Is digital display enough?

[Bob Michaels]

both prints on the wall and digital display are needed in different circumstances

both prints on the wall and digital display are needed in different circumstances

There are times when prints on the wall are the only thing that will suffice. But there are also times when a digital display can be used.

I did photo exhibits in two different galleries in Cuba in May and June. There is no question that framed prints were the only acceptable form of presentation.

Day after tomorrow (tomorrow is a travel day) I will do a slide show, 2 minutes 22 seconds long with 41 photos presented in a 15" digital frame for the local people where I live in Cuba. It is of the big May 1st workers day parade in the local community and basically is just of the local people. They are thrilled to see photos of themselves in such a patriotic event. There is no way I would print all of these, frame them, and transport the prints to Cuba. Since internet is very limited, very slow, and $2 per hour there that is not an option. But transporting a flash drive and showing everything on a digital frame placed in different facilities works well.

see the slide show at http://bobmichaels.org/Primero de Mayo 2016 Cueto.mp4

 

[Ronald M]

Digital picture frames can hold thousands depending on thumb drive.

Modern TV also take a thumb drive.

Print the best and make an album.

 

[Lss]

http://bobmichaels.org/Primero de Mayo 2016 Cueto.mp4

Good photos, but the show is too fast for me to enjoy. You said 2 minutes 22 seconds long with 41 photos. I would have aimed at about 4 minutes.

Assuming each individual photo is good enough within the context (which also means not too much repetition), I have found 5-6 seconds per photo to work quite well for most viewers. It gives time to take each photo in and remember them without killing the interest of the less patient viewers. About six seconds nicely allows for more than one photo at once, too, for fill shots or for effect (especially if the show is the end product). I tend to go much longer than that mainly for very wide panoramas where it's often best to pan slowly across the shot.

 

[Bob Michaels]

Good photos, but the show is too fast for me to enjoy. You said 2 minutes 22 seconds long with 41 photos. I would have aimed at about 4 minutes..................

Lasse: thanks for your comments about the timing and moving too fast. This has a specific target audience, the 13,999 people who live in Cueto and know everyone in the photos. So it simply may be too fast.Otherwise I could have told the story in a very few photos. While I always want to be on the side of leaving them wishing for more rather than being bored if I do err.

I keep working on alternate digital presentations that tell the story better than simple photos. Here is one on the economics of raising your own pig in Cuba. http://bobmichaels.org/Cuban pig economics/Cuban pig economics.pdf

I am going to Fidel's big 90th birthday celebration in his home town, Biran, which is only about 5 miles from where we live (me part time). My Cuban significant other will be one of the speakers. So, I may try to do something for that event as well. No clue what that will be.

 

[jsrockit]

Beautiful photo Bob.

 

[cz23]

Bob, I agree with Lasse that it's too fast. I do a lot of these and have found that for a single-subject photo fast works OK. But your pictures are rich in content and I felt I did not have time to take it in much on most images, even scanning for objective content. And for an event like this folks like to linger a bit to look for themselves or others they know.

Nice job, though. This is a wonderful way to share a series. And it's really enjoyable to put one together.

John

 

[jsrockit]

I just use the pause button... 😉

 

[willie_901]

No its not enough.
...

This ^









12345678910

 

[MikeMGB]

My photos are displayed in a random slide show on a 23" monitor in the room we use the most, I have a PC dedicated to this show and it is on all the time.

The same photos are also in an online album our families can access for viewing.

However, I have long thought that digital only isn't good enough and to this end I have started printing the best of the photos to keep in physical albums, as I used to in my film days. I have always printed the best of the best and hung them in the house, not that I have many I consider good enough for enlarging!

 

[kbb]

Is digital display enough?
No.
I was chatting about photos with a friend and in order to show me a shot he'd taken, he picked up an iPad, and quickly scrolled to the photo he wanted me to see.
It was dim, shiny, and the color(8500ºK or whatever it was was) completely mismatched the existing light in the room. An awful way to see a photo.

 

[jsrockit]

Is digital display enough?
No.
I was chatting about photos with a friend and in order to show me a shot he'd taken, he picked up an iPad, and quickly scrolled to the photo he wanted me to see.
It was dim, shiny, and the color(8500ºK or whatever it was was) completely mismatched the existing light in the room. An awful way to see a photo.

I think this is at least half your friends fault.

 

[Calzone]

Well it is sure enough for friends.

As for prints, no gallery representation, so not sure what I would do with prints other than put more of them in my print drawers. Honestly kind of disheartening.

Books are great, and require no digital maintenance. They have become the 21st century equivalent of traditional photo albums.

Fred,

Next Wednesday I have a curator coming to visit my public storage unit to view artwork. I have paintings from the early 80's and a 40x50 shipping container for prints stored there as well as a full darkroom.

It seems this non-profit, "No longer Empty" does these pop-up exhibitions in vacant spaces all around the city, and earlier in the summer I got solicited via e-mail to submit for a possible group show that will open in October and run for 10 days.

I am currently one of 18 artists that will have "storage visits" and will be videotaped interviewed. Out of the 18 it will be culled down to ten artists that will be exhibited in October at the Manhattan Ministorage on Spring Street in SoHo.

Check out 5 examples I submited at www.FreshOutOfStorage.com.

I decided to follow the housing bubble with the idea to "print big and some rich guy will buy it." LOL. My crazy idea seems to be working.

Print sizes are 20x30 on 24x36 paper, and 24x36 on 30x40 paper.

Cal

 

[kshapero]

i would say no but I realize that it has been over a year since I have printed anything. I guess I am now a digital slob.

 

[presspass]

No, screens aren't enough. They suffice for most of my digital work, but the black and white film shots deserve traditional darkroom prints and that's what I do. Some I keep, rotating the ones on display at home and at work, and some I give away. Luddites rule.

 

[Cirrus1]

I really enjoy making prints of my stronger images (Quadtone Rip with a really nice split tone curve). I have a couple of wires strung across above my desk and hang prints with clothes pins. Sadly, I have no printer right now... 3800 died. I will replace it with a P800 in January or if i win the lottery. If I didn't make the prints, the images would stay buried on my hard drive. I feel it adds more purpose to the process of making images.

 

[Bill Pierce]

I have to say that, for me, digital display is not enough. Some minor reasons - (1) When I put a jpeg on the web or in an email, it looks great on my monitor. But, since no one adheres to some universal monitor standard, it can look pretty awful to some folks on other computers. (2) I love to make postcards and send them to my friends. Of course, the postcards are actually small proof prints made before a run of larger prints. But I don’t tell the postcard recipients that. (3) Galleries and museums aren’t interested in jpgs on a monitor, but sign some prints and get old enough that there is not going to be an unlimited supply of prints and their interest perks up.

Now for the big reason. Digital imaging is relatively new, and the way of storing those images is constantly evolving and changing. Whether they be scanned film images or images from a digital camera, I have stored digital images on zip drives, CDs, DVDs and all manner of things that can’t be read by my current computer. (And, sadly, not all of those images have been transferred to a medium that my current computer can read.)

Currently, I store images on large auxiliary disc drives. I suspect those will be replaced by solid state drives which will eventually be replaced by something else. And the older storage systems will become less and less compatible with our current computers.

More important, even if you update all your images onto whatever storage device you use, it won’t look like a picture. When you’re gone, it’s unlikely that anyone is going to look at some rectangular thing and say, “Look, pictures of the family…” or “Look at these beautiful landscapes.” or “Look at these ugly pictures of a war.” They’ll probably put that rectangular thing in the trash.

So I make prints, lots of them.