Luminous Landscape Forum
The Art of Photography => Discussing Photographic Styles => Topic started by: vdemczuk@tpg.com.au on September 24, 2016, 01:34:00 am
-
I note the theme on LL this year is "The Print". Paper prints have been with us for a very long time. We have worked on "capturing the moment" and producing the "essence" of "the moment" via a Print. I think at this point in the 21st Century that we can do better. Many subjects do not have only one decisive moment. For example, a sunset has a "period" when it is "captivating". In the past we had to pick one "moment" because we could only reproduce one moment as a paper print on a wall.
Electronic Displays are now of comparable (or better) quality to prints (at normal viewing distance) but have the ability to change images. I suggest that we work on the "art" of including change in our photography.
I am not talking about video. I am talking about evolving the static print to include change. One example is that each time we walk into a room the displayed image is of a different moment in e.g. a sunset.
-
I note the theme on LL this year is "The Print". Paper prints have been with us for a very long time. We have worked on "capturing the moment" and producing the "essence" of "the moment" via a Print. I think at this point in the 21st Century that we can do better. Many subjects do not have only one decisive moment. For example, a sunset has a "period" when it is "captivating". In the past we had to pick one "moment" because we could only reproduce one moment as a paper print on a wall.
Electronic Displays are now of comparable (or better) quality to prints (at normal viewing distance) but have the ability to change images. I suggest that we work on the "art" of including change in our photography.
I am not talking about video. I am talking about evolving the static print to include change. One example is that each time we walk into a room the displayed image is of a different moment in e.g. a sunset.
You mean you want us to buy yet more gadgets?
No thanks!
Rob C
-
It's already the case here. I regularly change the prints pinned to the toilet door...
-
I read you, Victor, and for something like a sunset I think you have a point. But with photography's apex -- street photography -- there's a decisive moment; a single one that conveys the point. HCB's "Behind the Gare Saint-Lazare" is a classic example. A graduating series showing the guy on his way down to the water simply wouldn't be the equivalent of a sunset.
But having said that, welcome to LuLa! Show us some of your work.
-
My original post was supposed to include the following link which expands on my argument and includes examples of my work. https://www.changingstaticimages.com
-
In reply to RSL, from a perception aspect it could be argued that humans capture the visual world in "snapshots". Part of my point is that a sequence of these better (or as well as) captures many situations than a single image. Electronic "picture frames" give us the added capability to display those many images in comparison to a single paper image. In the street photography example, if a video was taken of a scene, individual frames could be selected that better cover the "ambience". I believe wedding photographers are starting to use this technique with the quality available from 4K video.
-
I am not talking about video. I am talking about evolving the static print to include change. One example is that each time we walk into a room the displayed image is of a different moment in e.g. a sunset.
It seems to me that you are precisely taking about video. Or a slideshow. And to me, one of the main beauties of the still photograph is that is *has* captured one specific moment, and that moment will be there forever in the print.
-
In reply to PeterAit, video is usually presented as an image sequence of 10-50 frames per second. What I am talking about is an image sequence of 1 per hour (approximately). It could be described as a "slide show", but that is a previous century term - we no longer use "slides".
-
PeterAit commented: " And to me, one of the main beauties of the still photograph is that is *has* captured one specific moment, and that moment will be there forever in the print."
I agree that a single image can capture the "essence" of a situation. Art and Photo galleries are full of awesome images. I am talking about an extension of an image display that becomes possible with an electronic "picture frame", that is how some situations can be better represented by a sequence of images.
-
What I am talking about is an image sequence of 1 per hour (approximately). It could be described as a "slide show", but that is a previous century term - we no longer use "slides".
But the video (there really is no other word for it) on your home page is the exact opposite: a time-lapse.
Jeremy
-
But the video (there really is no other word for it) on your home page is the exact opposite: a time-lapse.
Jeremy
I agonised about presenting the image sequences as videos, fearing readers would get the wrong idea. I eventually decided to leave the videos because they quickly convey the range of images in a sequence. I doubt anyone would watch on the web an image that only changes once an hour! The concept is an evolution of a print on a wall that never changes to images that are different each time you look at them, but still of the same subject.
-
It is a good idea but I don't see it instead of a print, but in addition to the prints. I agree with Russ that some images that don't need a sequence.
-
Yes, I can see the interest. It seems to me that is is a slide-show, just done with newer technology that makes it more practical in more settings.
There are of course pros and cons, aside from the cost etc: a photo i viewed for as long as the viewer wants. A sequence of photos, unless you offer a button to the viewer, requires watching for the duration of the sequence. It's a disadvantage shared with video.
They are different, but legitimate ways of showing images, me thinks.
-
Yes, I can see the interest. It seems to me that is is a slide-show, just done with newer technology that makes it more practical in more settings.
There are of course pros and cons, aside from the cost etc: a photo i viewed for as long as the viewer wants. A sequence of photos, unless you offer a button to the viewer, requires watching for the duration of the sequence. It's a disadvantage shared with video.
They are different, but legitimate ways of showing images, me thinks.
In regard to cost, LCD devices are now available at similar cost to a framed print.
My experience with the sequences is that each image stands on its own (or should), one does not need to see the full sequence at one sitting (like a video). If the sequence takes a month, each hour/day can be a new pleasure.
In any case the software controlling the sequence allows image selection via "soft" buttons.
-
On my walls I have about a dozen 17 x 22 prints matted and framed 22 x 27, and a couple dozen at various smaller sizes. I don't need software for them. I don't need to plug them in. I don't need to change batteries. I don't need to worry about a power failure or a destructive power surge during one of Florida's powerful thunderstorms. They all have scenes that remain static and are exactly what I was after when I shot them.
-
In reply to PeterAit, video is usually presented as an image sequence of 10-50 frames per second. What I am talking about is an image sequence of 1 per hour (approximately). It could be described as a "slide show", but that is a previous century term - we no longer use "slides".
Oh we already have what you are talking about - those digital photo frames where you insert a memory card with photos and program it to cycle thru them every X minutes.
-
On a sixty inch LCD panel next to my kitchen I have a slide show comprising about a thousand images. It's a never ending source of delight to me, my family and all who visit.
-
On a sixty inch LCD panel next to my kitchen I have a slide show comprising about a thousand images. It's a never ending source of delight to me, my family and all who visit.
Do you always have the Panel engaged, or is it when you feel a viewing coming on? Just asking for practicality...and is this the screens sole function?
Peter
-
On a sixty inch LCD panel next to my kitchen I have a slide show comprising about a thousand images. It's a never ending source of delight to me, my family and all who visit.
Exactly - I call this "Themes" on my site.
What I also propose, from a "Style" view is that electronic picture frames allow us to incorporate how a scene can CHANGE with time or viewpoint via a sequence of images.
-
Do you always have the Panel engaged, or is it when you feel a viewing coming on? Just asking for practicality...and is this the screens sole function?
Peter
I have one display from Electric Objects [www.electricobjects.com] that can turn on and off on a timer, so it is off when I sleep. It also adjusts its brightness so it is bright in day time and suitably dimmer at night.
When an electronic display is being used as a digital picture frame, that is its purpose. I have some screens that are multi-purpose, connected to media boxes that can be used to display other content.
-
It is a good idea but I don't see it instead of a print, but in addition to the prints. I agree with Russ that some images that don't need a sequence.
I agree. I have many paper prints on my walls. I eventually ran out of wall space, yet kept taking images that deserved display. When electronic displays began getting very cheap they solved my wall space problem.
-
Oh we already have what you are talking about - those digital photo frames where you insert a memory card with photos and program it to cycle thru them every X minutes.
I propose an extension of "photographic style" by capturing how a scene changes with time or viewpoint via a sequence. The hardware has been with us for years. Almost all the landscape photography at present is "a moment in time". I think we can go beyond a single image capture and thus capture more of the "essence" of a visual experience.
-
Oh we already have what you are talking about - those digital photo frames where you insert a memory card with photos and program it to cycle thru them every X minutes.
Even better - you can control some of them via the Web. My brother and I use one (Nixplay) to let our mother have a series of our photos. It's really rather nice, but it's no substitute for a large print.
Jeremy
-
In order to clarify what I am proposing, I have added more examples to my web site [https://www.changingstaticimages.com]. I am proposing that we can improve the landscape aesthetic by adding image sequences which we could not do in the past with a "print".
-
Maybe it would be better to speak of creating a different aesthetic, rather than "improving." They are bound to be different and not immediately comparable.
Although it isn't landscape, David Bailey makes the point that despite all the hours of news-reel film exposed in Vietnam, the most powerful images for changing public opinion were two B&W stills: the vietcong soldier having his brains blown out, and the little girl burnt by napalm running down the road.
-
Maybe it would be better to speak of creating a different aesthetic, rather than "improving." They are bound to be different and not immediately comparable.
Although it isn't landscape, David Bailey makes the point that despite all the hours of news-reel film exposed in Vietnam, the most powerful images for changing public opinion were two B&W stills: the vietcong soldier having his brains blown out, and the little girl burnt by napalm running down the road.
On top of which, who remembers any newsreels stuff accurately enough, other than the Twin Towers, to identify places or times? It all merges into the same thing: witness the Middle Eastern conflicts. Even Afghanistan - beyond the pretty picture of the lass with the piercing eyes...
The still shot is often accompanied with touching text which, together, make the whole memorable and also accessible quite easily at later dates. Newsreel vanishes as soon as it's off the screen.
Rob
-
Hi Rob,
One piece of newsreel footage that is very memorable...the Hindenburg.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CgWHbpMVQ1Uhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CgWHbpMVQ1U
Peter
-
Hi Rob,
One piece of newsreel footage that is very memorable...the Hindenburg.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CgWHbpMVQ1Uhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CgWHbpMVQ1U
Peter
Indeed! Maybe that's a reason I no longer like flying. Was a time I felt withdrawal symptoms if there wasn't a flight in the future; now I am happy never to fly again, if avoidable. Not only do I trust aircraft less and less physically, the whole experience has moved from being something cosseting to being a member of a herd of cattle. I'd rather drive a week than fly three hours. Perhaps it's an underlying dislike of being wedged in beside strangers and especially those bearing children. It has certainly lost its cachet.
Rob
-
Indeed! Maybe that's a reason I no longer like flying. Was a time I felt withdrawal symptoms if there wasn't a flight in the future; now I am happy never to fly again, if avoidable. Not only do I trust aircraft less and less physically, the whole experience has moved from being something cosseting to being a member of a herd of cattle. I'd rather drive a week than fly three hours. Perhaps it's an underlying dislike of being wedged in beside strangers and especially those bearing children. It has certainly lost its cachet.
Rob
Yeh driving would be great...but unless you just want to hermit in your own little world...I still need to fly if I want to get to places like Vietnam or Iceland...or just about anywhere interesting in this world.
-
and there in lies the rub....what one finds interesting...and what one can do with it. Has nothing to do with being a hermit crab.
Frank
-
Being a hermit is a matter of mental attitide, and little to do with travel.
This little island, for example, is filled to disaster point with tourists every summer, and with bicycle maniacs every autumn, winter and spring. (Suicide jockey was a term coined for these people who regard white, edge safety-lines for bicycles on roads as the ideal marker for side-by-side riding, one on each side of said line.) The point, though, is this: the bulk of the summer flock seems to care nothing for local ways, culture, food nor anything else: just sun, sand, free sex (they hope), booze and the production of fresh pavement pizzas each night. They fly in from God alone knows where, and go back home knowing nothing more than they did on arrival. Go, Johnny go! And please take your carapace back with you.
Of course, the problem is that they aren't LuLa readers and probably not even rabid snappers of images. That may or may not preclude sexting, though the latter may actually be an invention of the media and not really exist: no young lady, known or otherwise, has sent me either a requested (never requested) or unsolicited personal portrait of hidden bits via cellphone. I almost feel deprived.
Practical notes: my islands are double-edged swords: they make caravans very rare because of ferry costs (yes!) but also make moving off to the mainland of Europe quite a drag that involves booking, deciding how long you will stay away and thus how much you're gonna be screwed for the choice of type of tickets for your pair of little ovenight sailings. Ideally, the price should be standard, however long the muse tells you to drift in Europe - or beyond, if Visa is available strongly enough. How on Earth are you meant to know how the damned trip's gonna turn out? You may suddenly feel homesick or quite the opposite!
I hate the concept of variable pricing. Just as with airlines, they screw you when there is little choice of alternatives, and now it seems that when the volume is low, they no longer offer the flights at all. So, the sanctimonious argument about providing loooow-cost in winter and making up for such generosity in summer no longer holds if you want to fly here from Glasgow or Newastle, though I believe London always has flights available. That travelling north to south in Britain, which using London often necessitates, is also a heist-in-action is neither here nor there, which is why I mention it.
Rob
-
Maybe it would be better to speak of creating a different aesthetic, rather than "improving."
+1
It is like reading a book or reading on an iPad.
Different
-
Maybe it would be better to speak of creating a different aesthetic, rather than "improving." They are bound to be different and not immediately comparable.
