<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Lomo LC-A: Why? Actually, Lomography: Why?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.adistortedreality.com/lomo-lc-a-why-actually-lomography-why/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.adistortedreality.com/lomo-lc-a-why-actually-lomography-why</link>
	<description>Sex, drugs, politics.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 28 Jun 2010 00:55:23 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: M.</title>
		<link>http://www.adistortedreality.com/lomo-lc-a-why-actually-lomography-why/comment-page-1#comment-6286</link>
		<dc:creator>M.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Jun 2010 00:55:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.adistortedreality.com/?p=375#comment-6286</guid>
		<description>I agree--to a point. The Lomographic Society shouldn&#039;t have monopolized the camera. The ethos--as Pete says--is stupid. And some of their cameras are ridiculously priced considering the quality. 

However, I enjoy the lo-fi end results of the pictures. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and art is subjective. [But I do believe to be more effective as an artist--or photographer!--one must follow some general rules, but those rules certainly aren&#039;t hard and fast.]

Not only that, but they make a cheap medium format camera, which would be good if a person was unsure about getting into medium format or didn&#039;t want to shell out thousands of dollars.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree&#8211;to a point. The Lomographic Society shouldn&#8217;t have monopolized the camera. The ethos&#8211;as Pete says&#8211;is stupid. And some of their cameras are ridiculously priced considering the quality. </p>
<p>However, I enjoy the lo-fi end results of the pictures. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and art is subjective. [But I do believe to be more effective as an artist--or photographer!--one must follow some general rules, but those rules certainly aren't hard and fast.]</p>
<p>Not only that, but they make a cheap medium format camera, which would be good if a person was unsure about getting into medium format or didn&#8217;t want to shell out thousands of dollars.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pete Ashton</title>
		<link>http://www.adistortedreality.com/lomo-lc-a-why-actually-lomography-why/comment-page-1#comment-738</link>
		<dc:creator>Pete Ashton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Dec 2008 12:02:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.adistortedreality.com/?p=375#comment-738</guid>
		<description>Yup, the Lomo thing is kinda tragic. I&#039;ve got a fondness for the occasional trashcam (the Vivitar Wide &amp; Slim being a particular fave - cost me a quid) and reveled in the accidentally genius shot or two but the whole ethos behind Lomography stinks. You are not alone, and sadly you&#039;re by no means the first to spot this nonsense.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yup, the Lomo thing is kinda tragic. I&#8217;ve got a fondness for the occasional trashcam (the Vivitar Wide &amp; Slim being a particular fave &#8211; cost me a quid) and reveled in the accidentally genius shot or two but the whole ethos behind Lomography stinks. You are not alone, and sadly you&#8217;re by no means the first to spot this nonsense.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
