> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > Bruce Walker [...] > > And yet Mante's claim would seem to not apply to the viewing of images. > Else how to explain the enormous number of art and photography books > with larger dimensions. I have a whole bunch of photo books in my own > small collection that are on the order of 10x13" (16+" > diagonal) that contain images near that size. One of my faves, a > Lillian Bassman book, features mostly full-bleed and even gutter- > straddling images. I don't hold these books 32" away to view them. I > read them at arms-length, and I can assure you that I have industry > standard arms. > > I don't think that all these photo/art books are outliers. I contend > that folks like larger images. >
I have a gripe with art and photo books that are too big to hold and read comfortably. I think that their size is not so much a result of readers' preferences, but of some sort of arms race for prominence in the bookstore, and coffee table impressiveness at home. A lot of them are probably also bought as presents and may seem more impressive as such when they are bigger than the room they're supposed to go in. I still have quite a few overlarge photo books myself. If I want to look at the photos I can only buy the book that's on offer - I don't normally get a choice of an oversize book or one designed for normal humans. But the books I take off the shelf most often are the ones that fit on my lap without breaking my thighs, and don't require the sort of lectern that only cathedrals should have. I also suspect that smaller books sell more. In the shops where I lurk the colossal books get a lectern to themselves, but there's only one copy and nobody buys it even when it ends up in the sale bin. On the other hand the little books have plenty of shelf space which suggests a decent turnover. There's a similar bloat tendency in the IT book market, where in my experience the books tend to be useful in inverse proportion to their size, although the shops are filled with fat books that contain nothing but froth, for dummies. > I also don't think that anyone hiring a photographer would be satisfied > being handed a portfolio of 4x6" or 5x7" shots. I'm pretty sure they'd > expect to see 8x10" or so. I think that, as a sales tool, 4x6" images > would be rather lacking. They're fine for holiday snaps though. > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