The "different aesthetic" requires consideration of time - how long should the image sequence cover, how many frames, what display time for each image?
I constructed one sequence by extracting particular frames from a 4K video of a person moving through a landscape. Each image was a composition on its own but as a sequence it conveyed more of the range of body movement and relationship to the background. I could remove awkward positions, only keeping "key" frames.
Other sequences have been of beach sand. A few years ago I displayed a changing abstract sand pattern as a triptych. However it was too limiting and now I have image sequences showing how the patterns of sand change as waves come and recede.
Another aspect is the lack of need for high resolution since it is displayed on a 2K or 4K screen.
There remains the need to consider colour and intensity range. The new HDR (High Dynamic Range) 4K video format along with OLED and ULED display technology is capable of stunning image quality.
-
Given the quality of the TV displays announced/displayed at CES 2017, in my opinion this further dooms the "paper print display". Reiterating my earlier posts, this is in two areas; (1) display quality (2) dynamic creativity.
(1) requires landscape photographers to pay more attention to colour coding. JPEG coding is a limitation, current and future electronic displays can display a wider colour gamut. At present I mainly use JPEG because it is convenient and widespread. With current electronic displays I can produce "stunning" images with JPEG images, but they could be better (for the purists).
(2) requires photographers to explore how to better convey visually cued emotion. My website https://www.changingstaticimages.com has further discussion and examples of what I mean.
The current push for quality TV displays is for large form-factor displays, probably because that is where companies can make the most money. Eventually these will be available in smaller "picture frame" sizes. The Samsung Q9 "hanging" display shows what is possible in a thin display that is "hung" on a wall and minimises cable connections.
-
I have updated my web site https://www.changingstaticimages.com to include a section on "cars" where I explore an alternate way of presenting automobile images. During a recent visit to a local car museum I took lots of "traditional" still images, but found them boring when I reviewed them. I did get more excited with images that I could utilise as sequences - more dramatic!
-
We have series of waves at various points. They are interesting prints as you move down a wall and see the wave in "action". There is something about a print that no display can duplicate and vice versa. I prefer the print. I think we tend to like our own work on video displays but would others? I don't know. It reminds me too much of wallpaper for your pc's or macs desktop.
I think it is great that you have found a way to display your work that excites you - that's what it's all about. We all don't need or want to do the same thing.
-
What about...given the cost of printing and framing large images to hang in your living room...
would you rather have numerous prints or one of those new OLED televisions to display your stuff?
-
What about...given the cost of printing and framing large images to hang in your living room...
would you rather have numerous prints or one of those new OLED televisions to display your stuff?
Prints, every time. I already have prints and paintings on the available walls; the electronic screen is never on anymore other than to catch some news. For me, tv and its associated media are dead. I detest the faux reality of elecronic imagery; it only serves a purpose as an example of something else, something tangible. A print, even unframed, is tangible. Of course, future generations may never understand what that might mean, never mind be.
;-(
Rob
-
now I am happy never to fly again, if avoidable... the whole experience has moved from being something cosseting to being a member of a herd of cattle...dislike of being wedged in beside strangers and especially those bearing children.
I recently flew overnight nonstop diagonally across the world's largest ocean. From Vancouver to Auckland. A journey that took James Cook months took me one night - three movies, two tasty meals (with a superb Sauvignon Blanc) and a short snooze.
My active noise cancelling headphones isolated all but the tiniest whisper from the cranky two-year-old in the row ahead of me and automated passport readers and well-prepared, efficient security procedures mitigated, if not eliminated, most of the herd-of-cattle feelings.
A miracle, if you ask me.
I made a digital article about my attenuated photo trip to The South Island. You can read it here if you like. About a five minute read.
https://indd.adobe.com/view/fc8ae9c8-e4c8-4d67-a805-d15d76af5c27
-
Prints, every time. I already have prints and paintings on the available walls; the electronic screen is never on anymore other than to catch some news. For me, tv and its associated media are dead. I detest the faux reality of elecronic imagery; it only serves a purpose as an example of something else, something tangible. A print, even unframed, is tangible. Of course, future generations may never understand what that might mean, never mind be.
;-(
Rob
In addition to the display of images I am talking about the extension of photography to encompass "time" or how the image environment changes, e.g. how a sunrise/sunset view changes over many minutes. An image sequence can capture that ambience. I would like to see discussion about how best to "capture a time period" of a scene.
