Displaying your images on digital picture frames

[bobby350z]

There was a recent thread where someone posted about using Meural frame. I was checking that and then I remembered about the Samsung Frame TV. I went to my local BB store and liked what I see. So I picked up the 65" model. All versions support 16:9 images and screen being matte it looks much better than other shiny TV. Think BenQ monitor vs apple display. I just did some tests by uploading a few of my files and it is like wow. Yes it is quite a bit of money but I was able to pick one up with significant discounts. If I went the print route, it won't be cheap either and I would be restricted in how often I can swap the prints.

I've been interested in these for a while now. Would be real convenient to change your images seasonally. How do you like it so far? Does it use a lot of power?

Suppose to be very little power.

55 inch model


65 inch model

You can configure the sensor to stop displaying after xyz mins if no presence detected in the room. Looks like it has mmWave sensor but not as advanced as I had expected. Samsung sw is crappy but I am old school so no app for me, I just stuck a USB with my images into the One Connect box and uploaded my images that way. It can take max 7680x4320 but I need to see if that makes any difference in quality compared to std 3840x2160.

Those appear to be fully functional smart TV's. I was always hoping someone would produce smaller and cheaper high res displays for photos where you reasonably buy a bunch of them. Still very tempted to get one though.

I looked at all the other options. Those options max out at like 30" and cost quite a bit for that small size. 55" of Frame can be had for < $1000 through employee discounts. 32-43" are much cheaper but they don't have matte screen from my understanding. Somehow 55" is cheaper than 50" when on sale.

 

[bobby350z]

It would be fun to use something like this to show work of my friends. I'm trying to limit how much of my own stuff is on the wall ... I don't want the house to feel like a vanity gallery. Unfortunately there's no reasonable copy protection for this kind of thing, so it's not really reasonable to ask people to swap high res files.

On another note, I went with an artist friend to an event sponsored by a digital art startup (they were selling digital frames and an art subscription service). The thing that bugged us most was the power cords. My friend said that visible power cords were his biggest pet peeve with digital art installations. Interesting to hear since that's his medium. I'd make it a priority to hide the cord if I had one of these.

This TV has a small cord from the One Connect box to the TV. I hid it behind the wall.

 

[bobby350z]

I intensely dislike looking at images on electronic displays. I offer that as a simple statement. I don't wish to diminish the enjoyment of those who do.

I have spent a lifetime making physical, paper prints of all kinds including every photographic method and almost every commercial printing method, spanning letterpress, gravure and web and sheetfed offset lithography. And of course, "digital printing" spanning inkjet, dye sublimation and other methods.

I have given up trying to describe the satisfaction that comes from holding a physical print in one's hands. Such an experience, again, in my opinion, far exceeds viewing an electronic screen.

I fully realize that I and others like me are in a very small, unimportant and diminishing minority. It will only be a few short years before there will be no-one in photography who has had any experience making prints of any kind. The great majority of people who are photographically active now have never handled or even seen an analog photographic print. And don't care. Soon, that number will be 100%.

Have you seen a Frame TV? Just go best Buy or some place like it and try it. I would want a print but how often I change it? And I wouldn't know what to do with that 40x30 I replaced? Boss at home is not going to happy with junk in the garage or my office.

 

[liggy]

Thanks for the post. I'll tiptoe into the waters by loading up my Apple TV box with favorites and then think about a dedicated monitor.

 

[paulraphael]

Thanks for the post. I'll tiptoe into the waters by loading up my Apple TV box with favorites and then think about a dedicated monitor.

I've been planning to do this, just haven't tried to make it work yet. I've been collecting some high res art on the internet for this.

All the Farm Security Administration photography (Walker Evans, Dorothea Lang, etc) is public domain and can be downloaded from the Library of Congress site. There are some other sites that have other art libraries. I've even snagged some Anselm Kiefers that are pretty good quality. Could be a fun alternative to the stock Apple screen savers.

 

[paulraphael]

Those appear to be fully functional smart TV's. I was always hoping someone would produce smaller and cheaper high res displays for photos where you reasonably buy a bunch of them. Still very tempted to get one though.

