Source: Tom's Guide US | Keywords: digital, photo, frame | Themes: Digital Cameras
- 4. Westinghouse DPF-1411, $168
- 5. Kodak OLED Wireless Frame, $999
- 6. More on this topic
4. Westinghouse DPF-1411, $168
This frame is big: 14.1 inches, with a 1280x800 resolution, to be precise. But, it is lacking wireless or Web-based connectivity. Some day, perhaps there will be a big, beautiful frame that’s connected to the Web, but it isn’t here yet.
Westinghouse also makes an even bigger frame—a 15-inch model with a 1366 x 768 resolution, but we can’t find that model available for purchase anywhere.
The trouble with Westinghouse’s big screen frame is that the screen itself isn’t terribly attractive. When looking at it head-on, it is clear and moderately bright, though it retains a washed-out look and slightly blue tint. When viewed from any other angle, the picture nearly fades completely. What good are those extra inches if they don’t help you view photos from all around the room?
This 14.1-inch frame can be wall-mounted, making the viewing angle pro
blem even bigger since a wall-mounted screen can’t simply be turned and angled like a picture frame. But the kickstand can still be used without wall mounting.
The frame is formed from an attractive black plastic, with a white matte inner frame around the screen. Want to make this thing prettier, Westinghouse? Make it in a variety of colors and materials.
Navigation buttons are on the right hand side, along with the power button. A strip of ports and slots are on the left hand side (all the typical form factors: SD, Memory Stick, Compact Flash, Mini USB and USB), as well as the AC power slot.
Westinghouse has one frame feature that impressed us, and imbued the future of big-screen frames with potential. Westinghouse calls it MosaicView, and it’s a slideshow format that displays landscape and portrait photos together so that the screen gets filled up. Portrait photos don’t take up the full screen on landscape-oriented frames, so including three photos (two landscape and one portrait, for example) makes better use of space. This way, you can see more photos in a shorter period of time.
You can use the MosaicView format outside of slideshow mode, and pick and choose which photos to place together in the frame (this can get a bit creative). But, when the images themselves look so lackluster, it takes some of the fun out of this process.
Another downer? This frame’s instructions claim the frame can display AVI, MPEG 1 and 4 videos. We couldn’t get it to work. We uploaded two videos direct from a digital camera, went to the video menu, selected the videos, and then only stills from the videos were actually displayed.
This frame can’t get on the Web, which means it should have more built-in memory than a paltry 128MB.
With all these weaknesses, you might be surprised to know that the original MSRP on this frame was $300. Most retailers are marking it down to about half that, with good reason.
- Previous page eStarling Impact 7, $99
- Next page Kodak OLED Wireless Frame, $999
Its amazing how fragile technology is getting. Back in the day them black and white pictures were tough, and always there. Now, our pictures are all digital, on digital frames, etc. If we have a large war that wipes out all technology, we lose so much.. even our own pictures.. The more technology we get, the more fragile our society and way of living becomes.
I fail to see the point. I take pictures at 8MP (3264 x 2448) in RAW format then post-process them. I Think that resolutions and sizes discussed above are worthless. With such sizes even a bad picture would look sharp. I take Macro pictures of insects and enjoy looking at hidden details; which such small resolutions this is impossible.
$3 for an 12" x 18" print seems like a much more suitable solution.
NOTE: why hasn't someone just sold a regular 19" LCD display in a frame with some memory for $300. It would be much more feasible then.
I've owned 4 different frames over the past 3 years; they keep getting better. The most recent purchase, a Pandigital 10" frame ($165 or so at my local Costco) is fantastic. The screen is the best I've seen, very vibrant and easy to see at multiple angles. It doesn't have built in wireless...I'm anxious to try the Samsung SPF-83V wireless frame when I can see it local.
I agree, with the first poster, this is the most unneeded tech out there. Think of the waste produced to make these, the electricity it takes to keep it powered, and yes, the fragility of the data in such a format. I still think that photos worth framing, should be printed on a quality paper and framed in a legitimate frame.
IMO, it is far more costly for a person to run slide-shows on a computer than it would be to have it on a digital frame. One way or the other (lcd or Paper) resources will be used & the potential for waste will always exist. A digital frame has multiple advantages that can be perceived as advantageous on other levels that I can cite if anyone really cares.
Paper is great, but it doesn't change like a dynamic slideshow. Computer-screen slideshows are great, but many people don't keep a computer in the living room (yet). That's why people like digital photo frames--they are entertaining to watch, and they fit in with the decor.
Rachel Rosmarin, Editor of Tom's Guide