CEIVA view point FRAMED

Posts Tagged ‘fingerprints’

For my first digital photo frame review, I selected the Sony S-Frame Model DPF-V1000. To be thorough, I actually set Sony’s frame up and used it for over two weeks. I wanted to dig into it  and really get to know and use the frame the way a consumer would. As I was taking my notes, I noticed that for every good thing I liked about the frame I always felt the need to qualify what I wrote with a “but” statement.

I selected Sony’s frame because recently there has been much talk about the design of the frames in Sony’s S-Frame series. I have to say the frame’s overall design is beautiful to look at; the fit and finish is perfect. But, as every designer knows, “good design is in the details” and it is in the details where the frame falls a little short. First, surprisingly there is no integrated holster/caddy to store the small remote control that comes with it. Next, I found that the frame’s trendy high gloss black finish with shiny chrome accents was a fingerprint magnet.  Also, because the rear leg extends back 6 ½ inches the frame can really only be viewed from the right side when it sits on shelf and takes up quite a bit of space on a night stand.  Finally, the frame’s sleek and modern design style, looking much like a miniature computer screen, would most likely clash with more traditional décors.

The DPF-V1000’s 10.2” LCD wide-screen picture is clear and bright… the quality you would expect from Sony. But, because the screen is a wide-screen (16:9 aspect ratio) a little less than 1/3 of the screen becomes useless black bands when viewing photos generated by most consumer cameras which are 4:3 aspect ratio. The black banding becomes even more awkward to look at when the frame is turned on end to portrait mode.

Surprisingly the frame, which looks hi-tech, relies on older card reader technology.  As a stand-alone frame, it accommodates all the popular card formats.  Pictures files can be moved from the card and into the frame’s 1GB of memory. But, I have to admit I was a bit perplexed as to whether the upload was complete after I moved my pictures over. A simple “Upload Complete” message would have saved the time it took to look around and confirm that the pictures were actually moved.  Also in this wireless age, I found that fiddling, futzing and fingerprinting the frame to load it with a new batch of pictures from a card was a frustrating and tedious task. A Blue Tooth adapter is available for the frame that retails for $249.99. The adapter would be an additional $29.99 for a total of $279.98.

Maybe to compensate for the fact that it is sold as a free standing frame, Sony packed it full of internal features. But, having to dig deep looking through layers and layers of menus to access those features is time consuming and confusing.  This coupled with the fact that for some reason the remote control required that I press the button numerous times in order for the frame to register my selection was extremely annoying.

While reviewing this frame, I learned that using an internal photo editing feature can be quite limiting. The frame’s Auto Touch -Up feature makes six basic corrections; but, going through the correction process with each picture one by one is quite slow and often results in a final “touched up” version that has negligible improvement.  Another feature called Creative Edit is a nice idea, but it is very limited in the choices it offers in the way of decorative borders and stamps. After using the photo frames built in picture editing, I came to the conclusion that ultimately it would be better to find a more robust PC or web solution (many of which are even free) for photo editing and decorative enhancement. It is also important that I note that photos edited in Photo Shop and converted to GIF file would not load onto the frame.

Finally, one of the features I was particularly interested in was the HDMI interface that would allow me to connect the frame to my Sony BRAVIA XBR LCD TV for big screen picture viewing. But, to make this connection I needed to dole out another $19.99 to purchase a special HDMI cable. Once connected, the show on my 46” TV screen had mixed results. New pictures that I shot using my camera’s super fine High Quality mode looked great on the TV.  Pictures I shot in the Normal Quality mode looked OK. Old paper prints that I had scanned and converted to a digital image looked OK when viewed on the frame, but looked horrible on the big screen. I realize this lack of quality is not due to a fault in the frame. My point is that while the HDMI connectivity feature is enticing, don’t expect that same clear image you get when viewing a small picture on a small screen to always transfer over to a larger screen.

FINAL VERDICT: I would have to say that considering the suggested list price of $249.99 the 10 Inch Sony S-Frame is an expensive sleek and shiny beauty on the outside, but cumbersome and perplexing on the inside.

Yesterday the Internet was all abuzz and twittering about SilverPac’s SilverFrame being shown at Computex in Taipei.

Engadget’s blog on the subject thought that SilverPac was doing “it’s best to break the boring mold of typical digital photo frames”. While over at Gizmodo they wondered if “SilverPac SilverFrame Is a Questionably Acceptable Use of the Term ‘Digital Picture Frame’.”

All this got me wondering, and wanting to ask a few questions.

• Is SilverPac truly “breaking the mold” or is it snuffing out the digital frame’s true purpose?
• At what point does a manufacturer cram a “frame” so full with technology and functionality that it no longer becomes a digital frame and becomes something else?
• Are the engineers that designed this “frame,” thinking that just because it has a video screen it needs to be filled up with a lot of gadgetry like a computer?

When it comes to product design for digital photo frames I could not help but think of two famous principles of GOOD design.

“LESS IS MORE” and “FORM FOLLOWS FUNCTION”

To be honest, I am not sure this “gadget” adheres to these basic design principles. Why do I say this? Well, picture frames (even “traditional” frames for old fashioned paper pictures) are such that they sit in the background in our homes and offices passively displaying and sharing images of past moments that mean so much to us. Be it simplistic, picture display is the function of the form.

So I can’t help but wonder. Do people really want to fiddle, futz and get greasy fingerprints on another gadget that has functions commonly found on their computer, or better yet, their cell phone?

If showing personal photos is to be the primary function of the form, then I believe these over designed forms are not true digital picture frames. But what are they? Well, to be honest I am not sure what to call them. I do know that at CEIVA, photo display/sharing is the primary function we honor in our forms.

So until the next post… that’s what CeivaJoe knows!

POST SCRIPT: Do I see a trend? Since posting this blog this morning I have come across another “video screened gadget” being reviewed with the hopes that it be considered a digital photo frame. PC WORLD says in their review of Trancend’s PF720 that it “does it all, but… might be too much for those looking for a straightforward picture frame.“  And Tom’s Hardware writes “We’re also wondering why SilverPac is calling this a digital picture frame…” Hmmm… I guess it is not only me after all.

COMMENT

These days there’s a lot of talk about digital frames with touch-screen menus.

Here’s the one fundamental problem with touch-screen frames: They’re a lot like stainless steel appliances — they seem great until you realize they show every fingerprint. With a touch-screen frame, you’ll touch the display over and over again in order to use the menu, which means you’ll have dozens of fingerprints on your frame.

Would you put your fingerprints all over the surface of a printed photo? Of course not and for good reason—it wrecks the photo and your ability to enjoy it. You would hold a photo from the edges to keep it smudge-free. So if you’ve got a digital frame with a touch-screen menu and you want to enjoy your photos free of fingerprints, you’ll have to clean the display all the time. We think that’s a big hassle.

We also understand that over time some touch-screens lose sensitivity to your touch, making it more and more and difficult to navigate. That’s why we offer either easy-to-use remote controls or on-frame buttons that won’t put messy fingerprints all over your pictures.

So until the next post… that’s what CeivaJoe knows!

COMMENT