Is THIS the way to view images?

I see more photography on a computer monitor than anywhere else. Perhaps more significantly, I see these at relatively low resolution for technical reasons. Nuances are obscured in the fog of jpeg/72dpi/sRGB screen. Is this where it will end up?

Probably not Pete. My daughter is very computer savvy and views images all the time. For her own photography, she loads them onto the PC, then off to get all the good ones printed.............everytime , without fail. Her friends seem to be the same, while dad has little printed off.

What makes me smile is these digital photo frames. Nice idea, but NOTHING ever beats a print on the wall, nothing M8t. I think its just a convenience and plus its part of how we all seem to relate to each other on the web. Thats a must.

All the best Pete.

Danny.

So it is still ok to strive for technical excellence? I'm not kidding by the way.
Pete D.

So it is still ok to strive for technical excellence?

If you're asking for my permission, Pete, you've got it.

But seriously...

It seems to me that if your goal is to ultimately present anything beyond the "jpeg/72dpi/sRGB" you mentioned in the initial note, striving for technical excellence is highly desirable...and is, arguably, a laudable pursuit in any event. I say, go for it!

Viewing a photo on the web pales in comparison to a nice large print. I get so much more enjoyment viewing prints, there is so much more to see. I don't think the monitor will replace viewing prints any time soon.

Oh yeah Pete, the goal always should be perfection. Not that its possible, but to get as close to it as possible should be a goal. You can't replace the eyes as it scans a large print, the sense of taking in the details, theres just no comparison IMO. I look at Guy's images as an example and often wonder, what it would feel like to be standing there and viewing a huge print, with all the details, bang in the face as it were. I think we tend to lose the power of an image on the net.

Yes, to get those jpeg's clean, smooth and still sharp is a great challenge Pete and also a must. Off the net, those jpeg's and the RBG, dpi, are not such a big deal.

Interesting Pete.

Danny.

Pete,

I think printed work will always be the most emotionally pleasing. GIven the rate at which monitors are evolving, the somewhast low visual resolution of screens will improve. If that is coupled with vastly improved download times for very large image files, we may well see incredibly detailed and 'color-correct' images on our monitors.

While such 'electronic' images may wind up being superior to the fine print, from the standpoint of accuracy, I believe people will still be more emotionally affected by a fine print.

-PB

I know a lot of people who never get prints made anymore. I also know people who have never gotten anything more than a 4x6 print made. In either case, for them, technical excellence doesn't really matter. I can think of a few reasons it might still, though, for someone like yourself :

1) There has to be good technicals even for web sized shots (just look at some of my stuff versus some of the great postings on here ) even though there's more wiggle room.
2) To be able to post process really effectively, it always helps to start out with a perfect shot.
3) You may just want to make prints at some point - I hadn't made any but bought a photo printer and enjoy that part of things a lot now
4) You might start posting larger images to the web at some point (the only reason I can think of for not posting larger right now are copyright reasons)

I hope that's reason enough - and if it isn't, I'm sure you can still be happy trying to perfect every other part of photography.

(On a side note, 72 dpi doesn't mean anything on computer images - only the actual resolution, like 720x340 pixels. Sorry to nit-pick, but it's a pet (not Pete) peeve. )

If you're in a smaller community, you're certainly going to have to go to the web or books for diversity. In that light, the web is a boon.

But if you're in a large metro area or travel a bit, you can still find breathtaking work in galleries and museums. I'm in a very small community, and a tour of mounted and hung photos won't take long at all. Therefore I really value the web as an alternative to buying even more books.

But when I travel, as I am doing right now, I search out galleries and shows as an alternative to hotel TV each evening. It sure improves the travel experience, even as it broadens my horizons. I've been on the road 15 days now and I've already hit well in excess of 20 shows and galleries in Washington, Oregon and California. I'm in Idaho right now, but sad to say I'll be passing through too fast to look for photos. I've got another 8 weeks in Colorado and Utah, and you can almost bet that the number of exhibits I'll view will exceed the number of days.

It's a priority for me, so I schedule it in.

When personal computers became popular many were predicting that the electronic media will reduce or eliminate the use of paper. The result was the exact opposite - the ease of desktop printing caused a huge surge in paper consumption.

I believe the same will happen with photography. Fine-art printing is now within most people's budget, bringingr print sizes of 8x10 or 13x19 (once considered "large") to most desktops.

Guy

I ran into exactly what you're talking about Guy. I bought a great (I think) 13x19 printer, when I didn't think I'd ever really be making prints other than an occasional oddball one. Now if only framing could be made much cheaper...