Thursday, February 9, 2012

Graduates of the Chelm School of Business

This may be the most insanely misguided biz idea of the century thus far.

VisionArt allows you to "disguise" your big clunky large-screen TV by having it display art. Great idea, no? does it work?

Why, via motorized retracting canvas, of course! And you can buy arty images for a nominal few thousand bucks each (alas, no flying toasters)! And it goes without saying that there's a Ponzi scheme element.

Forgive any typos, I'm nearly epileptic with laughter as the full weight of this craziness registers.


Anonymous said...

I'm not buying one, but it doesn't seem like a bad idea to me.

Not to say I love their art, etc. but a system that swapped out a flat TV (shiny glare reflective screen) and swapped in a flat work of art (textured oil paint) doesn't seem crazy. I know rich people with beautiful (they paid a lot) interior decoration, and this would be right up their alley if they could put whatever art they wanted in. (I'd recommend, hidden panels and all Artemus Gordon.

Jim Leff said...

I think you missed the fact that a television is itself an instrument for displaying images, and does quite a good job of it. Covering a TV screen with a canvast art contraption, and expecting people to pay $$$$ for custom art pieces, when most people have oodles of digital images, including personal ones which would make for ideal slideshows) is asinine.

Anonymous said...

I didn't miss that fact, I referenced it in my post, twice, and addressed your other concern. I just show respect to people by not belaboring every little point, sorry if I was too subtle.

Art needs to be seen in its original medium, an oil painting, a watercolor, acrylic, a silkscreen, whatever, you can't digitize it and show it on TV and consider it the same thing. It's like live jazz trombone vs. a recording: recording has its place, but it's not the same. And if you have the dough or you treasure the visual aesthetics of your art and wish to watch only a bit of TV, why compromise your home? Some people care about that.

Digital art, sure you could display that, but it would alter the feel of the interior design, it would take you modern; most people do not choose modern, they choose warmer textures for wall coverings and fabrics, and that generally does not include a large shiny plastic panel even in the form of a TV screen.

And like I said, I wasn't endorsing their art selection, wasn't clear to me if you had to buy only from their catalog, but the basic idea that you could swap back and forth between hanging art and TV screen is not a bad one. Most high end homes I've seen have the TV hidden in custom hardwood furniture of some sort, walnut panels or whatever, and the hung-framed art idea works better to my eye.

There are also many people (like say the stereotype of a Liberace or Elvis fan) who spend vast sums on what some might say are garish interiors even without this device. Like I said, I'm not buying one, but this just doesn't seem like an idea that has no audience, and if done tastefully, I might admire it.

Anonymous said...

...not to mention art that displays without electricity and without illuminated the room with a TV glow. The other night I tried to play sexy times music on Pandora via Roku... guess what lights up a room like Kenny Rogers chicken in Kramer's apartment?!

(answer is a Roku playing Pandora on a TV, if that was not apparent)

Blog Archive