Tate Debate: Does seeing art on screen change

the way you see it in real-life?

BySusan Holtham
3 May 2013

Think back to the first time you saw an artwork. You probably
cant remember, because it was likely long before you went on a
school trip or on a family day out to a gallery. Your first look at a
work of art was probably printed in a book, which may even have
been just in black and white (with colour ink the preserve of pricier
publications), or on an overhead projector remember those?

Over time there are certain perceptions you associate with an

artwork, that become acutely familiar to you, even if youve never
seen the artwork in real life. A faded poster of van
Goghs Sunflowers in your Aunts living room that if removed
would leave a sad, pale rectangle on the wall, a Turner postcard
perched perilously on your greasy student fridge, a greetings card
of Monets Water Lillies that you gave to your Mum on her
birthday four years ago and has been on the same spot on the
window sill since.
With images in books, cards and magazines restricted to the size
of their static medium, and not capable of giving the level of detail

now achieved on, say, museum websites, when you did come
across art or an object in a gallery or museum, youd of course
judge it upon your only frame of reference seeing it in print.
Naturally you might assume an artwork would be bigger in the
flesh than it appeared on paper. But art can now been seen on
screen in multiple ways, not just the desktop computer, but also a
mobile phone, tablet and even in the cinema.