We are familiar with 24/30 frame per second image sequences (video), what about slower sequences? I have a sequence of waves moving on a shore causing changing patterns in sand. One image/print does not do the scene justice - what makes it engaging is how the scene constantly changes creating pseudo-abstract patterns unique to that location and time-of-day. By displaying the image sequence on an "electronic picture frame" every time I look the image is same/different. Another example is a sequence from a close-up panorama of tree texture - every time I look at the image it is same/different - I have captured the variety and visual complexity that could not be represented by a single image. I have "extended" the ambience of the scene.
-
In addition to the display of images I am talking about the extension of photography to encompass "time" or how the image environment changes, e.g. how a sunrise/sunset view changes over many minutes. An image sequence can capture that ambience. I would like to see discussion about how best to "capture a time period" of a scene.
We are familiar with 24/30 frame per second image sequences (video), what about slower sequences? I have a sequence of waves moving on a shore causing changing patterns in sand. One image/print does not do the scene justice - what makes it engaging is how the scene constantly changes creating pseudo-abstract patterns unique to that location and time-of-day. By displaying the image sequence on an "electronic picture frame" every time I look the image is same/different. Another example is a sequence from a close-up panorama of tree texture - every time I look at the image it is same/different - I have captured the variety and visual complexity that could not be represented by a single image. I have "extended" the ambience of the scene.
I love the way Stephen Wilkes does it in his "Day to Night" series:
http://stephenwilkes.com/fine-art/day-to-night/52fa99eb-3e5c-461e-af58-56020af4b6c2
-
I love the way Stephen Wilkes does it in his "Day to Night" series:
http://stephenwilkes.com/fine-art/day-to-night/52fa99eb-3e5c-461e-af58-56020af4b6c2
Me too, James. :-)
-
I love the way Stephen Wilkes does it in his "Day to Night" series:
http://stephenwilkes.com/fine-art/day-to-night/52fa99eb-3e5c-461e-af58-56020af4b6c2
This raises a point about "Style". Another word that might be appropriate is "Branding" - Stephen Wilkes can be associated with his (unique) "Day to Night" series. Artists are not "branded" by their use of e.g. paper - it is the content on the paper that identifies their "style".
I may have picked the wrong Blog to discuss my use of electronic displays as being "Beyond the Print". My mistake may have been to go too high in abstraction level and thus moved away from "Style".
-
This raises a point about "Style". Another word that might be appropriate is "Branding" - Stephen Wilkes can be associated with his (unique) "Day to Night" series. Artists are not "branded" by their use of e.g. paper - it is the content on the paper that identifies their "style".
I may have picked the wrong Blog to discuss my use of electronic displays as being "Beyond the Print". My mistake may have been to go too high in abstraction level and thus moved away from "Style".
Equally, I think mistake are made when people try to intellectualise and over-complicate a simple thing like an image. I think pretty much everybody loses the plot when they attempt to give a complicated reason for the existence of an image. An image exists because at a give moment somebody thought it was interesting, or pretty or otherwise of meaning to them. That's all photography, non-commissioned, ever is. Is all any art ever is: it seemed a good idea at the time.
If folks could only accept it for what it is, we would all be spared the tedium (if not rising sense of hysteria) of reading artist's statements.
If anything brings photography and most of the rest of art into disrpute, it's those promoting it as something that it is not.
Rob
-
I note that Samsung have just announced a new display panel that is used as “framed art” when not used as a TV.
http://vancouversun.com/technology/personal-tech/is-it-art-or-television-new-tv-set-can-serve-as-both
My point has been that the display technology is getting better and cheaper. I have a number of $100 displays scattered around the house displaying my "art". It is true that their quality could be better - but it slowly is.
Our role as photographic artists is to take advantage and “push the envelope” of creativity. We can do better than “an instant in time” to convey the emotion of a place.
-
I note that Samsung have just announced a new display panel that is used as “framed art” when not used as a TV.
http://vancouversun.com/technology/personal-tech/is-it-art-or-television-new-tv-set-can-serve-as-both
My point has been that the display technology is getting better and cheaper. I have a number of $100 displays scattered around the house displaying my "art". It is true that their quality could be better - but it slowly is.
Our role as photographic artists is to take advantage and “push the envelope” of creativity. We can do better than “an instant in time” to convey the emotion of a place.
Possibly the best way is with the help of a few G&Ts.
In another situation, it's hard to beat a Campari Soda on a terrace of the Carlton in Cannes.
In most real situations photography comes in as a very distant also-ran.
