LOMO Wonderland @ Esplanade tunnel

ckiang · 1st December 2002

Ok, I just walked past and saw the LOMO Wonderland, a "mural" of sorts made up of LOMOGraphs from all over Asia. Nothing fantastic, in fact I'd call it crap.

Really dunno what the hype/fuss/etc is about.

Those are really banal shots to me, shots of just about anything, dog, cat, dustbin, half a face, blurred shots of whatever, signboard, colours look weird too. Think even some of the newbie shots here are better. Serious!!

Seriously, I don't understand why anyone would bother to buy a $280 to do random shooting. A $20 disposable would probably do the job. Want digital? Get one of the many detachabe webcams, wala, digital LOMO. They are just as blur and all.

Just my personal opinion, so don't flame me for that.

Regards
CK

Juvelyn · 1st December 2002

according to this website, blur photos, photos of
dog, cat, dustbin, etc can be considered art?

The Art of Bad Photography:
http://www.geocities.com/badphotography2001/

YSLee · 1st December 2002

Heh, where was that thread about art? Go read Jed's comments about art, they apply here too.

1st December 2002

Hi all.

First of all, i would like to say that Lomography itself is an alternative form of photography. it's unlike your normal type of photography whereby you think so much about the composition, metering and all that. I would say that Lomography is a free form of photography, without restrictions.

Also, i feel that the spontaneous type of photography Lomo has brought about opened my eyes to things i would have often overseen in the streets. The little dog, the rubbish bin, the small little girl holding a doll in her hand.

Also, Lomo L-CA is known for its lens, which produce pictures with colour, saturated unlike normal lens.

Lomography, i would say without shame, and my personal opinion, is a class of photography itself, just like landscape photography, photojournalism etc.

I feel that being able to take pictures w/o thinking too much is pretty nice.

Just my 2 censt worth, and copying Ckiang, dont flame me hor~

Cheers,
I_AM

roygoh · 2nd December 2002

Everyone is welcomed to express what they think about LOMO photography in this thread. However, I would advice that everyone only express your own view, and not criticize another person's comments. That is about the only way to keep this type of threads flame free.

insanne · 2nd December 2002

I would rather see the fotos as an extension of the photographer's view. Photography itself is a subjective art, so I would rather call them different than crap. Crap is a very strong word, and it rather deconstructive.

Do we really need the technically correct shots, the well posed models or the proper equipments to get the shot? Do we need to go for the equipment chase to get the correct shot?

"Banallness" is a difficult art. Have you tried to make something banal look good. I dont bother. I guess if you do that it doesnt become banal anymore. I would rather see the fotos as a spontaneous reaction on the part of the fotographer. It's a proactive reaction on something so "banal" Can we afford to ignore the mundane? I would like to think that a lot of memories are made up by such banal and mundane moments and events.

the lomo mural collections are a collective works. It spans through time and work on the collective consciousness of different fotographers (in this case). I would rather see them as stories. I dont think you would want such a well posed shot for a lomo. The lomo are for shots that you had never get to shot, a stimultaneous reaction to the surroundings and enviroments, which is great since the lomo is able to capture the motions in 4 different frames on a single shot.

denizenx · 2nd December 2002

well the fujiroid instants was trying to sell the same concept of fuzzy art too... as if shooting the unclean toilet was a statement other than one about hygiene

johnsmith · 7th June 2003

IMHO, I think lomo is great... it's so relaxed compared to regular photography which has to stick to the "rules".

well i like normal and quirky photography. lomo and "normal photography is good. just keep a open mind and accept lomo as a form of art (consisting of weird and out-of-focus shots).

some times it isn't the picture, its the random patterns/effects/colours that you get on the lomo that makes it so surprising. it makes you curious to know if you screwed up the previous shot. lol.

peace out.

ckiang · 7th June 2003

Quote:

Originally posted by johnsmith
IMHO, I think lomo is great... it's so relaxed compared to regular photography which has to stick to the "rules".

well i like normal and quirky photography. lomo and "normal photography is good. just keep a open mind and accept lomo as a form of art (consisting of weird and out-of-focus shots).

some times it isn't the picture, its the random patterns/effects/colours that you get on the lomo that makes it so surprising. it makes you curious to know if you screwed up the previous shot. lol.

peace out.

What's wrong with using a regular camera and breaking the rules? You don't have to use a LOMO (or anything else for that matter) if you want to feel relaxed when shooting.

IMHO, LOMO is just some marketing hype which will die off.

Regards
CK

johnsmith · 8th June 2003

errr, lomo isn't really a marketting hype. lomo's were meant to be cheap/budget (NOT MORE THAN us$40 for a new one) camera.

the real marketting scam lies with lomo.com and if people want to buy their lomo's there then its too bad. lomo.com never said you couldn't get your lomo cams else where.

well... we've just got to accept the fact that lomo.com is making all the money while you're here saying "why didn't i think of that(referring to popularizing the russian camera and jacking up the price) first."

btw: i agree with the fact that you can use almost any camera to get blurr-ed out shots. but i like the l-ca so i admit i'm kinda biased in my reply lol

i guess its the nostalgic feeling of using old cameras.

