Skip to main content

Has the internet affected our appreciation of photographs?


Seaside, Whitby, UK. An invitation to discover the subtle details from the crack in the paving to the pink crocs. Click on the image to see a larger version.


Seaside conversation - interrupted, Whitby, UK. Click on the image to see a larger version.


Most photographs are viewed on screens at low resolution and quite small pixel sizes. Is this affecting the way we look at photographs in general and in particular our ability to appreciate the finer nuances in images?

The way we experience images in different media affects our perception. When viewing photographs on the internet we click through very quickly to the next image. Pick up a large beautifully produced photo book and you are likely to spend a lot more time looking at each image.

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.

I hope that this does not discourage those photographers with a quieter voice, who load their images with layers of detail and subtle nuances, waiting for the perceptive viewer to discover them.

I love looking at images and nothing gives me a bigger kick than to go beyond the big main statement to find a subtle element, carefully included to add wit, humour or a poignant statement that enhances the overall image.

For me a lot of the joy in photography and indeed the essence is the extraordinary detail, subtle colour and light we can capture with our extremely high resolution cameras and lenses.

On the internet I see an increasing tendency to produce highly manipulated images, using texture layers, high contrast, blurring and other filters to strip out the detail. And I understand this trend in the context of viewing images on the internet where bold images stand out. Sadly the initial impact often does not last very long. It’s fast food for the brain. Compare many of these images to a picture like an Ansel Adams landscape, which will keep you discovering new things for years because of the richness in detail and the subtle interplay of light on the subject.

We need both types of image, and like music there is a place for contemporary and a place for the classic.

I hope that readers of my blog will take a moment to think about, discover and enjoy the quieter images that go beyond the obvious, the images that reward the viewer who is prepared to take their time to discover and enjoy the tiniest detail. It is the discovery of these tiny details that ultimately helps the viewer to take the image into their heart and make it their own to treasure.

Yours,

Paul Indigo,
www.indigo2photography.co.uk

Comments

Linked here http://news.deviantart.com/article/87979/ on deviantART :)
Alexander E. said…
Just curious as to why you mention 72 DPI for screen viewing. DPI doesn't matter for screen viewing, and the DPI is different every monitor, there is no set standard for the density of the pixels AFAIK.
What I meant by 72dpi is that when you view an image on screen you cannot see the level of detail you see in a print, at normal website photo sizes. Open a full high res image in Photoshop and then zoom into it at 100 per cent. You see much more detail at 100 per cent than you see at 16 per cent or a web version 500X500 pixels.

In a reasonable sized print all of this rich detail is there in front of you straight away.

A bit awkwardly expressed but hopefully the above sums up what I meant without getting hung up on the technical details.

Cheers,
Paul
Nathan Erfurth said…
You make some incredibly valid points here, and it makes me want to go out and buy a giant photographer's book with full sized prints. I completely agree that the truest judge of an image's merit is its appearance on paper, and that's something I don't think will ever change, especially for the artists.
Unknown said…
Every new technology has changed how we see photographs and photography. Film follwed glass negatives. 35mm film and the Box Brownie brought photography to the masses. The SLR and interchangeable lens, TTL metering, colour film, Kodachrome, faster ISO films, the Polaroid, multi-grade paper, zoom lenses, electronic flash, high speed photography...name me a technology that didn't change the way photographers recorded the world around them, and thus the way people expected photography to be.

There will always be a place for detailed prints, because it is in human nature to make a place for art.

Furious Ennui
www.furiousennui.deviantart.com
Ranger 9 said…
Obviously, photos conceived for one medium -- such as a large print -- can suffer when transposed to another medium -- such as online viewing.

But this issue has been around for a long time, and it cuts both ways: I remember curatorial debate about whether it made sense to take photos that were created with the intent of being published (such as the work of Weegee, aka Arthur Fellig) -- and blow up such works to large size for gallery exhibits?

Ditto small, fragile, hard-to-view originals such as daguerreotypes: turning the images into large, matted, "exhibition-size" prints may have made them more viewable, and more saleable, but was it true to the nature of the original medium?

It's not just image quality that can suffer under inappropriate "translation." For example, it's possible to argue that the whole precious-object ethos surrounding the "fine print" is inappropriate to Weegee's work... the effect can wind up seeming ridiculously inappropriate, like an opera ensemble doing rap.
Chandler said…
Enjoyed the read. Keep up the awesome work!

Popular posts from this blog

Approach to taking a portrait

Portrait of Amitabh Bachchan. Click on the image to see larger version. Every portrait is different but there are also elements which are the same, whether you’re shooting the famous or the locally famous. Fame is of course all relative. It depends on profession, accomplishments or media celebrity status. Whoever the ‘famous’ individual is there are millions of people in the world who will never have heard them. For example I photographed the legendary Indian Bollywood actor Amitabh Bachchan, who amongst his many accolades was awarded the Legion d'Honneur, the highest civilian award of France. But I’m positive that many people in North America will not have heard of him – although he has more fans than Tom Cruise, Jack Nicholson and Robert De Niro put together. I find that however well known a person is cracking through egos and insecurities is really important when it comes to getting authentic strong portraits. However I hasten to add that when it came to photographing Amitabh th

The portrait photographer's motivation

Easy access to the Internet and digital photography has resulted in an ever growing number of photographers uploading their images for comments and ratings from peers. Online communities evolve and these mini-societies each have their pecking order, internal groups and communal preferences. Photographers learn from each other. On sites that have a rating system there is often pressure to conform to certain styles, techniques and even subject matter. Although I participate in numerous sites (it's great fun), I recognise the danger of becoming a herd animal and losing the edge of individual creativity. There will always be the creatives that lead the way and the imitators that can only try to follow in their footsteps. This lead me to think about classifying photographers according their inner motivation. So as a bit of fun here are a few different types: The innovator Driven to always find something new, different and creative. Wants to be leading edge. Motivated by creative satisfa

Capturing the truth: The power of documentary photography to shape public opinion

Photographer, writer and artist, Paul Indigo (Photo by Magda Indigo ) Documentary photography is more important than ever because it plays a critical role in informing and shaping public opinion, particularly in today's fast-paced, information-saturated world. With the rise of social media and the 24-hour news cycle, we are bombarded with images and information daily. It can be difficult to separate fact from fiction. From a trusted source, documentary photography counterbalances the often sensationalised and biased coverage of social and political issues. Documentary photography can challenge dominant narratives and foster greater understanding and empathy by presenting a nuanced, humanistic perspective on complex issues. It can highlight underreported and marginalised issues, giving voice to those who are often ignored or silenced. In a world where many people feel disenfranchised and marginalised, documentary photography can help to create a sense of community and solidarity by