone back.



eosfun
Registered: Dec 22, 2004
Total Posts: 2120
Country: Netherlands

I would expect any resurgence in film will be temporary since digital is advancing at a staggering rate and will at some point pull the retreat-ers back. Yes, digital is out of it's infancy, but we ain't seen nothing yet. Better things are still on their way. In the current state of the global economy, innovation slows down. But expect new technologies applied in the future when economic hurdles have been taken and a new order is in the make. Film, might survive as a niche imaging media. Lomo however has no long term future; it's a hype product and most of what it does will be emulated and taken by digital photography products. For the subculture of Lomographists Instagram a.o. is a rapidly growing community that does for a great part the same thing, faster, better and more sustainable. Lomo did not save the film industry, it is the last flame of mass photography on film. A nostalgic convulsion.



rattymouse
Registered: Feb 04, 2006
Total Posts: 4504
Country: China

you cannot replicate the film process digitally. Some people enjoy slower shooting with hard, fast limitations that a roll of film imposes on them. Some people enjoy shooting medium and large format film cameras. Some people enjoy shooting classic 35mm film cameras. Some people enjoy working in the dark room. Some people enjoy the analogue qualities of specific individual films.

If the film manufacturers can figure out a way to service this small group of people profitably, then film will never disappear.

Thankfully, Ilford has figured out how to make film profitably.



Edgars Kalnins
Registered: Mar 09, 2007
Total Posts: 708
Country: Latvia

I agree with Rattymouse, film will not die. There will always be people that will love to experience this process. Look how wet plate photography has gained following recently. I only wish that research in film industry continues and they can come up with new types of film.



mh2000
Registered: Oct 06, 2005
Total Posts: 7596
Country: United States

Doubt film will die in my time, but there is a big difference between film and wet plates. Anyone with enough dedication can produce and use wet plates, but film requires precision manufacturing facilities.



JohnJ
Registered: Jul 09, 2005
Total Posts: 1992
Country: Australia

I wonder what percentage of the total production of film was purchased for and used in Lomos? Without that information you might as well argue that the Lomo also ended Communism, the Cold War, Apartheid, and world hunger.

I wonder how many are still using such cameras now that you can get the same effects much quicker, easier and cheaper on your smartphone? So has the Lomo killed film?



rattymouse
Registered: Feb 04, 2006
Total Posts: 4504
Country: China

JohnJ wrote:
I wonder what percentage of the total production of film was purchased for and used in Lomos? Without that information you might as well argue that the Lomo also ended Communism, the Cold War, Apartheid, and world hunger.

I wonder how many are still using such cameras now that you can get the same effects much quicker, easier and cheaper on your smartphone? So has the Lomo killed film?


Your theories are incoherent. One cannot credibly argue that Lomo killed communism. However, one can observe that Lomo shooters are buying film that otherwise would not be purchased. Using deductive logic, it can be reasonably stated that this is GOOD for film.

Just as you cannot completely replicate film on digital cameras, one cannot completely replicate the Lomo effect digitally.

The film store I patronize (yes, it is a 100% film store) has dozens of Lomo cameras on display and they sell VERY well according to the manager.




JohnJ
Registered: Jul 09, 2005
Total Posts: 1992
Country: Australia

rattymouse wrote:
...
Your theories are incoherent. One cannot credibly argue that Lomo killed communism. However, one can observe that Lomo shooters are buying film that otherwise would not be purchased. Using deductive logic, it can be reasonably stated that this is GOOD for film.

Just as you cannot completely replicate film on digital cameras, one cannot completely replicate the Lomo effect digitally.

The film store I patronize (yes, it is a 100% film store) has dozens of Lomo cameras on display and they sell VERY well according to the manager.


Yes. And without facts/figures my incoherent (and I might add bizzare) theories are about as strong as those that Lomo saved film!



1
       2       3       4       end