In the Huffington Post Weddings section, a blog post appears by photographer Kathleen Trenske, entitled “The Case Against ‘Good Enough'”.
In the post, she recommends that brides and grooms have an album of their wedding photos professionally printed and bound in an album, instead of simply purchasing a disc of the digital images (which many do, to save money). Her argument is that a beautifully bound album provides a better and longer-lasting keepsake for the couple’s children and grandchildren.
I appreciate the value of such a thing – like the author, I have vivid and cherished sense memories of my parents’ wedding album, bound in white leather, and containing maybe 20 striking images. But this issue highlights for me how much we, as an industry, are still smack in the middle of the transition from the older to the newer technologies. Will a time come when some digital representation of an image is the standard? The most convenient and usual way to enjoy our photographic memories, appreciated by professionals and casual users alike? I, for one, love to look at digital images – they seem to be inherently made of light – but I sure don’t want to sit down at my computer every time I want to look at a cherished image, and Facebook doesn’t seem like the ideal family photo album for the long term.
So, what do you think? Will there always be circumstances under which we prefer to print our images? Or is a more modern way of keeping, appreciating, and cherishing our photos coming down the line?
By the way, be sure to read the comments at the bottom of the post – both sides of the argument are interestingly represented there.
wspconfidential 