I see a lot of question here about buying Polaroid or Holga/Diana/Lomo cameras. Now back in the film days polaroid certainly filled a niche. What I just don’t get is why people spend money on a Holga or similar camera while for the same amount or less money you can also buy a used film camera, either a high-end compact or a decent SLR with lens.
So, can anyone explain to me why someone would buy a camera where there’s hardly any film for or why anyone would buy a camera that’s basically a poorly made toy?
Categorized | Affiliate Marketing 101
What Is The Attraction In Holga/lomo/polaroid Photography?
Posted on September 2, 2010.
Long story short, marketing. Long story-
It’s a “user friendly” approach to photography meant to ease people into buying expensive cameras. It sticks so well because it’s a “rebellion” from the established world of photography, which I would theorize is also responsible for kids referring to DSLRs as professional cameras. What happens is these cameras and the principals that the composite character values are idealized in popular media. Lady gaga and Beyonce taking Polaroids of eachother, Many Paramore videos, Jonas Brothers making behind the scenes videos and publishing their Polaroids all have the toy cameras. It’s all based on the mere exposure effect (no pun intended) .
When you are exposed to something enough it becomes normal. On the medical side, we use this for picky eating kids. Just put the vegetables on the plate and don’t expect them to eat it. After a while they think it’s perfectly fine. Put massive posters up telling people how great the dear leader is, after awhile they will believe it. Put the cameras in the music videos and soon they will become normal.
So now these kids love photography with their Holgas, Religion, politics and your identity as a teenager are the leading causes of anger. Now what? Now that you have people who identify themselves as photographers, they will soon turn 16-20-ish and identify themselves as adults. Toy cameras (not an accident it’s called that) don’t fit the schema of adult, so as a grown up photographer they need a big black professional camera.
It’s all about what products there are too sell. In the 80’s imaging came out which meant we knew the biological causes of disease which meant we could develop pills. By the 90’s the law changed to put pill commercials on TV because the pills were there and needed to be sold. Digital cameras are currently a new market that needs to be sold. Holgas are just a microcosm of the massive campaign to get these products sold. It is very literal when I say you’re life depends on cameras being sold. If we don’t make people buy crap they don’t need the economy goes down. Low enough and there are no hospitals, no schools, no government, no law. Marketing might seem evil and aggressive. But at the heart of it marketing is responsible for your way of life more than any government.
I got into the field when I finally got my head around all that. I wore tube socks (at 14) because Blink 182 did. I beat people up for making fun of my bands and I wondered why. When I did find out why I said I want to be a part of that. It’s an awakening, an almost religious experience (and just a plain old power high) to know and be responsible for everything in the world.
It is a cliche camera. It makes such funky images with vignetting, scratches on both the base and emulsion sides of the film (white or black streaks depending on which), sometimes amazing colour aberrations and occasional light leaks make it a quirky camera.
Add to that the nearly zero exposure control, making getting a good exposure pure luck unless the user is an advanced amateur with a lot of experience using film. The camera has only two aperture settings and one timed shutter speed (plus bulb)
It produces images that are not much better than the old “Instamatic” cameras of the late fifties which had only one shutter speed and one aperture. Due the conditions these cameras are used, the resulting colour is way off and what people are starting to call “vintage” colour. This usually means that there is a distinct shift toward either cyan or others magenta. Just look as some of the galleries on the LOMO site. You will see what I mean
Polaroid (now Fujifilm and XP film) is a different story. At over $2 a print, it seems excessive. My guess is there is a similar attraction watching the Polaroid “develop” similar to printing your own black and white prints in a darkroom, but without the pesky need to learn how to actually make a print using traditional techniques
Because its a teen fashion at the moment to have crappy, out of focus, poorly exposed & ‘retro’ looking cross processed photos. Even if they haven’t got a Lomo camera, they edit a digital file to hell & gone so it looks like Lomo output.
It’ll pass…hopefully.
What it seems like to me as far as my own experience is concerned is that it is relative to the individual. While some old pros have seen and discarded these types of images decades ago. You have an entire generation that is just now discovering photography and all of it’s nuances. Many who are new to photography experiment with the medium and some of the outdated and less mainstream aspects of it for the fun of it. Some just think it is cool because it doesn’t look like a “normal” family photo that they have been forced to sit up straight and say cheese for. So rebellion plays a part in it. Its a fad. Just like selective color. You have to admit the first time you saw a black and white photo with part of the picture in color you thought it was magical and like a magic trick you wanted to know how it was done. Maybe you even experimented with it and then got tired of it. If used occasionally and done well it can add to the photograph. Like most things moderation is the key to not becoming a cliche.