Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: RE: Image Disembodiment  (Read 24117 times)
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7526



WWW
« Reply #60 on: August 20, 2008, 04:40:17 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
PS, Bernard, I really enjoyed those B&W panos you included - stunning, attractive images.

Mark
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=216240\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thank you Mark.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
Ernst Dinkla
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2726


« Reply #61 on: August 24, 2008, 06:25:30 AM »
ReplyReply

Bernard,


You didn't upgrade after the Epson 4000 in view of the predicted market changes ;-)

Till 2035 or something like that the majority of the population will have grey hair and they also have most of the money to spend. They do not adopt technology that fast to  decorate homes they intend to stay in for the rest of their lives. Their taste becomes more conservative how modern they once were. So I do not see it happen in the next 15 years though I shared your thoughts on the subject for some time.

That change may come with the younger generations and in areas of the world where the demography and wealth distribution is different to that of our populations. I guess it will also go along with a different view on copyright. For photographers it is harder to go on tour than it is for musicians. We all know what is happening in that market. If that display isn't showing images that were not paid for it is likely showing images from big distributors, the images we know already and the neighbours have the same and we confirm one another in our taste.

In the busy world we are in with fast media, mobile phones, ever changing landscapes, it may be nice to have some well known, worn pieces of art in your home that have a lower contrast, lower gamut, but nicely blend in with the room's illumination and colors. Like the portraits of relatives that are selected on how we like to see them. There are already several screens in that house with all the advantages you describe and they didn't replace the art on the wall. Would Balmoral Mist worth the essay on http://luminous-landscape.com/essays/balmoral.shtml be any better on a translucent screen than it is now in print on Photorag or a bromide? It wouldn't be the right media for the image in my opinion.

Paper manufacturers have a hard time right now. Raw material and energy prices are high and demand outside the packaging industry is less than it used to be. Offset, rotogravure, newspaper paper in this case. The predictions that the print market would once feel the growth of other media and the internet dates back a long time. It actually sold more paper in manuals for digital equipment and to feed the millions of printers attached to them. That effect is gone and traditional use of paper is declining (but packaging).

With a history of slow acceptance of new media in musea, galleries and collections I doubt you will see them acting as forerunners in this change. For them it actually never becomes a change but just another way of presenting art next to what is already accepted. Not so long ago I walked through the local modern art museum with the man in charge of the print collection. Talking about the problems keeping the modern pieces (1920 up to now) available for exhibitions. Not just prints but movies, performances on video, installations, giclées, color photography. It's a nightmare compared to the conservation of old paintings. Then there is the issue of  the value with insurance etc. That already conflicted with the introduction of conceptual art. The insurance company rather repairs the piece that was damaged by a flood than have it replaced with a new copy by the artist and have the old one destroyed. They couldn't grasp the concept of conceptual art. The same change of mind would be needed when art is hired instead of purchased.

I think you can upgrade your printer another time before things change.


Ernst Dinkla

Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/
Logged
mike.online
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 207


WWW
« Reply #62 on: August 27, 2008, 01:07:33 PM »
ReplyReply

Its tough to jump in to a conversation as long as this, and not re-iterate all of the points that have been made thus far, but I'll try to add something new.

I've had to read Mr. Languillier's article with moderate skepticism. However, I think that publishing that article was important and people need to read it.

Image Disembodiment to me is very analogous to a concept car. It is a departure from the norm, introduces some flashy styling and new concepts as well as pushes our ability to see into a new and wonderful future. This wonderful future gazes into the crystal ball and pulls out a technological revolution, just as we have seen many visionaries do, a la Gene Roddenberry (commiunicators as cell phones, etc.).

Now, the analogy isn't perfect, because there is the possibility that the 'future is now' and we already have digital frames. So then, where is the departure from tangible pervasive technology and the beauty of concept work? The answer, I believe, is in the adoption of the technology. Just as with any radical concept, we do not usually reach the technology as it is foretold, but rather we mutate the idea into practicality. I do not think that we will have a explosion of anyone with a Rebel getting international acclaim because of image repositories. Some people will try do create these (there isn't a technology barrier there, just think of a flicker desktop...), but I do not see the massive amounts of mediocre impinging on the sparse amount of beauty.

The death of paper? Maybe. A paradigm shift in the way we collect art? No. We will have limited editions for purchase, and we will have mass proliferation. There will, however, be a standard of quality that will always be demanded.

Paper has a richness of feel, texture and the physicality creates a sense of ownership. That will not change. For expensive pieces of art we will demand that it is presented to us on a medium that conveys the idealism of the photograph. Flat screens can't reproduce this. No matter how good we get at things like dynamic range and contrast. It is the reason why you can spend thousands on an original oil painting; the fat globs of paint really come out and grab you the way that a printed reproduction never could. (Yes, I am aware that this is a very medium is the message type of argument)

I'm not saying that we won't buy and sell photographs online, and that flat screens will not become a real medium. I'm trying to say that they will not make printing a thing of the past. There will be both, and each will have its benefits. We need tangibility to art. The connection between the Artist and the Collector is not created in the same way though digital the way that it is in analog.

my $0.02 at least.

Thank you for the interesting thought experiment, Mr. Languillier.
- Michael
« Last Edit: August 27, 2008, 01:17:28 PM by mike.online » Logged

BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7526



WWW
« Reply #63 on: October 01, 2008, 02:32:21 AM »
ReplyReply

Perhaps I was off the mark with Fine Art Screens... it should have fine Fine Art Projectors...

http://whathifi.com/News/CEATEC-NEWS-JVC-t...the-next-level/

No pricing information yet.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad