Rob, Instagram is a window to the world and boosts the the rankings of any website linked to the account.
As for image quality, frankly if it takes a minor hit on small jpegs then that's par for the course and would be of no concern. As for colour problems, well, I know what I'm doing so it simply won't be an issue. You think my work or that of others is well represented on small jpegs posted to LuLa or elsewhere?
There are many photographers who I admire posting to IG. If for any reason I'm not happy I have the option of deleting any content, as here or elsewhere. I have more control over reproduction than I ever had when delivering transparencies to agencies, publishers and libraries.
Indeed I do; perhaps not in an absolute fashion in that I am sure that some people manage to print very well. Nonetheless, as few see prints anymore, and as I certanly see far more images online than in magazines or any other paper medium, it seems very clear to me that there are huge differences between the quality of work posted online, so judgement calls are still legitimate. You are surely not suggesting that everything online is equally good or poor, in both execution and/or content,
both being vital factors, IMO?
Vision is an illusion. I do not for a moment agree that my work on print looks much better than my work on my monitor: they are different mediums. My transparencies always looked better than my finest colour prints. As you very well know, though some here may not, that is the difference between viewing something by transmitted light rather than via reflected light. It's key, all else being equal. That said, the work on
my monitor may certainly look better than the same work online on somebody else's monitor or cellphone.
Actually, I have a website because it gives me an instantly available directory to the best of the material from the past that survived changing countries, destruction of material that could not be sold back to clients (foreven much regretted!), material recouped from a stock agency - the fact that so much of which had been scuffed but not reported as having been licensed out raised a lot of questions as to how, then, such damage happened... I also get a place to gather my thoughts on the times that new pictures do get produced.
I think my stuff on my monitor looks as good as I can get it to look. The thing is, on that same monitor - as on the little iPad - images on the websites of people whose work I admire
do look excellent. So really, I guess it depends what one sees from which source, and on which viewing device it is being seen.
