Original Paintings versus Slide and Computer Reproductions: A Comparison of Viewer Responses

Abstract

The issue of whether viewing works of art by computer or slide is comparable to viewing original paintings was investigated by having visitors to The Metropolitan Museum of Art view works in these three formats and having them rate the works on measures of physical and structural characteristics, novelty of content, and aesthetic qualities. Only four of the sixteen evaluative ratings showed statistically significant results among groups, typically with viewers of the original works differing from viewers in the slide and computer formats. Correlational and factor analyses provided additional support for a notion of “pictorial sameness” for artworks viewed in the three formats. The results are examined in light of Currie's (1985) transferability thesis and the concept of “facsimile accommodation” developed by the authors.

In the white cube: Museum context enhances the valuation and memory of art

“…Specifically, the affective and cognitive aspects of art appreciation (Leder et al, 2004) were enhanced in the museum context: Artworks were experienced as more arousing and more positive, more interesting and liked more. These results confirm and extend previous findings showing that original artworks in museums are liked more and found more interesting and pleasant in comparison to reproductions in non-museum environments (Brieber et al, 2014;Locher et al, 1999Locher et al, , 2001. Our study's design allows us to reject the possibility that such effects were due to order or repetition, given that these effects were found independently of the order in which participants attended both contexts, and that participants who viewed the exhibition twice in the laboratory gave similar ratings on both occasions.…”

“…There are several features inherent to the museum context that could lead to this enhancement: The size of the artworks (Clarke, Shortess, & Richter, 1984), which was larger in the museum than in the laboratory, the fact that participants encountered the original pieces in the museum and digital reproductions in the laboratory (Locher et al, 1999(Locher et al, , 2001Newman & Bloom, 2012), or that the museum exalted the artistic status of the pieces and the simulated exhibition did not (O'Doherty, 1986). In addition to the effect of the original artwork or the museum in situ, people's prior expectations about museum experiences in general (Smith & Wolf, 1996) might have also contributed to this effect by anticipating that the museum experience must be "the real thing".…”

“…Whereas Liking, Interest, and Understanding scales have often been used in empirical aesthetic research (e.g. Leder, Carbon, & Ripsas, 2006;Silvia, 2005;Swami, 2013), we also included Arousal and Valence scales to examine the affective experience in more detail than other similar studies have done before (Brieber et al, 2014;Locher et al, 1999Locher et al, , 2001. All were 6-point Likert scales, were 1 stood for "very little" and 6 for "a lot", except for valence, where 1 stood for "very negative" and 6 for "very positive".…”

Are there any differences of impression between real objects and their reproductions viewed through CRT displays and video projectors?1

“…Here, we need to consider the "facsimile effect" pointed out by Locher, Smith and Smith (1999). They studied whether the perceived pictorial and aesthetic qualities of artworks vary according to the mode of presentation.…”

“Reading” Paintings: Evidence for Trans-Symbolic and Symbol-Specific Comprehension Processes

“…The two paintings were presented as full-color prints, and resized to fit a standard 8.5" × 11" sheet of paper. Even though the artworks were presented as reproductions and not in their original size, previous research by Locher, Smith, and Smith (1999) suggests that reproduction of the paintings would not impact the students' analysis of their meanings. The title of the work, artist, year of publication, and ownership were included below the reproduction.…”