Only in the world of Lomography!
Old 3 Weeks Ago   #1
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: CA
Posts: 8,573
Only in the world of Lomography!

Just got an email from Lomography.
Apparently they have a batch of Metropolis film (which I love) that has a production flaw that leaves a line across some of the film.
What to do, what to do? Sell it as a feature at a discounted price!

https://shop.lomography.com/en/lomoc...rk-35mm/?fresh

Freakin' genius!

lol, I love tomography! And no, I don't want it cuz I like my film w/o random lines.
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #2
robert blu
quiet photographer
 
robert blu's Avatar
 
robert blu is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Italy
Age: 71
Posts: 6,131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
...

Freakin' genius!

lol, I love tomography! And no, I don't want it cuz I like my film w/o random lines.
It's a special marketing move! I love lomography too...but with no lines please!
__________________
Remember: today is the Day !
from Ruth Bernhard recipe for a long and happy life

my quiet photographer's blog

My RFF photos and my albums on RFF
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #3
retinax
Registered User
 
retinax is offline
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 1,093
This is a hoax, right? Some hacker-photo-geek satire collective has taken over their website, yes?
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #4
rangefinderlove123
Registered User
 
rangefinderlove123 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2017
Posts: 77
i am speechless
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #5
Timmyjoe
Registered User
 
Timmyjoe's Avatar
 
Timmyjoe is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 3,094
This reminds me of the first time I heard about the Diana camera thirty years ago. A female photographer friend had just discovered the soft, blurry, vignetted images it produces and was encouraging me to put aside my Canon F-1n and take up the Diana. I was like, "So purposely create blurry, heavily vignetted images, instead of trying to make sharp, properly exposed, properly processed images?" I was baffled that the marketing pitch was on par with "Make worse pictures, that's how you create art!"

Glad to see that in 30 years, Lomography hasn't changed their business plan.

Best,
-Tim
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #6
CharlesDAMorgan
Registered User
 
CharlesDAMorgan is offline
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Plymouth, UK
Posts: 1,356
They're slacking, they should charge more!
__________________
De-gassing progress:

Leica M2, Nikon D700, Bronica RF645, Leica CL, Summicron 40mm, Rolleicord Va, Hasselblad 500 CM Zeiss Planar, Leica 50mm Summicron V3, Hasselblad PME51 metered prism, Zeiss Ikon Super Ikonta 534/16 & Ensign 820 Special - all gone.
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #7
emraphoto
Registered User
 
emraphoto's Avatar
 
emraphoto is offline
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,681
reminds me of the M8
__________________
www.johndensky.ca
@eastofadelaide
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #8
Corran
Registered User
 
Corran is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 1,362
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timmyjoe View Post
This reminds me of the first time I heard about the Diana camera thirty years ago. A female photographer friend had just discovered the soft, blurry, vignetted images it produces and was encouraging me to put aside my Canon F-1n and take up the Diana. I was like, "So purposely create blurry, heavily vignetted images, instead of trying to make sharp, properly exposed, properly processed images?" I was baffled that the marketing pitch was on par with "Make worse pictures, that's how you create art!"

Glad to see that in 30 years, Lomography hasn't changed their business plan.

Best,
-Tim
Making sharp pictures ain't necessarily art either...
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #9
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: CA
Posts: 8,573
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlesDAMorgan View Post
They're slacking, they should charge more!
Yes! Especially since it is a limited run.

Quote:
Originally Posted by emraphoto View Post
reminds me of the M8
And ouch!
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #10
benlees
Registered User
 
benlees is offline
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Edmonton, AB
Age: 47
Posts: 1,606
I'm not sure I'd call it genius as this is just an example of what many business' do to get rid of 'imperfect' stock.


If they charged extra, and people actually bought it, then perhaps that might be something closer to exceptional.
__________________
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #11
aizan
Registered User
 
aizan's Avatar
 
aizan is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,780
$12 for a roll of defective film...

this is the kind of thing that gives lomography a bad name.
__________________
Ugly Cameras
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #12
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: CA
Posts: 8,573
Quote:
Originally Posted by aizan View Post
$12 for a roll of defective film...

this is the kind of thing that gives lomography a bad name.
Why? It is cheaper than the regular Metropolis and they are calling it out.
So it is up to the buyer whether they want to play along. If they do, they are getting it at a discount.

Remember when Kodak had that backing paper issue on their 120 film?
They kept on selling it for full price and kept their pie holes closed about it until enough users complained.
THAT is what gives them a bad name.
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #13
aizan
Registered User
 
aizan's Avatar
 
aizan is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,780
Lomography developed a bad rap in the early 2000s for charging a lot of money for low quality products and marketing it as lo-fi analog tech that makes artistic photos easy. They've done a lot of cool things over the years, but this is a step backwards.

On the other hand, selling a batch of defective film at a small discount to knowing consumers is not the worst thing that could have happened. But rather than selling it, the most obvious good solution would have been to donate it or sell it for the cost of shipping.
__________________
Ugly Cameras
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #14
K14
Registered User
 
K14's Avatar
 
K14 is offline
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Washington State
Posts: 294
Huss,

I wouldn't limit that to Metropolis film. Shooting some night shots with my Olympus Pen in Bakurocho Tokyo produced these lines. Some suggested it was an airplane but it shows in more than one shot.

Lomo Color Negative 100


  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #15
giganova
Registered User
 
giganova is offline
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 1,527
And its only twice as much as Tri-X!
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #16
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: CA
Posts: 8,573
Quote:
Originally Posted by aizan View Post

On the other hand, selling a batch of defective film at a small discount to knowing consumers is not the worst thing that could have happened. But rather than selling it, the most obvious good solution would have been to donate it or sell it for the cost of shipping.
Yes, they should give it away for free....
They are selling it for a discount, stating exactly what is wrong with it but you think it should be free?

You do know they are a business, right? Paying employees?
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #17
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: CA
Posts: 8,573
Quote:
Originally Posted by K14 View Post
Huss,

I wouldn't limit that to Metropolis film. Shooting some night shots with my Olympus Pen in Bakurocho Tokyo produced these lines. Some suggested it was an airplane but it shows in more than one shot.

Lomo Color Negative 100


That looks like damage from the camera or the processor. It could also be a scanning line. Thedarkroom.com used to return scans like that (which is one reason among many why I never use them anymore)
I've had that happen many times, with all brands of film. Stopped after I stopped using Costco to develop my film...
(they no longer offer that service anymore)
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #18
HHPhoto
Registered User
 
HHPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,723
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
Why? It is cheaper than the regular Metropolis and they are calling it out.
So it is up to the buyer whether they want to play along. If they do, they are getting it at a discount.

Remember when Kodak had that backing paper issue on their 120 film?
They kept on selling it for full price and kept their pie holes closed about it until enough users complained.
THAT is what gives them a bad name.
I agree.
I am not a fan of lomography in general, never have been. I still see some of their business decisions very critical.

But not here. They honestly say it is defective film. They show the defect. They offer a discount.
Customers know what they get. Nobody is forced to buy the film.

Probably there is pure necessity to sell it. The financial loss of scrapping it totally would be huge, and could danger the existence of a relatively small company like Lomography (and maybe the producer of this film, because Lomography is buying their films from real film manufacturers).
Film production is a low-margin business.
If a production batch failed the financial consequences are serious.

I find their current honest communication to their customers with this film much much better what for example JCH is doing with his 'Street Pan': Selling very long expired old film with high base fog and about two stops less real effective film speed at very high prices. And not telling the customers the truth. That is cheating.

Cheers, Jan
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:55.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.