Being smart TVs might make them cheaper. The companies make more money off your data than your original purchase.

Luckily it's easy to make them dumb; just don't connect them to the internet.

 

[liggy]

Thanks for the post. I'll tiptoe into the waters by loading up my Apple TV box with favorites and then think about a dedicated monitor.

I've been planning to do this, just haven't tried to make it work yet. I've been collecting some high res art on the internet for this.

All the Farm Security Administration photography (Walker Evans, Dorothea Lang, etc) is public domain and can be downloaded from the Library of Congress site. There are some other sites that have other art libraries. I've even snagged some Anselm Kiefers that are pretty good quality. Could be a fun alternative to the stock Apple screen savers.

Super easy to do.

I just set up a new folder in Photos on my phone for images to display. Hit "Slideshow" and in the top right corner the TV icon appears and send it to your TV as a mirrored display.

Instead of using an old iPad as a digital picture frame I'll use it as the dedicated steam to TV device for this purpose.

 

[mcsey2k1]

I was able to pick up the Samsung frame 55-in the latest version at an Best buy outlet just a little under $500, last year. I use it exclusively as an art frame. When people come into the house this the first thing they see. I have other TVs for viewing

I use it to showcase my Hasselblad X2D pictures. Every time someone walks in they ask where did you get your art from and I tell them that's my work.

I agree with you, I simply love it.

Thanks for sharing

That's beautiful.

May If you have been displaying JPEG files?

I read here Samsung Frame TV can display TIFF files? is that true?

Sorry for the late response, am not certain about tiff but my image is a jpeg converted from raw. Hope this helps.

 

[bobby350z]

Thanks for the post. I'll tiptoe into the waters by loading up my Apple TV box with favorites and then think about a dedicated monitor.

I've been planning to do this, just haven't tried to make it work yet. I've been collecting some high res art on the internet for this.

All the Farm Security Administration photography (Walker Evans, Dorothea Lang, etc) is public domain and can be downloaded from the Library of Congress site. There are some other sites that have other art libraries. I've even snagged some Anselm Kiefers that are pretty good quality. Could be a fun alternative to the stock Apple screen savers.

Super easy to do.

I just set up a new folder in Photos on my phone for images to display. Hit "Slideshow" and in the top right corner the TV icon appears and send it to your TV as a mirrored display.

Instead of using an old iPad as a digital picture frame I'll use it as the dedicated steam to TV device for this purpose.

Don't have Apple TV, I am the Android person but have chromecast etc but normal TVs are too reflective. With Google Photos I can't control easily how often my image changes. Here with Frame TV, I can stick with same image for months. It has proximity and Ambient Light sensors though both of them don't work as well as they should in theory. Samsung software interface is not great. If Apple were to make a matte display frame I would buy it in a heart beat.

 

[somadjinn]

I intensely dislike looking at images on electronic displays. I offer that as a simple statement. I don't wish to diminish the enjoyment of those who do.

I have spent a lifetime making physical, paper prints of all kinds including every photographic method and almost every commercial printing method, spanning letterpress, gravure and web and sheetfed offset lithography. And of course, "digital printing" spanning inkjet, dye sublimation and other methods.

I have given up trying to describe the satisfaction that comes from holding a physical print in one's hands. Such an experience, again, in my opinion, far exceeds viewing an electronic screen.

I fully realize that I and others like me are in a very small, unimportant and diminishing minority. It will only be a few short years before there will be no-one in photography who has had any experience making prints of any kind. The great majority of people who are photographically active now have never handled or even seen an analog photographic print. And don't care. Soon, that number will be 100%.

I seriously doubt that number will ever be 100%. I'm not sure why there's a need to sound so dire. Traditional artists didn't fizzle out when photographers entered the scene with their "new technology" back in the 1800s, and I'm pretty sure traditional artists sounded similar alarms back then. In other words, same problems, different times. Yet changes keep happening, and traditional artists are still thriving. Do you see how much the rich are paying for fine art nowadays? Or how popular arts & crafts are becoming on sites like Etsy?

