Smartparts busts out 32-inch SP3200WF WiFi digiframe

There comes a point in a digital photo frame's life in which it grows beyond being "just a simple digiframe." For Smartparts' SP3200WF, that time is now. This 32-inch monstrosity is easily the world's hugest WiFi digital photo frame, packing a 1,366 x 768 resolution, natural wood frame with espresso finish, an SD / MS / CF multicard reader, RF remote support, and the ability to play back slideshows, videos, PDFs and even PowerPoint files. Furthermore, it's among the firm's first to integrate with Windows Live Photo Gallery, and the built-in RSS reader keeps your eyes occupied when the snaps grow stale. Too bad there aren't any video inputs (and a price to ponder).

[Prokanda @ Sep 23rd 2008 4:05PM]

what are "PowerPower" files?

[Madoc @ Sep 23rd 2008 4:06PM]

they are very similar to PointPoint files, but with extra power...

[phanbouy @ Sep 23rd 2008 4:07PM]

pow pow power wheels! pow pow power wheels! power wheels, power makes them go!

[Madoc @ Sep 23rd 2008 4:08PM]

...and less Point

[Darren @ Sep 23rd 2008 4:11PM]

What? You guys haven't heard of the Windows 7 version of PowerPoint?

Thanks for the catch!

[vijay @ Sep 23rd 2008 5:11PM]

Now this is cool but can be still bettered with a self solar system or energy recycle system for the wifi and display system.


-

[PJ @ Sep 23rd 2008 6:17PM]

OMG! I have one of these! It's called a TV.

[nathan.wong @ Sep 23rd 2008 4:06PM]

That's nice, but I can see it being very, very expensive.

[rock99rock @ Sep 23rd 2008 5:31PM]

Agreed. might as well get a real 32 incher and runa cable to it from the computer and play slideshows on it.

BTW, the picture in that "picture" is NOT 32".

[Gnrlmike @ Sep 23rd 2008 5:38PM]

It's still cheaper than having a portrait of your boss next to his boss, next to his boss...

[Bryant @ Sep 23rd 2008 9:08PM]

or a portrait of yourself next to a portrait of yourself next to a portrait of yourself beside a fireplace next to a portrait of youruself

[nDee @ Sep 24th 2008 2:47AM]

Running cost would be worst
maybe they should put a motion sensor so it only displays when people are being detected.
E-ink?

[bob sakamano @ Sep 23rd 2008 4:06PM]

Oh yes, I've been looking EVERYWHERE for something that will run my PowerPower files.... wait whats PowerPower?

[LongshotX @ Sep 23rd 2008 4:06PM]

I am not sure where the incentive is to buy this thing. Perhaps I'm missing something.

[aholine @ Sep 23rd 2008 4:22PM]

+1 At that size and price (unless there's a *real* surprise), why not display photos on your TV?

[Ryan Trevisol @ Sep 23rd 2008 4:27PM]

Well, you see, it's like your TV, you know the one with the SD card slot? Except you can't watch TV on it, but you can read PDF's from across the room, just like with a real picture frame. Except, not as sharp as on your computer monitor. Also, it completes your need to have every item in your house enabled with Wifi. You'll want to purchase this immediately after your Wifi Chair.

[kojo87 @ Sep 23rd 2008 4:37PM]

its big and expensive making you cooler if you own one.

[phanbouy @ Sep 23rd 2008 4:06PM]

and in this corner i've invented the fabulous Money Flusher 2000. it'll take any legal tender US bills and pneumatically transfer them to someone who actually fucking values the good fortune of disposable income.

[LongshotX @ Sep 23rd 2008 4:08PM]

We already have a money flusher...it is called the Bush Administration and the rest of the trickle down Corporate Socialists.

[phanbouy @ Sep 23rd 2008 4:10PM]

hey come on now, he's a "compassionate conservative", remember?

