There has been so much commentary on this subject from people who actually know what they are talking about, and now here’s some from me.
It’s not researched. It’s pure gut feel, and it’s my gut and I’m not trying to pretend it has even a grain of authority.
I’m a sucker for reading physical books and magazines – that doesn’t mean that I shun the digital, if I’m going away, or even on a train journey, then I’m more likely to take my Kindle than I am to take a physical book.
However I want the full experience with my reading matter. With a story, well, it’s mostly just the story, and so holding a book should just be an inconvenience, although I do love to see what I have read on the shelves as a reminder of tales loved. So novels, even heavy weight pieces of literature, work fine for me in either media, and I admit that an old style, matt screened Kindle is dandy.
With a magazine, or any book with pictures, then the medium is vital.
The coffee table volume, the staple of publishers such as Taschen and Phaidon, both of whom I have lauded here in the past, just would not work in any other format.
I guess also publishers could not justify the cost involved and that pretty much have to be charged for first editions of monograms of famous photographers if digital was the only medium. You can’t charge £100 or more to flick through screens on your iPad (can you)?
As soon as you have images then the paper quality makes all the difference. In a day or two I’ll write about Kinfolk, it’s a newish magazine that I have only just discovered. It’s paper is almost as important as the images themselves.
I have fallen in love with it. I will tell you more. Regularly!