You will never convince me that traditional photography will go entirely extinct. Thinking you are in a very small, unimportant diminishing minority is a very pessimistic way of painting it in my opinion. The truly creative and more optimistic artist would see this as an opportunity; that he is uniquely talented to offer a niche form of photography with less competition to worry about.

 

[JimKasson]

I intensely dislike looking at images on electronic displays. I offer that as a simple statement. I don't wish to diminish the enjoyment of those who do.

I have spent a lifetime making physical, paper prints of all kinds including every photographic method and almost every commercial printing method, spanning letterpress, gravure and web and sheetfed offset lithography. And of course, "digital printing" spanning inkjet, dye sublimation and other methods.

I have given up trying to describe the satisfaction that comes from holding a physical print in one's hands. Such an experience, again, in my opinion, far exceeds viewing an electronic screen.

I fully realize that I and others like me are in a very small, unimportant and diminishing minority. It will only be a few short years before there will be no-one in photography who has had any experience making prints of any kind. The great majority of people who are photographically active now have never handled or even seen an analog photographic print. And don't care. Soon, that number will be 100%.

I seriously doubt that number will ever be 100%. I'm not sure why there's a need to sound so dire. Traditional artists didn't fizzle out when photographers entered the scene with their "new technology" back in the 1800s, and I'm pretty sure traditional artists sounded similar alarms back then. In other words, same problems, different times. Yet changes keep happening, and traditional artists are still thriving. Do you see how much the rich are paying for fine art nowadays? Or how popular arts & crafts are becoming on sites like Etsy?

You will never convince me that traditional photography will go entirely extinct.

I often tell people that some, maybe most, of the best platinum, cyanotype, or gum bichromate printers that ever lived are printing right now.

Thinking you are in a very small, unimportant diminishing minority is a very pessimistic way of painting it in my opinion. The truly creative and more optimistic artist would see this as an opportunity; that he is uniquely talented to offer a niche form of photography with less competition to worry about.

 

[paulraphael]

The great majority of people who are photographically active now have never handled or even seen an analog photographic print. And don't care. Soon, that number will be 100%.

Unless you're logging in from the Star Trek universe, I seriously doubt that's true.

People have photographs on their walls. There's photography from every era hanging in galleries and museums.

I personally share your preference for a physical print. I'm thinking more along the lines of, "there's already a big ugly tv on my wall ... how can I make it useful when I'm not binging something?"

 

[bobby350z]

The great majority of people who are photographically active now have never handled or even seen an analog photographic print. And don't care. Soon, that number will be 100%.

Unless you're logging in from the Star Trek universe, I seriously doubt that's true.

People have photographs on their walls. There's photography from every era hanging in galleries and museums.

I personally share your preference for a physical print. I'm thinking more along the lines of, "there's already a big ugly tv on my wall ... how can I make it useful when I'm not binging something?"

How often you change those prints? I have a small house and can only put a couple of 40x30". Then just forget about them. New tech allows to keep the wife happy and me enjoy more of my own images. Frame TV is not ugly IMHO, need to go see in the store.

 

[DavidMillier]

The great majority of people who are photographically active now have never handled or even seen an analog photographic print. And don't care. Soon, that number will be 100%.

Unless you're logging in from the Star Trek universe, I seriously doubt that's true.

People have photographs on their walls. There's photography from every era hanging in galleries and museums.

I personally share your preference for a physical print. I'm thinking more along the lines of, "there's already a big ugly tv on my wall ... how can I make it useful when I'm not binging something?"

How often you change those prints? I have a small house and can only put a couple of 40x30". Then just forget about them. New tech allows to keep the wife happy and me enjoy more of my own images. Frame TV is not ugly IMHO, need to go see in the store.

My DIY digital frame is pretty ugly at the moment. I had it on an easel and brushed past it and knocked it off to the hard floor. The wooden frame pieces are now scattered to the 4 winds, LOL.