Intravenous Ketchup #0002

Intravenous Ketchup #0002

If one were to look at a blurry picture accidentally taken on a dark night, could one possibly say much about it given it's story or even write 3-4 paragraphs worth of information on the picture? The old saying goes that a picture is worth a thousand words. But is that so? Can information on a picture truly be worth only so much? What about pictures of holocaust victims, or of the aftermath of the bombings over Nagasaki and Hiroshima? Even then for pictures that define much or are not as easily distinguishable, then there's not much to say. Yet the real problem with the phrase is that why does it have to be words that define a picture? Why not numbers? Numbers could provide just as good as an interface to define meaning as words can. Number combinations such as 1337 or 8008135 can still be understood by the reader as long as they have previous knowledge on the number combination. Watch as I demonstrate: 843 378462837 333463 3837984464 8428 93 5669 22688 843 96753 93 5483 46. Even emojis (unfortunately) can provide a "sturdy" way to communicate thought and emotion from images. This can be a good way to communicate to children the value of not littering: 🚯or👮will🔫and🚔take you to🌋 (My apologies, I couldn't find an emoji for prison so I used volcano) To summarize, a picture cannot simply be dumbed down to a thousand words. Many interfaces exist and can accurately describe a picture. So my proposal is to instead say "A picture is worth a varied amount of characters and character combinations based on whatever interface the viewer would like to use".