Paul Indigo asks: Has the Internet Affected Our Appreciation of Photographs?
The obvious answer is yes, but his short article is worth reading nonetheless.
High resolution prints entice the viewer to look at the detail and explore an image. Large photographs hung on a gallery wall invite the viewer to spend even more time discovering every aspect of the image. Nothing beats a beautifully produced original print. Despite the proliferation of online images I still think the ultimate measure of a photograph is how it looks in print.
On screen with typical dimensions ranging from 500 pixels on the longest side to 800 pixels, and screen resolution at 72 dpi it is impossible to convey all the subtle details that a full resolution image holds. The images that work at small sizes are bold, dramatic and full of immediate visual impact. Subtle images are therefore not popular on sites which invite fellow users to comment such as Flickr.
A few comments…
The presentation of photographs on the web is something of a two-edged sword. Photographers, those interested in photographs, and others certainly have the opportunity to see much more photographic work than in the past. It would not be unusual for active Flickr viewers and/or users of other online photo sites to view hundreds of new photographs every day. Exposure to a wide variety of new photographic work certainly has value – among other things it has the potential to expand the photographic vocabulary of photographers and others more quickly than in the past. (An analogy to the changes in how we listen brought about by recorded music is apt.)
Continue reading Paul Indigo: Has the Internet Affected Our Appreciation of Photographs?

