“When an image converts poorly to the web, the poor quality of the image reflects badly on the artist,” James continues. “An incredible amount of interested can be generated in a digitalized form of word of mouth, as friends share links to your work,” founder James writes in an email, “Most importantly this form of self-advertising is free and accessible to emerging artists, who may not have the means of otherwise promoting themselves.” But what about when this same venue starts damaging the works of those self-starting artists? “Let’s face it,” their About statement reads, “Facebook’s photo management really sucks.” Shouldn’t pictures on the world’s biggest social network actually look good, particularly when so many Facebook users depend on them for a livelihood? The message of James’s group is that Facebook isn’t just for presenting shitty party pics, but also presents a tool that artists depend on for marketing and sales. Yet though difficulties remain, new Facebook updates point to a way forward for art and artists online. The limitations were even annoying enough for artist Jonald James to start a Facebook group in protest, Artists Against Facebook’s Image Compression Process. ![]() Those digits mean an image size that’s low enough to make even high-quality pictures look bad, adding grain, and distorted colors. Since the inception of Facebook’s photo viewer, an influential tool that’s become the go-to for documentation of everything from social events to product launches, users have been stuck at a pretty lousy 72 DPI and 720 pixels. ![]() ![]() Facebook’s new photo viewer, with lightbox
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |