It's a creativity fad. The same people like Instagram. Ya, it has it's place.

@rambo is right, it 'is' a creativity fad. As are all other art movements. Saying the same thing can be done digitally is to not understand the artistic process in the first place. Logic has little place in art....and on that note, you are Dr Spock, and I claim my $5.

Like always, everything is cool until it becomes mainstream.

Personally I give respect only to those things that requires skills. I'm not sure about this lomography.

And as Eric Cartman says... God da*n hipp... hipsters!

Is not that i dont understand them, its not that i dont like the images, its that they belive that their images are the only one to stand out from the rest, when it can be donde digitally.

But its ok, i dont hate them its just that, i dont understad the passion behind bad quality imagery, behind hippsters.

I dont want to prove then wrong. I dont like the bad quality, its only my personal view.

The interpretation of reality in this type of format, it is actually interesting, my point was that all lomography shooters think all their photos are art an perfect, when its not. Even a normal photographer knows when something is right or wrong. Thats all.

And i dont paint with hubris brush the lomo users. Its not like that. Its maybe that the people i have discussed this are to fans maybe like i am about my GH camera.

I am sorry if someone felt bad about my comments, was not my intention.

If you have 1k$ left and want to record video in an arty way.. get a GH2... everythings else is pure shit. Does not happen very often, but this time its true. ;-))

I like the dirty aesthetics of lomo, but still the person who handles the cam does the art. Not the cam.

Photography like video production is having a seismic shift in terms of accessibility. What once was the preserve of craftsmen and women in a dark room with only a faint red light to guide them, is now in the hands of quite literally everyone. The Swankolab app for the iPhone even emulates the darkroom to achieve it's effects on your photos. I for one like Lomography. It's a way of making the ordinary, extraordinary, but most of all it's just plain fun.

This would require a debate on what is art and what is not, but this is one with no definitive answer... art can be a catherdral that took a whole century to build, or just a white square painted on a white canvas.

Lomography doesn't make the artist, but if used properly, it can create something that a sufficient amount of people would call "art".

Besides, why not ? A pencil is extremely dumb in itself... i can draw a stickman with it, or write "ass", but someone else can use it to draw a fantastic landscape. It's not because he used a dumb pencil that he's not an artist.

@Zeko for me art as i put in this thread :

http://personal-view.com/talks/discussion/comment/37530#Comment_37530

Art is a way of comunicating emotions, and thats it. Design on the other way, has to have a proper function.

Modern art, is more general, and has become a big debate today, cos for modern standards anything can be art, and it is not. That more people can make what they call art, in any of its variations its not properly art in its pure form, cos those works that bring no emotion at all, are just tryouts, they are a process of what one day maybe can be called art. A man has a process to follow before becoming artist, and its in all the time he trys, and perfects its craftsmanship, that becomes one, and the recognitions that involve him after trying out diferent works and variations. And are usually those that generate more emotions the ones that are more recognised and become an ART WORK.

Art is a process not only a work.

Why can we diferentiate from a good art work, and a bad one. Only in the amount of emotion it generates in you and others, its function is no more than that. Emotions cant be described in words properly cos they are complex, art can bring you a proper description of emotion in diferent ways, that are not properly placed or even not recognised, but afterwards, it says you something.

Nowdays the word ART is more general, we already have the posibility to create almost any classic art form we know to date, the materials, the technology, the technics and the people are there. Art has change in the way we create it. Technology has make it more easy to comunicate our feelings, though emotions emerge faster and easier.

Art is already disolving in everything, and a new form, a more naked one, will emerge from all this information that art has become. I think the way will be more holistic, making art a new system, a new dynamic system interpreted by its all, and no more by its units, like, painting, writing, acting, etc. They are now the basics of art, and anyone can participate, thogh, not everyone can make them work properly together.

Cine is the fist to include various art forms in one, and thats what makes it more interesting and dynamic.

@Luxis yeah, lensbaby fits this niche as well.

@endotoxic, I think this is more a brand attack than anything else, as what is art and what is not is plainly distinguishable. The majority of photographers are not at all artists. Wedding photographers (i have this conversation a lot) are not artists. Hipsters, unless they produce actual artwork, are not artists. Don't get frustrated by it, and let them think they're doing great amazing stuff, because what they think doesn't matter and only benefits them egotistically. By the way, I am also not an artist.

@Roberto :)))