> you used "an old Powershot and did a ton of post-processing in GIMP", didn't know it was that useful, i just used GIMP for drawing and conversions.
Yeah, I used GIMP for absolutely everything. Photoshop might be what the pros use, but I only ever used that in school. I've always stuck with GIMP just because I'm used to using it and it's free.
>It does justifies certain aesthetics popular these days with the lomography scene but it's demanding, i would fall back into a small thrift store point n shooter while trying to get them negatives enlarged, your stuff is pleasant to view and maybe a cheap compact package might get you warmed up, although it also says here film was more closer/better for the motive you wanted.
Film might be a lot more of a hassle, but it can also get imperfect images right out of the camera that I'm (mostly) satisfied with. With digital it was more of a matter of taking pictures and editing them until I liked them.
A lot of times I'd get things like blown-out skies shooting digitally, too. While the Holga images I shot were blurry (maybe a bit more than I'd like), they also didn't have that problem. There was even a short period when I tried to compromise and shoot on a Nikon camera with a Holga lens, but then I just realized I should stop going halfway with the things I want to do and just try shooting on film.
Also, judging from his first record, Ulrich Schnauss has done some great stuff. I only discovered him a few years ago. He might sound a bit clinical in production compared to something like Boards of Canada, but his compositions were nice and really capture that early 2000s feeling for me.
Here are a few second-tier images I shot. I'm actually pretty happy with the way the second one turned out after editing, even if it's more of a textural piece than anything.