8th June 2003

Lomography to me is abstact art and I enjoy it totally although I have to admit that half of the pictures in the Lomo year book is worthy of high admiration but the rest is hopeless crap. Heavy editing encouraged.

Like for my Holga camera, what I do find amazing is that the camera I bought(In a sealed(stapled) clear plastic) without the fanciful hyped up packaging is agreeable. But the boxed-up version with "special instructions" is 500% more. Both are identical pieces.

At least I'm glad to know that my first plastic fun Made In USA Kodak 126 camera including a roll of film in a nice box with "special instructions" whether hype or no hype was sold for only $19.90.

clive · 8th June 2003

the individual shots themselves is crap

but when they are all assembled together as a huge piece (mural)(@espnanade tunnel) then i looks better

plainsman · 10th June 2003

Quote:

Originally posted by ckiang
What's wrong with using a regular camera and breaking the rules? You don't have to use a LOMO (or anything else for that matter) if you want to feel relaxed when shooting.

IMHO, LOMO is just some marketing hype which will die off.

Regards
CK

hmm well if photography is art and art is an expression of life then lomo could also simply be an expression of how some people just don't really think so much when they capture a snapshot or a moment in time.

then one day they they look at the pictures they realise they were looking back, perhaps from a crooked neck (tilted horizon) or unsteady hands, somewhat blur (is it the passing of time that fades memories or its the inadequacy of equipment to capture or retain it perfectly?)... and were the colours that nice? (or that bad?) ... what becomes the past? a trip down nostalgia lane always yields thoughts, feelings and sometimes doubts.

if photography is meant to provoke feelings then i don't think lomo is all that bad actually.

cheerios and good day

plainsman · 10th June 2003

just to add, there is a distinct difference between the two - use of lomo as a photography tool and the marketing of lomo as a preferred/popular photography tool.

there are always the masses who seemingly try to follow what everyone else perceives is 'cool' at the moment. this herd instinct is in man since time immemorial and i think understanding it and learning to live with it can be considered one of life's lessons if one chooses to learn it...

when all's said and done its just good to know what you like and value, as well as understand that not everyone may like and value the things that you do.

cheerios

shuy · 12th June 2003

i do share ckiang's view on lomography, i believe its pretty meaningless to me. it also goes against many principles of good photography...

however, art is about individual expression imo. artists have always been fiercely individual abt creation of their art pieces cos it's purely their own piece of creativity and expression, probably for their own appreciation as well. to criticise lomo downright is harsh, but i hope the people r doing it because they truly finding meaning in taking banal pics, n not just jumping on the hype bandwagon just to be 'current'.

1st December 2002	#1
ckiang Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Singapore Posts: 6,597	LOMO Wonderland @ Esplanade tunnel Ok, I just walked past and saw the LOMO Wonderland, a "mural" of sorts made up of LOMOGraphs from all over Asia. Nothing fantastic, in fact I'd call it crap. Really dunno what the hype/fuss/etc is about. Those are really banal shots to me, shots of just about anything, dog, cat, dustbin, half a face, blurred shots of whatever, signboard, colours look weird too. Think even some of the newbie shots here are better. Serious!! Seriously, I don't understand why anyone would bother to buy a $280 to do random shooting. A $20 disposable would probably do the job. Want digital? Get one of the many detachabe webcams, wala, digital LOMO. They are just as blur and all. Just my personal opinion, so don't flame me for that. Regards CK

2nd December 2002	#5
roygoh Moderator Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Northwest Posts: 5,042	Everyone is welcomed to express what they think about LOMO photography in this thread. However, I would advice that everyone only express your own view, and not criticize another person's comments. That is about the only way to keep this type of threads flame free. __________________ As complexity rises, precise statements lose meaning and meaningful statements lose precision.

2nd December 2002	#7
denizenx Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: L2TPYSG Posts: 4,514	well the fujiroid instants was trying to sell the same concept of fuzzy art too... as if shooting the unclean toilet was a statement other than one about hygiene __________________ "I'm... dreaming... of a wide... angle~ Just like the ones I used to know~"

7th June 2003	#8
johnsmith Member Join Date: May 2003 Location: Singapore Posts: 95	i love lomo... IMHO, I think lomo is great... it's so relaxed compared to regular photography which has to stick to the "rules". well i like normal and quirky photography. lomo and "normal photography is good. just keep a open mind and accept lomo as a form of art (consisting of weird and out-of-focus shots). some times it isn't the picture, its the random patterns/effects/colours that you get on the lomo that makes it so surprising. it makes you curious to know if you screwed up the previous shot. lol. peace out. __________________ -johnsmith

