Breathtaking Surreal Photographs Taken With A $50 Camera (And 100 Ton Of Talent)

If you thought that it takes the last word in gear to create incredible work, think Again. Ukrainian artist, Oleg Oprisco uses a $50 Kiev 6C and a strong vision to create photographs like you’ve never seen before.

oleg-oprisco-03

Oleg was born in a the small town* city of Lviv. He spent some time as a developer in a photo store and some as a photography assistant, but none triggered his creativity. The thing that eventually got the creativity out of him (though we suspect he was creative all along) was a getting a Kiev C6 camera  – a medium format, 12 shots a roll, camera. Oleg shares that the fact that he only has 12 frames makes him carefully work on each frame.

The photos are amazingly created in camera, using props, styling and brave models, as Oleg notes.

oleg-oprisco-01 oleg-oprisco-17 oleg-oprisco-16 oleg-oprisco-15 oleg-oprisco-14 oleg-oprisco-13 oleg-oprisco-12 oleg-oprisco-11 oleg-oprisco-10 oleg-oprisco-09 oleg-oprisco-08 oleg-oprisco-07 oleg-oprisco-06 oleg-oprisco-05 oleg-oprisco-04 oleg-oprisco-02

There you have it, creativity trumps gear yet again. You can see more of Oleg’s work on his site, Facebook page and 500px Gallery.

[Oleg Oprisco via Bored Panda]

*thanks for everyone who let me know how big Livid is

  • Alex

    LOL… Small town Lviv is not small at all. Trust me I am from Ukraine too.

    $50 camera + 100 ton of Photoshop too.

    • Chris

      Not the mention the awesome, not easy to find props!

    • Tony

      Liviv population: 725,342 (2011)

      :)

    • goblover

      I’m sure you are flash-reading since you used the word Photoshop. Read again: he did that in camera. It requires more than a touch of genius and creativity to make those pictures in camera, using a film camera. I suggest you go buy a film camera and try it yourself.

      • Shiva Sharifi

        Right on! you tell em… it is a great deal of skill to accomplish this in camera… building your technique is key

    • Arindom Ray Chaudhuri

      And man, you are a retard to crap someones extraordinarily splendid compositions … Hope you find solace in your own work .. @Alex

  • Alex

    But, still awesome work. Appreciate the talent.

  • https://www.facebook.com/KarenHanlonDanks Karen Danks

    Love this!

  • http://www.joelmeaders.com/ Shifty303

    This guy is my favorite photographer by far.

  • https://www.facebook.com/jcfgonc João Carlos Gonçalves

    I wonder what comes after the 50$ camera..

  • Andre

    I would say most medium format cameras are worth a hellevah lot more than half the digital crap that Nikon and Cannon puts out. Just because the monetary market value is about $50 bucks doesn’t mean the format doesn’t trump most digital SLR’s in resolution and range. This article is nice in that affirms that people can be creative and produce stunning work without broncolor, profoto, and a Hassleblad and the other equipment that alone would pay for half my house note, however I’m still left feeling uncomfortable with the emphasis on film camera being somehow inferior.

    • Andre

      Ok, on rereading the article, maybe I read into that a little too much. Plus I agree that plenty of Photoshop must have been skillfully included in the production.

      • Gery

        Oh, but what if this guy didn’t use Photoshop at all? There is a possibility, no matter how small, that a guy with amazing talent can take a film camera and produce amazing pictures such as these in camera, without Photoshop.

      • Gery

        Reread the article and interview; no Photoshop to alter composition etc. Everything done in camera. And yes it is possible. Some small minded guys who can’t do those things might be the bully and play down this artist’s hard work and creativity, just because they don’t have the skills to do it and the balls to acknowledge it. Sorry to throw my rant in your comment. But I can’t help if a genius did a very hard work to produce a beautiful result is being bullied.

  • A. Nguyen

    50$ camera + the cost of developing film, printing film.. i’m guessing the camera doesn’t have a light meter. how is these images on the web page? need a film scanner. the per shot cost of film is quite pricey in the end, but the process and the final product can be vastly different from digital, and often worth it.

