When You Purchase Photo Related Books..Electronic or Paper?

[bwcolor]

or Electronic 'How To" and Paper "Photographic Images".. or any combination...

 

[literiter]

Two years ago I bought a Kindle. I then paid for, and downloaded a book.

Worst investment I ever made.

 

[Robert Lai]

Books are heavy, and bulky. But, properly done the images inside can be beautiful.

A kindle is just another small computer with a very annoying interface.

 

[Phil_F_NM]

Books.
In fact I just picked up a second printing of Portraits of Greatness by Yusuf Karsh.
Before that was a copy of Workers by Sabastiao Salgado.
I'm amassing a collection of photo work by photographers whom I really admire.
Philip Jones Griffiths, Vietman Inc.
Jeanloup Seiff (Taschen printing)
Paris, Elliott Erwitt
Unposed, Craig Semetko
Photojournalists on War, Kamber et al.
In Opposition, Benedict Fernandez
Protest, Benedict Fernandez
Impounded, Dorthea Lange
The Americans, Robert Frank
Minamata, W. Eugene Smith
Yankee Nomad, David Douglas Duncan

Add to that all the history volumes, autobiographical works, literature and finally books for working.
There is no way to really have a connection with an electronic version in my opinion. There is so much to the tactile experience of a real book.

Phil Forrest

 

[konicaman]

Paper!

Only exception is manuals - and only if I can't find a printed version.

I don't mind ebooks that are text only; nice for reading on the bus/train - but books containing pictures? No way that I am going to do a lot of resizing, turning the device and then getting a mediocre result that wont do justice to the photos!

 

[slidesandthecity]

Paper.

I had a tablet for a short time. Hated every second with it.

 

[RichC]

Depends. For pure reference, especially if technical such as manuals, I use ebooks. Particularly useful because I can refer to them on my phone or iPad if I'm away from home.

But I collect photobooks, and definitely paper for them.

Academic books about photography I prefer to read as physical books too. But their ebook equivalents are useful too (e.g. searching for something). So, I sometimes buy both electronic and paper editions of a book.

A screen is a single surface, and many books are easier to use in their traditional paper form, as flipping between pages is more convenient and allows a better overiew and appreciation of context.

Not to mention that some books - such as photobooks - are designed to be experienced as physical objects through choice of materials and print process.

So, horses for courses...

 

[Sejanus.Aelianus]

I'm not surprised to see fixed positions taken here. For myself, ink on a page, twisted crystals in a back-lit screen, it's all the same to me.

I either enjoy it or not and every case is different. :angel:

 

[majid]

eBooks whenever possible, except for coffee-table books.

 

[RichC]

I'm not surprised to see fixed positions taken here. For myself, ink on a page, twisted crystals in a back-lit screen, it's all the same to me.

Well, I use and like both. But I don't think they're the same at all (though later, somewhat contradictorily, you imply what I say: "every case is different").

They may have the same words, but they're different mediums. Neither is better, they each have strengths and weaknesses - like viewing photos on screen vs prints, or watching TV compared with going to the cinema.

NB. The increasing pervasiveness of the electronic screen is something I touched on in my Digital Archaeology photographic project (see my website) - all the artefacts deliberately have screens.

 

[Ansel]

Paper. Same as for photos.

 

[Sejanus.Aelianus]

Neither is better, they each have strengths and weaknesses

Exactly my point.

 

[RichC]

Exactly my point.

Fair enough! 🙂