As I was rereading a Sherlock Holmes story on my iPhone with the Google Reader app (I really like it) my eye caught a photographic print on my bedroom wall. I was wondering if printing and paintings, which are considered part of home decor, would be replaced by digital frames in the same way that e-books are being replaced.
Amazon recently proclaimed that they were selling more e-books than physical books.
Will this digital conversion also replace the physical print on the frame on the wall in the living room?
Were there unique differences between eBooks and digital photo frames?
At first glance, they look different, but I thought it would be interesting to list the differences.
The world has come to the conclusion that reading books is very convenient on digital devices, be it iPad, iPhone, Kindle, NOOK, etc. The only screen I can’t read on for a long time is my computer screen. No matter what anyone says, I still like to curl up with a good e-book, something I can’t do with this giant screen.
Given that context, I began to wonder if the print in the living room, the photos in the living room, the paintings in the hallway, would be replaced by digital frames.
And more specifically, what exactly was the difference between digital books and digital displays of visual art.
The differences may seem obvious to you, but I felt the need to list them because, as far as I could tell, the digital photo frame hadn’t quite caught on yet, although it was a much simpler thing to do from a technical standpoint. -view.
1. Give us some style
At first glance (so to speak), the digital book and the digital frame appear similar. A book is simply a display of some combination of text and images.
The digital photo frame displays images. The frame can be large, although as you get closer to the size of the poster, the price becomes an issue. But smaller photo frames can be purchased, and instead of displaying just one image, they can be programmed to display different images at different times of the day, or randomly, like a screensaver for the wall.
And therein lies the problem. What is chosen to display on the wall of a living room is an expression of the owners of that space.
The very fact that it does not change from one image to another gives it a value because you chose it. Think of it like a bit of interior design. The one immutable image in the living room has the responsibility of proclaiming your sense of style, in the same way as the painting on the wall, the furniture in the room and the lighting fixture.
The book, in essence, is not for display purposes. It is true that there will always be rare books to display. First editions of rare books and all that kind of stuff. But for most people, books can be perfectly enjoyed curled up in a nice armchair, or sitting on a plane (ugh), or wherever without needing to show them off as a statement of who you are.
In terms of style, if the use of a digital frame becomes a wow factor, a proclamation of your style, then it could become popular. But unlike the benefits of reading a digital book, the digital frame as a style statement has an uphill battle.
2. The entertainment factor
The book can be read and enjoyed on any suitable device because it is a set of symbols that you translate in your imagination. The art of telling a story, or writing about the story, is not inherent in the physical presentation but in the way the story or story is told.
It is true that there is a craft associated with physical books that can turn them into works of art despite the content, but here we are talking about a separate form of artistic endeavor that will be lost to the reader of digital books. There’s no doubt. But it is also clear that there will come a time when this kind of bookmaking craft will be rare, and that buyers of well-made physical books will do so as an investment and read them (if they dare) with white cotton gloves.
The question is whether a viewer can derive the same pleasure from a digital picture frame as from an original physical print.
That digital frame on the living room wall is always there. It can be turned on or off. You can display art or become a video screen. But this very ability to display anything (as opposed to the case of the digital book) will make it more difficult to enjoy. Even if you only have a digital image, that image will not have the same aesthetic value as a physical print.
This ability to display anything removes the personality behind the images.
Some laptop manufacturers now offer different covers as an option. The way the laptop looks, rather than what it does, is a major fashion statement.
The well-crafted art books I mentioned earlier will become more interesting because they cannot be transformed into anything else.
In short, even if a digital frame has the same “look” as a traditional painting or print, knowing you’re looking at a digital representation that can be changed at the push of a button will make the presentation less enjoyable.
Efficiency is not the key to enjoying art. Can you imagine Renoir exclaiming to his fellow painters: “Hey guys! Check this out. Now we can flip through my images with the click of my smartphone.”
Edward Weston used to do something like that. Ansel Adams writes (and I’m paraphrasing) that Edward invited his friends over and had a stack of small contact prints, maybe 5 x 7.
He put each one on a small easel for his friends to see. Then, without saying a word, remove it and place the next one on the easel. And so on until the little show ended.
Then they would talk.
But this wasn’t a slideshow or digital frame with a clicker. They were original prints, and I can’t imagine the time when a print would become a slideshow; whereas I can easily see a time when only the very rich had what we used to call books.