fisheye and holga 35 afx confirmed. what candy these will produce, i can vaguely imagine - but if people are going to discard them by the 'ten rules golden rules' logo/statement, after putting significant thought behind the image, i will not be happy. i only agree with the first three, but that's by personal choice - my cameras are rarely left behind. the other seven... they just seem like fillers. taglines to sell lomography with no subtsance.
'buy the surplus stock we rescued ( aka: bought really cheap) from russian companies: now it's hot because we've overblown the prices! and lomography equals a happy, fun, and social life!'
the ideals are of good nature> no elitism, both the lomographer and viewer enjoy the results, effortless, great images for everybody, spontaneous.
the theory's all good, but the practise> overpriced cameras with very limited life span, monopoly, rules that instead of guiding the beginner/amateur sell the product even further, 'don't think, just shoot' just gives you 2 or 3 interesting shots out of 24-36.
it doesn't seem so idealistic. it doesn't seem available to everyone. it does seem like a lot of fuss for something marketed by simplicity.
they say there's change. and i do agree with this, an actual confrontation. the 'ten golden rules' are holding people back, especially the individuals with more of an ambitious and artistic nature.
thought processes behind lomography will be aknowledged.
but i'm afraid that with this 'progress' we run the risk of becoming elitist and dictatorial, competitive and envious, dismissive of the commonplace image-making.
that would be horrible.
maybe it's worth thinking beyond all that: ignoring whatever the lomographic society claims lomography is all about (a lifestyle rather than a medium), ignoring the battlecries dissenting lomographers are typing (lots of barking but i see no biting); maybe realising that you don't owe anyone anything anywhere, that you can do your own little dance, regardless.
y al que no le guste, que no mire.