anyone have any lomokino results?

[Tyler]

yeah, I would fully agree that you can get the same from a digital camera. Granted I had a D90 (before it got stolen, along with my 35mm film camera) It however wasn't able to do 144 frames in a row. I think it would do about 20 something at about 3 fps before it would stop and have to process.

For someone like me who already had a film scanner and a bunch of old 35mm film lying around spending the USD $79.00 on a toy camera wasn't that big a deal. I can appreciate what they were trying to do with the camera. But, I feel it is kind of a limited use / too high of cost or time to be practical.

[Will2]

Finally processed and assembled my first Lomokino shot. Had the camera from the 1st week it was out but hadn't actually used it until Christmas. It's a fun toy.

http://vimeo.com/34450252

[grainy]

I bet the kid in the movie got a kick out of seeing the final results.
I think lomography offers a scanning service that does a lot of that manual work you describe in your vimeo caption, if you're interested.
I have to admit I've lost a lot of interest in this thing but the more examples I see the more I am convinced:
1 - it is a cool novelty
2 - this is whetting the whistle for super 8 or a "real" motion picture solution for these guys.

[granfer]

Anybody out there believe in "deja-vu"? I think we've been here before. I remain "under-whelmed",
and it seems others might actually now be also.

[Juergen]

We made a test of the LOMOKINO for the newest issue of schmalfilm magazine (still alive, yeah). The main problem of the LOMOKINO is: it's not a movie camera. A movie camera is able to shoot at least 16 frames per second. With this one you can hardly produce 2-3 frames per second. The hand crank makes it very difficult to get a good stability, working with a tripod is even worse. The parts of the camera (it's of course a plastic monster), especially the hand crank and the crank to roll back the film, look very fragile.

Happy New Year!
Juergen

[beamascope]

I don't have one but I read abut it on their website and they were perfectly clear about what it can and can't do. Did anyone expect a camera made by Lomo that creates a 35mm "movie" to be built of any quality for daily shoots? I'm kind of surprised by all the hate for what is just a fun toy. Actually it's cheap compared to what charges for some of it's stuff. I think the challenge would be in telling a story with just one roll. In camera edits and so forth instead of just another "test" roll.

[Will2]

It is what it is; just a toy. Fun little thing for getting rid of all those 35mm still rolls you have lying around from 6 years ago... nothing more. Not a real movie camera. Definitely plastic and cheap feeling but that's the point.

College kids will love it like they like the other Lomo products. They can go "retro" and put something on Facebook that no one else has.

Since the rolls came back to me un-cut, I may bring it to my next telecine session and have fun with it on a Spirit. The colorist will get a kick out of it.

[audadvnc]

dbl post

[audadvnc]

Considering that you can buy a real 35mm movie camera (Bell & Howell Eyemo) starting about $120, I don't see the appeal of a toy like this at that price point.

[carllooper]

Considering that you can buy a real 35mm movie camera (Bell & Howell Eyemo) starting about $120, I don't see the appeal of a toy like this at that price point.

Ah yes, but the Lomo comes with a lens.

That's pretty amazing though. A "real" 35mm movie cameras at that price. With the "death" of film (long live film) it couldn't be a better time for connoisseurs of film.

Re. the Lomo.

The Lomokino represents how relatively easy it is to manufacture something in plastic. While the Lomokino itself might be underwhelming (but compared to what?) the ideas it's embodies are interesting. Inspired by a film projector I saw last year, made out of Lego, I've been designing a film projector (or attempting to do so) that can be stored as a computer file and sent to a 3D printer from which all of the parts are printed in plastic. One then assembles the projector.

The design is the most important thing. The fact that it's made in plastic should not necessarily mean the result will be inferior (but again: compared to what?). It really depends on the design. The manufacturing process is so cheap one can test out all sorts of designs without the traditional costs usually associated with that.

With my film projector it's currently got the reels on opposite ends of a seesaw mechanism. There was some mechanical design reason for that which I can't recall but it also looks pretty funky. Just a 3D model on a computer at the moment. The cool thing about working with a 3D printer is that you can test your designs on a computer first - in virtual reality so to speak - spitting out a hardcopy from time to time as a sanity check. And you can shape all your parts as perfectly as you want. There is a resolution limit but you design around that limit.

This sort of thing is no longer just the domain of big companies. It's now something your average consumer can not only dabble in, but produce extraordinary results:

http://www.thingiverse.com/

Design and print your own real camera, projector, scanner, Super8 film cartridge, sprocket drive, lens mount, steam-punk computer, ...

Or a film reel:

http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:12849

[granfer]

But is there ANYONE ELSE with some actual results?

[carllooper]

But is there ANYONE ELSE with some actual results?

Why?

I thought Will's results were a pretty good indication of what to expect:
http://vimeo.com/34450252

And Tyler's results, though red, were quite evocative:
http://vimeo.com/33461243

[Andreas Wideroe]

Can someone else confirm that this ad spam is coming directly from filmshooting.com? Just type N**on and C***n and see if it hyperlinks. I'm suddenly worried that I've got an infected machine.

[Update: Don't bother. Looks like Andreas has added Viglink in-line forum ads to the site. Just for the record, I think the idea absolutely stinks.]

I made a post about this:
viewtopic.php?f=21&t=23041

[Will2]

I have some more to create but haven't had the time. Like I said, fun little toy but not useful in any practical filmmaking sense.

The Eyemo on the other hand rocks. Just wish it was easy to make a 2-perf version.

p.s. I have no problem with the links for the site to generate some money. I'll be making another donation this week.

[Nicholas Kovats]

Presenting my friend Dwayne Hill's 35mm 2 perf Lomokino film called "Lomokino Cat". Edited by yours truly. It's all in the leather...

http://vimeo.com/38822722