4 ms·

I'm trying to figure out where the value of experiencing it "in person" comes from.

msephton 2y ago
Experiencing anything in person hits differently, I'm sure you'd agree? Listening to live music, viewing art, being at your child's birth, hanging out with friends. With music and art in particular, you're not limited to low fidelity reproductions when you witness the real thing. It must be a fairly common desire given that concert halls, museums, and art galleries exist. In this particular instance, each impression of The Great Wave is different—actually unique—because of the way they were mass produced. So you might want to see a different one, or maybe try to see as many as you can to compare them. Also, in person you might be surprised by its size. You've seen The Great Wave, the Mona Lisa, etc. but have you seen it?
- romanhn 2y ago
  Personally, the Mona Lisa was entirely unimpressive in person. A rather small painting surrounded by a throng of tourists taking selfies with it. I did as well, of course.
  - azinman2 2y ago
    Mona Lisa is largely famous for its history versus its contribution in art. The louvre has far more impressive works.
surfingdino 2y ago
You get to see the original work. One of the moments where it made a big difference for me was seeing William Eggleston's original prints. They are very different from the reproductions you see online or in print, because of the print process he used. The richness of colours and the way light interacts with the layers making up the print really changed how I see his work. That process is no longer available, sadly.
takumif 2y ago
This is something I've been wondering about with regards to museums, live music, tourist sites, eating foreign food in their places of origin, etc. Sure, ideally I'd go for all the real stuff, but traveling to faraway places for that requires lots of planning, vacation time, money, and putting up with discomfort along the way. Some of the museum-visiting and sightseeing can probably be replaced by something like a Vision Pro without much loss in the quality of the experiences, with some upsides in the factors I just mentioned. Whenever I'm on a trip and visit an art or history museum I feel like I'd be able to better enjoy and appreciate the stuff if I weren't so tired from the walking/standing/travel and didn't have to go through the entire collection within the time constraints, and maybe a high-end VR headset at home can offer a higher quality experience. I still haven't paid for a Vision Pro though. Right now I do try to experience a lot of the aforementioned things (live music etc.) in person, but to be honest I'm not 100% sold on their appeal given the more affordable/convenient/comfortable substitutes we have in the modern world. So far the value for me has been more about the memories I'm making with others than the actual content of the experiences themselves.
- netsharc 2y ago
  Looks like that Apple ad squishing all those analog things under a giant hydraulic press is made for you...
- msephton 2y ago
  I can say work 100% certainty that the low resolution and limited colour reproduction of Vision Pro is no replacement. We're still a long way from that visually. And even if we do get there we've not considered the vibe and atmosphere. Particularly with live music you can physically feel the vibrations.
rtpg 2y ago
Big value from museums is curation. You can get context (for example, pieces done by the same person just before or after), explanations (I recommend audio tours! There's loads of info there), and even just having the experience of seeing the actual material and texture in a way that's hard to understand. You can also get exposed to related art and see things in a different light (though honestly this is dependent on the museum. Some curation is inspiring, other curation feels constrained by a lack of imagination or access to the right kind of pieces) I don't think for a woodprint you'll get this, but for a lot of paintings the scale itself can be impressive. There are multi-meter high paintings out there that can be very mesmerizing. But it's also just kinda neat!
MattPalmer1086 2y ago
It's an interesting question. That it does have value seems unquestionable to me and I suspect to most people. Seeing an original work by an artist always makes more of an impression on me than just seeing a representation of it. Being in the presence of something of significance weaves it into your personal history. Does it make you part of a grander narrative somehow? I have felt a kind of awe to witness something that is great in person. But I don't really know why it has the value it does.
- downboots 2y ago
  That's what I was wondering. If it is self-aggrandizing vanity. I guess it really comes down to personal meaning and preference. Other commenters brought up the valid point of increased sensory bandwidth or curation. Interesting to think about.
throwup238 2y ago
RGB monitors and CMYK printers have a very limited color space compared to the pigments used in inks and paints. The colors are brighter and more vivid instead of compressed to fit RGB/CMYK. Many of the best art works have to be seen in person to really experience (I haven’t seen the Fuji prints in person so I can’t speak to specifics here).
Findecanor 2y ago
I too don't think I would go to a museum to watch only a single artwork. However I've been to a travelling Hokusai exhibit that had the whole set of "36 Views of Mount Fuji" and I thought that was really something. There were also original drawings, and examples of Hokusai's original "manga" (Hokusai invented the word).
- msephton 2y ago
  You were very lucky to see such an exhibition!
acheron 2y ago
Beep boop, humans are so illogical.