8th June 2003	#10
johnsmith Member Join Date: May 2003 Location: Singapore Posts: 95	actually... errr, lomo isn't really a marketting hype. lomo's were meant to be cheap/budget (NOT MORE THAN us$40 for a new one) camera. the real marketting scam lies with lomo.com and if people want to buy their lomo's there then its too bad. lomo.com never said you couldn't get your lomo cams else where. well... we've just got to accept the fact that lomo.com is making all the money while you're here saying "why didn't i think of that(referring to popularizing the russian camera and jacking up the price) first." btw: i agree with the fact that you can use almost any camera to get blurr-ed out shots. but i like the l-ca so i admit i'm kinda biased in my reply lol i guess its the nostalgic feeling of using old cameras. __________________ -johnsmith Last edited by johnsmith; 8th June 2003 at 01:28 AM.

1st December 2002	#2
Juvelyn Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 396	according to this website, blur photos, photos of dog, cat, dustbin, etc can be considered art? The Art of Bad Photography: http://www.geocities.com/badphotography2001/

1st December 2002	#3
YSLee Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 2,262	Heh, where was that thread about art? Go read Jed's comments about art, they apply here too.

1st December 2002	#4
I_AM Guests Posts: n/a	Hi all. First of all, i would like to say that Lomography itself is an alternative form of photography. it's unlike your normal type of photography whereby you think so much about the composition, metering and all that. I would say that Lomography is a free form of photography, without restrictions. Also, i feel that the spontaneous type of photography Lomo has brought about opened my eyes to things i would have often overseen in the streets. The little dog, the rubbish bin, the small little girl holding a doll in her hand. Also, Lomo L-CA is known for its lens, which produce pictures with colour, saturated unlike normal lens. Lomography, i would say without shame, and my personal opinion, is a class of photography itself, just like landscape photography, photojournalism etc. I feel that being able to take pictures w/o thinking too much is pretty nice. Just my 2 censt worth, and copying Ckiang, dont flame me hor~ Cheers, I_AM

2nd December 2002	#6
insanne Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 149	I would rather see the fotos as an extension of the photographer's view. Photography itself is a subjective art, so I would rather call them different than crap. Crap is a very strong word, and it rather deconstructive. Do we really need the technically correct shots, the well posed models or the proper equipments to get the shot? Do we need to go for the equipment chase to get the correct shot? "Banallness" is a difficult art. Have you tried to make something banal look good. I dont bother. I guess if you do that it doesnt become banal anymore. I would rather see the fotos as a spontaneous reaction on the part of the fotographer. It's a proactive reaction on something so "banal" Can we afford to ignore the mundane? I would like to think that a lot of memories are made up by such banal and mundane moments and events. the lomo mural collections are a collective works. It spans through time and work on the collective consciousness of different fotographers (in this case). I would rather see them as stories. I dont think you would want such a well posed shot for a lomo. The lomo are for shots that you had never get to shot, a stimultaneous reaction to the surroundings and enviroments, which is great since the lomo is able to capture the motions in 4 different frames on a single shot.

8th June 2003	#11
ToMyself Guests Posts: n/a	Lomography to me is abstact art and I enjoy it totally although I have to admit that half of the pictures in the Lomo year book is worthy of high admiration but the rest is hopeless crap. Heavy editing encouraged. Like for my Holga camera, what I do find amazing is that the camera I bought(In a sealed(stapled) clear plastic) without the fanciful hyped up packaging is agreeable. But the boxed-up version with "special instructions" is 500% more. Both are identical pieces. At least I'm glad to know that my first plastic fun Made In USA Kodak 126 camera including a roll of film in a nice box with "special instructions" whether hype or no hype was sold for only $19.90.

8th June 2003	#12
clive Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 2,573	the individual shots themselves is crap but when they are all assembled together as a huge piece (mural)(@espnanade tunnel) then i looks better

10th June 2003	#14
plainsman Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 134	just to add, there is a distinct difference between the two - use of lomo as a photography tool and the marketing of lomo as a preferred/popular photography tool. there are always the masses who seemingly try to follow what everyone else perceives is 'cool' at the moment. this herd instinct is in man since time immemorial and i think understanding it and learning to live with it can be considered one of life's lessons if one chooses to learn it... when all's said and done its just good to know what you like and value, as well as understand that not everyone may like and value the things that you do. cheerios

12th June 2003	#15
shuy Member Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Alpha Centuari Posts: 242	i do share ckiang's view on lomography, i believe its pretty meaningless to me. it also goes against many principles of good photography... however, art is about individual expression imo. artists have always been fiercely individual abt creation of their art pieces cos it's purely their own piece of creativity and expression, probably for their own appreciation as well. to criticise lomo downright is harsh, but i hope the people r doing it because they truly finding meaning in taking banal pics, n not just jumping on the hype bandwagon just to be 'current'.