I have a Diana Mini, and I got my prints back from the chemist! Scanned the negatives, and here are some results:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/hairydalek ... 923784156/

The so-called 10 rules of Lomography strike me as a bit of a mixed bag, really.
On the one hand the whole point of the process is to be fast, carefree and from-the-hip, but the best examples of this photography form that I've seen have all been anything but.
It strikes me a little like the whole iPhoneography scene.
Nearly all photographs would be crap if nobody actually cared about what they were taking pictures of or how they were taking them. (8+/

Mark

I'm still wanting to get involved with Lomo. I fancy a Diana F+ and some 120 film. I do agree that some of the best examples of Lomo on that site are anything but carefree, etc etc though.

From the first roll of film, I’ve learnt a few things. Firstly, the camera is by modern standards truly dumb. It literally has no fine grained control over shutter speed - it’s either a click or you can hold it open and count. The aperture is either cloudy or bright, and focussing is simply by distance. There is, obviously, no instant preview.

With the double exposure abilities, you can get some rather interesting images. What you have to bear in mind is that a double exposure can, obviously, over expose. However, shooting in darker places and re exposing can produce almost correctly exposed images with odd mixes.

I am seeing it as a bit of fun - I rather like the odd ancient quality of the photos, and yes, I can simulate this in Photoshop or on the iPhoneography apps (of which I have a fair few). I am rather enjoying the handling of the material again - film, negatives.