Experiencing anything in person hits differently, I'm sure you'd agree? Listening to live music, viewing art, being at your child's birth, hanging out with friends. With music and art in particular, you're not limited to low fidelity reproductions when you witness the real thing. It must be a fairly common desire given that concert halls, museums, and art galleries exist. In this particular instance, each impression of The Great Wave is different—actually unique—because of the way they were mass produced. So you might want to see a different one, or maybe try to see as many as you can to compare them. Also, in person you might be surprised by its size. You've seen The Great Wave, the Mona Lisa, etc. but have you seen it?

romanhn 2y ago
Personally, the Mona Lisa was entirely unimpressive in person. A rather small painting surrounded by a throng of tourists taking selfies with it. I did as well, of course.
- azinman2 2y ago
  Mona Lisa is largely famous for its history versus its contribution in art. The louvre has far more impressive works.

surfingdino 2y ago

You get to see the original work. One of the moments where it made a big difference for me was seeing William Eggleston's original prints. They are very different from the reproductions you see online or in print, because of the print process he used. The richness of colours and the way light interacts with the layers making up the print really changed how I see his work. That process is no longer available, sadly.

takumif 2y ago

This is something I've been wondering about with regards to museums, live music, tourist sites, eating foreign food in their places of origin, etc. Sure, ideally I'd go for all the real stuff, but traveling to faraway places for that requires lots of planning, vacation time, money, and putting up with discomfort along the way. Some of the museum-visiting and sightseeing can probably be replaced by something like a Vision Pro without much loss in the quality of the experiences, with some upsides in the factors I just mentioned. Whenever I'm on a trip and visit an art or history museum I feel like I'd be able to better enjoy and appreciate the stuff if I weren't so tired from the walking/standing/travel and didn't have to go through the entire collection within the time constraints, and maybe a high-end VR headset at home can offer a higher quality experience. I still haven't paid for a Vision Pro though. Right now I do try to experience a lot of the aforementioned things (live music etc.) in person, but to be honest I'm not 100% sold on their appeal given the more affordable/convenient/comfortable substitutes we have in the modern world. So far the value for me has been more about the memories I'm making with others than the actual content of the experiences themselves.

netsharc 2y ago
Looks like that Apple ad squishing all those analog things under a giant hydraulic press is made for you...
msephton 2y ago
I can say work 100% certainty that the low resolution and limited colour reproduction of Vision Pro is no replacement. We're still a long way from that visually. And even if we do get there we've not considered the vibe and atmosphere. Particularly with live music you can physically feel the vibrations.

rtpg 2y ago

Big value from museums is curation. You can get context (for example, pieces done by the same person just before or after), explanations (I recommend audio tours! There's loads of info there), and even just having the experience of seeing the actual material and texture in a way that's hard to understand. You can also get exposed to related art and see things in a different light (though honestly this is dependent on the museum. Some curation is inspiring, other curation feels constrained by a lack of imagination or access to the right kind of pieces) I don't think for a woodprint you'll get this, but for a lot of paintings the scale itself can be impressive. There are multi-meter high paintings out there that can be very mesmerizing. But it's also just kinda neat!

MattPalmer1086 2y ago

It's an interesting question. That it does have value seems unquestionable to me and I suspect to most people. Seeing an original work by an artist always makes more of an impression on me than just seeing a representation of it. Being in the presence of something of significance weaves it into your personal history. Does it make you part of a grander narrative somehow? I have felt a kind of awe to witness something that is great in person. But I don't really know why it has the value it does.

downboots 2y ago
That's what I was wondering. If it is self-aggrandizing vanity. I guess it really comes down to personal meaning and preference. Other commenters brought up the valid point of increased sensory bandwidth or curation. Interesting to think about.

throwup238 2y ago

RGB monitors and CMYK printers have a very limited color space compared to the pigments used in inks and paints. The colors are brighter and more vivid instead of compressed to fit RGB/CMYK. Many of the best art works have to be seen in person to really experience (I haven’t seen the Fuji prints in person so I can’t speak to specifics here).

Findecanor 2y ago

I too don't think I would go to a museum to watch only a single artwork. However I've been to a travelling Hokusai exhibit that had the whole set of "36 Views of Mount Fuji" and I thought that was really something. There were also original drawings, and examples of Hokusai's original "manga" (Hokusai invented the word).

msephton 2y ago
You were very lucky to see such an exhibition!

acheron 2y ago

Beep boop, humans are so illogical.