Pin It. Post It. Like It. Tweet It.
Sharing life's moments has never been easier. In the early to mid '90s, upgrades in computer user interfaces and drops in production costs made home computers mainstream. People no longer had to wait multiple days to receive a message from across the country thanks to email. Today, we can stream video using a device in our pocket to share a moment with someone on the other side of the globe.
It is clear that the Internet has provided us with powerful tools and further developments in social networking communities and tools have brought the world to our fingertips. Social media, one of the Internet's many forms, has helped satisfy the seemingly never-ending need for instant gratification, one of the defining characteristics of Generation Y. This obsession, although not widespread in the entire population since the Baby Boomer generation is still present, has warped how we perceive and value photographs. Before the Internet, photos were exclusively used as a method of documenting time, almost in an archival sense. Today, more and more of the population are using cameras to share daily moments. Networking sites such as Facebook have integrated photos into their "stream" where moments come and go in less than a minute. Although this is not necessarily bad, it has come at a cost.
Social media tools have made photographs such commonplace, to the extent where the significance of photography, as an industry and an object, has become devalued. This includes both digital and print mediums (I am willing to bet there is a subset of readers who thought this was just about digital photography, which further proves my point). Don't get me wrong, though. As part of Generation X, I too indulge in what technology has to offer. In fact, it is probably what brought you here.
Recently, I printed out one of my favorite images. As corny as this sounds, when I finally received it in the mail and pried it out of the packaging, there was something special about being able to hold the photo. The feeling I got from it is what brought this post to existence. A coworker of mine took a picture of me holding one of these prints. At the time, I thought it was totally ridiculous to have this done, mainly because I do not like having my own photo taken. Call me a hypocrite. But when I looked at this photo, it was very odd to see myself holding something that for so long had only existed on my computer. It was at this point that I realized I had also fallen victim to what I previously outlined, how the digital world has warped our perception of photography. As a side note, I do not own a single photo album which I could pull off the bookshelf or out from under the coffee table. Up until recently, all of my photos were either online or on my hard drive.
It was interesting to me to see the impact a photographic print can have. This can be easily measured by comparing the amount of time people spend looking at photographs when on a screen and when in print. I showed a good number of folks the digital image of the Olympic Iliad and the Space Needle and if I were to ballpark an average viewing time, I would say people spent 3-5 seconds when viewed on screen (Update: According to Google Analytics, viewers spend an average of 7 seconds per page in my Seattle Street gallery. I was close!). But when I showed these people the same image in print, they spent at least half a minute. On top of that, some would come back and look at it again.
*Photo of print at Philanthro Seattle's 2013 Art with Heart event
Tangible prints and albums offer so much more than digital files. They convey and recall emotion/memories more vividly than digital photos through our auxiliary senses of touch and, in some cases, smell. They have that inherent wow factor. Honestly, I find it really difficult to adequately explain what prints do for people. They just do more and I sincerely hope the current generation does not lose sight of this value.
I think concepts such as this are best explained through example. The significance of a print can be extended to objects in general. The video below is of Adam Savage (host of Myth Busters on the Discovery channel) explaining how objects can carry extensive backstories in not only a historical aspect, but also in respect to the process of obtaining and creating them:
Regardless of whether you made it through the video, I leave you with one question:
If you were to pick between having 10 of the highest resolution photos which, for the sake of this example, were locked in digital form or having a single wall print, which would you choose?