Excuse Me? WTFrikkinFrakk is That I Hear...DIGITAL!!!??!!! On Lomography Dot Com?!? NO FRIGGIN WAY!!!!!

Credits: koduckgirl
On Lomography Dot Com there is an unfortunate double standard here; A. There is a huge community of amazing anologue photography fanatics really into photos and cameras as a love interest and hobby and artform and B. The shop that only really cares about selling selling selling to this community and then there is C. The very tiny part that crosses over into both which make the heart of the shop that cares for the art of the community and the continuation of the supply for analogue…FOREVER!

But it is only a matter of time before 20 and 30 somethings think ‘oh yeah anologue was fun but lomo also does digital and that is less expensive and my Petzval lens fits on my digital Nikon and that is even cooler and more practical use of such an expensive lens so back to digital I go. OH NO…WHAT WERE THEY THINKING?!?
I mention 20 and 30 somethings because they are getting into analogue in the digital age and could be persuaded off the fence because of costs and life distractions like work and university fees etc as opposed to 40, 50, 60 and abovers who were doing analogue back in the 60’s and 70’s when that was what it was and are now very very happy to have it back and readily available at no matter what cost and are very very EXTREMELY ANNOYED at Lomography Dot Com for letting digital on this site and thinks making the Petzval Lens able to fit on a DSLR Nikon and Canon was their FIRST mistake!!

written by koduckgirl on 2013-11-20


  1. avola
    avola ·

    I fully and sadly agree here .......

  2. kelvin_wx
    kelvin_wx ·

    I could not agree with you more, I stand by your side for always

  3. kelvin_wx
    kelvin_wx ·

    Petzval is a very very bad start..

  4. slobill
    slobill ·

    As soon as it was available, I set on the 'exclude digital from search' option. When I want to look at digital pictures, I can look at Flickr. Disappointing even so.

  5. koduckgirl
    koduckgirl ·

    Yes digital has whatever merits it has and I shot half my trip with my iPhone and am very glad I did but that said do I post them here? NO! That is what Eyeem and Flickr are for! I only post shots straight from the camera on here! I thght LomoDotCom was trying to encourage the 'future is analogue' not 'if you can't beat digital, join it!' makes me think of that song Digital killed the Photographer or was it radio star well you get my drift ha ha thanx for looking and commenting @slobill @kelvin_wx @avola

  6. chippo
    chippo ·

    what can we expect of people that only cares about money?

  7. kelvin_wx
    kelvin_wx ·

    i think that @chippo has got the very point. money always comes to the fucking first.

  8. koduckgirl
    koduckgirl ·

    Yeah that's why we always say the lomo "brand" he he I always said I don't want to do photography as a job profession like wedding or grind pro that was just MY thing i mean if someone wants to buy my photo I will sell but a price that is relevant to the effort and development costs not over the top i would rather make money with other jobs and have fun w/ photography. My father worked his arse off with architectural and fashion photography in the 70's and lost two marriages because he worked too long hours at it ha ha
    Cheers @chippo and @kelvin_wx

  9. kelvin_wx
    kelvin_wx ·

    digital is instant,foreseeable,electronic,cold and lack of expect;
    film is awaited,experienced,crafted,warm and full of expect.
    that is the very reason we choose it.

  10. kelvin_wx
    kelvin_wx ·

    sorry for you father...it is really very difficult for a professional photographer to balance his work and family..

  11. koduckgirl
    koduckgirl ·

    @kelvin_wx yes exactly very good reasons and words... I mostly like to use digital as a recorder because for example I may never go to Tahiti ever again and certainly never with my dad so I wanted to make sure I recorded at least digitally shots with my dad and me on a memorable trip together but the real film shots were surprising and magical because they were uninhibited and spontaneous and unexpected win win

  12. kelvin_wx
    kelvin_wx ·

    o yes,here what we are talking about is not the digital is a completely a bad thing, on the contrary, digital has its own merits:safe,stable,instant...but we just want to keep some places that we can use another way,film. haha, it is reall a pleased thing talking with you,koduckgirl~~

  13. koduckgirl
    koduckgirl ·

    You too @kelvin_wx my lomo pal cheers!!!! We should do a swap sometime!

  14. waggrad00
    waggrad00 ·

    Looking at this from a glass half full perspective, maybe this change will get analogue lovers to fight more. Between the Lomo site allowing digital shots and Fujifilm discontinuing the 3000B peel away, film analogue lovers need to come together, display the beautiful work made with film and rebel against digital work (although beautiful in its own way) being on the site all of us love! Money keeps a business going and new films coming (Purple Lomochrome), but it shouldn't be a reason to compromise a site that's unique. So, I say we fight. And, as a fellow bay area lady, you know WE know how to do that. Step 1 was you posting those awesome vacation shots!!! Step 2 was you writing this blog! Get the conversation going...=)

  15. koduckgirl
    koduckgirl ·

    @waggrad00 thanx so much I agree totally!!!

  16. herbert-4
    herbert-4 ·

    May I add something... there is still a few things that digital can't do, except in very specialized way. I got lucky at auction with an Exacta mount uncoated fused quartz lens, and a 340nm passing filter, all fitting my old Topcon SLR. I've got ISO 800 tungsten film, so watch for UV color response photos this spring. This works well with radial flowers (landing instructions for bees) and lots of other plants and flowers have unexpected UV reflectance. IR has become a problem, because Kodak Highspeed IR is long gone, and Efke and Rollei products are rather weak, cutting off ~800nm. For pure IR with 87C filter, now I have to winkle the hot filter out of my DSLR for that. I might post some of those here, because this in my only web page. Anyway, film is not going away, for reasons of fine art and highest resolution (see Adox CMS 20). I think Lomography is inviting digital. because their original mission was a dated, located, and tagged lo res photo archive of the whole world above all. I think everyone should just keep on taking, scanning, and posting more film photos, keeping film photos the vast majority...

  17. koduckgirl
    koduckgirl ·

    Hi @herbert-4 good words and thanx for adding

  18. sudhashunmu
    sudhashunmu ·

    very well written friend....love the blog it was just in mind
    i second with you

  19. koduckgirl
    koduckgirl ·

    @sudhashunmu thanx so much for that!!!! Cheers

  20. allanbendiksen
    allanbendiksen ·

    I really agree with you. Thanks for writing this.

  21. pearlsphere-kameraliebe
    pearlsphere-kameraliebe ·

    Please don't forget the very fact that this Lomography website is essentially a digital "thingy"...you still need a computer/tablet to access it, you upload images that are in digital formats and people are actually viewing virtual versions of your "hard copy" photographs. Like their motto states, "analogue is the future", it doesn't mean that they have to go and abandon whatever advancement in digital technology but instead they are using digital stuff to sustain the popularity of analogue photography.

  22. koduckgirl
    koduckgirl ·

    @pearlsphere-kameraliebe yes yes putting photos online and on CD and scanning them are essentially digitizing them ok but that is not the same as shooting with a digital camera and putting it on this site. I don't digitally enhance any of my anologue photos in my lomohome, I have the lab put them on CD right from the scanner and I put them on here as they are and I do not edit. My beef with the latest digital thing Lomo is doing is that I really liked that this was a purely shot on analogue cameras site...can you imagine if the Impossible Project Polaroid company were to start saying it was ok to put fauxlaroids-(polaroids made with iPhone camera apps)on their site...they wouldn't!!!

  23. forceusr
    forceusr ·

    It drives me crazy that all of the new articles on the Petzval 58 contain digital photos. :/