    • Jim Johnson

      Yeah, I’m a “not about the equipment” guy, as well, but I completely agree. In a rush to tell a particular narrative, the author has distorted it. If it is about money, film ultimately costs more than digital these days. A LOT MORE.

      • echomrg

        especially if you shoot medium format, i have a mamiya RB67 camera and the price of each shot (counting film, developing and scanning/printing) is around 2.5€ (and i still have to find a lab doing decent scans).

      • Gery

        Oh but read again, it’s about talent. Actually, by buying a 2000-3000$ gear and using Photoshop afterwards can create images like these without too much hard work.
        Guys who can’t take into their small heads how a guy with a Film camera and no Photoshop would endure the pains and the hours trying to get just 1 picture to become reality will opt to get those gears. If they don’t even have the capacity to do that, they will attack, play down the artist to make him look as low as them.

        • Jim Johnson

          My point is, proof of talent does not lie in what equipment the photographer does or does not use. This article, to me, is just another failed attempt to “prove” you don’t need expensive equipment to produce interesting work. Personally, I think these articles are kind of patronizing. People with talent to burn and the desire to make art will find a way, and people who desire equipment will always desire equipment.

          If the article was titled “Breathtaking surreal photos without compositing” it would have been more accurate and honest. The cost of the equipment he uses (expensive or cheap) is irrelevant.

  • https://www.facebook.com/juerg.wolf Jürg Wolf

    W.O.W.!

  • murhaaya.com

    Photographs that we’ve never seen before? Really? The internet (and especially deviantArt) is full of stuff like this

    http://petapixel.com/2013/12/15/entrancingly-surreal-self-portraiture-kyle-thompson/
    http://petapixel.com/2012/11/14/surreal-portraits-by-19-year-old-fine-art-photographer-david-talley/

    or just search “surreal photography” on the web. Some of the results are highly “shopped” some of them don’t, big deal. Internet is in awe because he’s using analog camera… wooow. He’s using something millions of photographers used for 150 years. But the title is so catchy. Hard to resist not jumping on the bandwagon…

    • Gery

      Yes, he did use something everyone used for a long time. I’m sure you have produced the same level, if not better, pictures using a film camera and No Photoshop, don’t you? I mean, if I can’t produce stuff like these I wouldn’t dare to try to play down all the hours, hard work, thinking, sweat he poured into just one of the pictures. I would be a sissy if I did.
      And don’t say you attack the writer and not the photographer. You twist what the writer meant just to make yourself look smart. No you are not. Let your creation do the talking, show something that earn stars and likes without bullying other people.

      • Joe

        @gery I hear you flapping your lips but how do you know? Because someone else said that he did? Have you bothered to look at old photographs by professionals. Not even back then photographers had this quality. I believe there is some level of photoshop involved. Like when Joey L was asked do you do any photoshop in your Twilight posters? He hesitated and then said no… but he lied about… so hell if he is not using any photoshop in his images neither do I. Don’t be a Johnny Purist and a nieve little boy. The day I can sit there with an artist and see his process and who says there is no photoshopped in his images. That’s the day I will praise him as a photography genius. Till then if I don’t see it I won’t believe it… FYI I shot film for 20 years….

        • Peace

          Who cares if you shot films for 20 years. Why are you guys fighting over nothing. Besides talking less and think more makes you a great photographer so shut the hell up and go grab some chocolate.

  • Definitivity

    Film scanning is actually not as expensive if you’re not planning on sending in loads of negative sleeves. I get my stuff done at places like scancafe or gophoto where it’s pretty cheap.

  • http://edgarbrionesfotografia.com edgar b

    Creativeiti at the most

  • Frank B!

    How the world they get her on the big hills?
    so are these un-photoshopped pix? if shopped, then awe ok.. still nice though.

    • Gery

      There are old school film techniques that combines 2 or 3 shots in a film. You make a shot, roll back the film, take shot no. 2. You got shot no.1 and 2 in a same film. But, unlike Photoshop, the tiniest mistake can waste the film and hours of preparations inside it and you have to redo everything from the scratch again. The photographer has to know exactly what he wants before starting. No taking 1000 shots and pick 1 and crop, etc.