April 8, 2010 § 7 Comments
Used in this context it denotes the subculture, not necessarily the actual use of a lomo brand camera.
It seems to me that with the rise of cameras, everyone is getting better at taking pictures; but there are few people, photographers included, that remember how to take photos.
To me, a photo is art. And like all good art, it should follow certain rules. I’m not talking like, the rule of thirds or dominant lines (although those make for a good picture) I’m talking like soul or story. The photo, like the art piece, should share some passion with the viewer. It should imply movement, allow your brain to think and chew it over, adding it’s own implied details and questions.
Photography, as of late, is lacking this entirely. I’m as guilty as anyone else, I’m certainly not a master photographer by any means, but I’m guilty of these types of shots:
Okay. It’s a sunset. Pretty, sure, but so? Where’s the story? How does it interact with me as a viewer?
It’s a good picture, a good postcard, but a horrible photo. It’s not story telling, or soulful.
The above is similar (I tried to find another sunset, turns out they’re all bad) but brings in this drop element. What do drops do? They drip. You can see it falling off, the leaf springing up, the sound of the drip, the coolness of the water if it were to land on you. It doesn’t really tell a story, but it implies an action. The movement aspect is what engages the viewer, this is art.
So, photographers out there, smarten up.
Lomography (again, culture) is wonderful because it’s ugly technically with things out of focus or over exposed etc, but it has a soul and imperfection to it. They typically are really good at telling a story, a portrait of a homeless man or whatever. It’s just that slice of real life, being candid and natural. It’s so much better than the photoshop colour perfect crap we’ve been feeding ourselves.