Rob
-
Following some advice from Alain Briot (www.beautiful-landscape.com), I have updated my web site www.changingstaticimages.com to reflect my current work. This should provide visitors with a reason to revisit the site. It also shows the variety of ways that electronic displays can increase the visual communication of "being there" over single paper prints.
-
I was happy to see the Kevin Raber video on Digital Wall Frames. He covered some of the benefits that I covered in this thread last year. I now wait for people to discover the possibility to capture and display more than "a moment in time" that I suggested in my first post. I think this is where Landscape Photography as an art will/should develop in the future. As I covered in my earlier posts I think "sequences" of images provides a better "capture" of some scenes (like sunsets) than one image.
-
If folks could only accept it for what it is, we would all be spared the tedium (if not rising sense of hysteria) of reading artist's statements.
Hear hear!!! I'll clink my glass to that.
-
Noting that this topic has not been discussed for a long time, I wonder if attitudes towards it have changed? I have not seen much discussion on web photography sites about the capture of landscapes where the light changes with time.
Victor
https://www.changingstaticimages.com/
-
Victor, it just isn't too many people's favourite method of enjoying their snaps.
I sense an obsession with "change" and the fixing of things wot ain't broke.
Personally, I enjoy my photographs most of all on the iPad: no setting up, no breaking down; as long as there's wifi I can look at my site or someone else's with no trouble at all. That is convenient, and a pleasure to boot. I have no interest in making motion images, and sequences are not much more than attempts at that - even if of unrelated subjects. I sent some prints off to someone this week, and as good as I think them to have been, I know them very well, and readying them for posting was the first time I'd seen them in perhaps a year. I felt no desire to do anything more with them, nor have another look at the rest of the ones in the boxes.
As for pleasing other people: I have had an amateur photographer uncle in the family and believe me, slide shows bore me to hell and back. I have enjoyed one slide show in my life, one presented by the late, great Sam Haskins. Why would I imagine other non-photographers that sometimes visit would be thrilled to be confronted with an electronic version of the dreaded slide show? Just because I like photography doesn't mean everyone else is thrilled to bits by it. Rather, it can rapidly become an embarrrasing case of running out of new ways of saying oooo and ahhh. Of couse, it's relatively easy if you photograph kittens. Much prettier than babies.
:-)
-
Victor, it just isn't too many people's favourite method of enjoying their snaps.
I sense an obsession with "change" and the fixing of things wot ain't broke.
:-)
I am not talking about "snaps". I think electronic screens can "enable" the display how light can change with time. I believe it adds the "time" dimension to landscapes.
I often sit and enjoy the beauty of nature and am sensitive to how it changes with time, whether it is over 20 minutes of a sunset or minutes with surf on a beach.
After many years of producing prints, I now find them "insufficient".
Victor
https://www.changingstaticimages.com/
-
I am not talking about "snaps". I think electronic screens can "enable" the display how light can change with time. I believe it adds the "time" dimension to landscapes.
I often sit and enjoy the beauty of nature and am sensitive to how it changes with time, whether it is over 20 minutes of a sunset or minutes with surf on a beach.
After many years of producing prints, I now find them "insufficient".
Victor
https://www.changingstaticimages.com/
That is my position too; the problem is perhaps nothing really to do with the medium on which we see them, but with familarity.
I could extend that reasoning to covering your current mood for electronically showing them in whatever sequence or over whatever time scale you may choose. Frankly, unless the photographs are of something that has huge emotional meaning to one, where the photograph, per se, is not the actual object of veneration but simply the key to something far more important represented within it, all I see in the idea is novelty which will wear off unless the images hold more than themselves. You could give me the Mona Lisa, and after a week, the best thing I could think of doing with it would be to sell.
There's a very good photographer who contributes to this site; he tells us that he has no framed photographs of his work on display at home. In some ways, that has come to strike me as a healthy attitude and a very good sign of his current position in life. I, on the other hand, do have some of my own pix on the walls, and they are almost all work-related. Why do I keep them there, so many years after I retired from the battle? Simple: they remind me that I once achieved some things, and that old age and retirement do not negate or deny a pleasant past. Just like my stolen Rolex, in fact: symbols of good times once lived. Loss of either is loss of far more than objects.
The above does not imply that the images are fantastic; it states that some people used to think that they were more than good enough to pay me to go and produce them. Especially in a current world of freebies and discounted stock, that holds personal meaning and validation. Snaps are sometimes far more than snaps, even if they are not pipes.
Trouble is, mostly, they are not much of anything at all.
;-)