It would be a bit disingenous for me to start waxing poetic about analog vs. digital technology. Hypocritical in fact, coming from a girl with a blog and a Flickr account. But there is a lot to be said for analog, specifically in photography.
I do not own a digital camera. I never have. This isn’t necessarily a philosophical stance; I am not opposed to them by any stretch of the imagination. They’re convenient. They’re fun to play with. And they’re damn affordable lately. But still, something in me still likes the feel of a film camera. I love the weight of them. I love the sound of the shutter (digital cameras and even some camera phones play recordings of that sound, which makes me giggle.) And I like actually receiving physicial printouts of my photos, because I know myself, and I will never print them out and frame them if I have to go through an extra step.
I used to be much more interested in photography as a hobby, but my interest has been piqued again as of late listening to the boy talk about his design projects. He found a few articles on lomographic cameras, and we’ve been researching them a little bit, specifically the Diana models. Lomographic cameras are basicaly a throwback to really inexpensive cameras manufactured in the 1960s, integrating the quirks and flaws of those cameras (light leaks, over-saturated colors, darkened corners) into more modern models.
The resulting photos appear to have an imperfect, almost nostalgic, dreamy quality. According to the web site, “A blurry-soft and dreamy-toned Diana image is more an interpretation of reality than a correct representation of it. In a way, it’s somehow more accurate to compare the Diana to an oily vintage typewriter than to a megapixel machine of today.” The examples I saw reminded me a bit of the poloroids I remember from my childhood.
This all just sounded too fun to pass up, so today we took a trip to our local Camera Doctor on our lunch breaks and picked up a Diana F+ (above). Isn’t she cute?
Will be experimenting quite a bit in the near future. More to come …
(Photo taken from Lomography.com)