I question the validly of Lomography as an art form and the place for web sites such as this in the art world.
First off is photography art? In a word, yes. However not every time I push the shutter release am I making art, indeed most of the time I push that button I am aware that this is a just a snap shot, or a pretty picture, not art. Is it craftsmanship that makes it art? There is a certain amount of “craftsmanship” to analogue photography, however the same could be said of digital photography and Photoshop. The truth is the equipment you use does not determine weather or not you have created art. So, to answer the question, Lomography can be art, however out of the approximately 4000 photos uploaded today, how could anyone consider them all art? Of these 4000 photos, how many could be considered to be “high art” (or worthy of display in an art gallery)? Is art even what people are striving for on this web site? This web site is an interesting example of the ubiquitous nature of the digital image, lets not kid ourselves, the negatives or prints are scanned to digital files to be uploaded onto this site, no matter how analogue you feel, this is digital. So were does that leave us? Since I am still trying to find my way, I will leave you not with an answer, but with a snap shot and an art shot.