[Ryan Trevisol @ Sep 23rd 2008 4:28PM]

Well that's messed up. That was a reply to Longshot X, and it was made after all of Phanbouy's other replies.

[Serial 8-Ball Mouse @ Sep 23rd 2008 4:32PM]

@aholine

A normal LCD or plasma TV isn't designed to show still images like that. The picture frame also doesn't need as good response time, inputs, or any of the things you normally look for in a television. It can be disgustingly basic, keeping the price down bigtime. I think you can score an entry level 32" television for like... $550 now, can't you? If this thing is more than $300, they blew it.

[phanbouy @ Sep 23rd 2008 4:34PM]

@serial

howzit gonna be (insert less than symbol here) $300? even shitty featureless 24" panels are at least that much typically and have no on board storage or wares

[djpurpose @ Sep 23rd 2008 5:45PM]

You really have to wonder about a company who fakes all of their "photos". They pasted a picture of flowers into a frame in Photoshop and then pasted that frame into a photo of a room.

http://www.randjprfiles.com/Smartparts/SP3200Livingrm_HR2.jpg
http://www.randjprfiles.com/Smartparts/32FrameHR4.jpg

They really need to get someone better at Photoshop if they don't want to pony up the cash for a real photographer.

[Serial 8-Ball Mouse @ Sep 23rd 2008 5:59PM]

@phan

Look how cheap this is.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16889112023

And that's a normal monitor. This picture frame thing could have the absolute most shit specs ever outside of its ability to display a still image. So let's say $350.

[bob sakamano @ Sep 23rd 2008 4:08PM]

ironically, the other frame in this picture doesnt look digital

[thatrotierkid @ Sep 23rd 2008 4:12PM]

if they had just put video inputs on this thing, or (even better) a wireless card to stream wireless video, they could have made a killing because for every guy out there who wants a 65" 1080p HDTV to watch the game on, theres a wife who doesnt want it. so if the tv looked like a picture frame and displayed family photos, it would at least be a compromise. i know my parents would love for our family room b/c it wouldnt be obtrusive.

[Christian Martin @ Sep 23rd 2008 4:13PM]

Did anyone else read that as "Smartpants" the first time?

[sdf @ Sep 23rd 2008 5:47PM]

I still read it as that, after the umpteenth time %-)

[helloUser @ Sep 23rd 2008 4:19PM]

Am I the only one that thinks these are tacky?

[phanbouy @ Sep 23rd 2008 4:21PM]

they're all made of ticky tacky and they all look just the same

[Sisyphus @ Sep 23rd 2008 4:24PM]

No.

Digital photo frames are idiotic. Complete waste of energy for something that can be done with a stationary print (unless you change out your picture frames 10 times a day).

Just something else grandma can use to trick you into watching her slideshows.

[phanbouy @ Sep 23rd 2008 4:27PM]

@sissyfus

so you don't think it looks tacky then? i'm cornfused??!!

[miko34 @ Sep 23rd 2008 5:04PM]

I think that they are not worth it right now. Too expensive and not the best quality.
Plus, it should be able to be viewed without a backlight (like an e-reader).
I wouldn't want wall art that glows all night long.

It is a good concept that will be in everyone's home eventually. I'm just waiting for nanotechnology wall paint that can display images so that we can be in a small apartment and get a high def view of mountains or whatever, like in Total Recall.

[bangladeshiluv @ Sep 23rd 2008 4:24PM]

it's about time to retire the moving waterfall portrait

[rosscbrown @ Sep 23rd 2008 4:28PM]

Yes, I'd spend whatever one of these costs. To hang it above the sofa. So when I sit on the sofa I'll be able to see it. Oh wait a minute. I won't be able to see it if it is behind me.

LAME.

[Boarderwoot @ Sep 23rd 2008 4:33PM]

apparently 8x10 family portraits aren't enough for the Jones'

[phanbouy @ Sep 23rd 2008 4:35PM]

they've moved to the Hollywood Hills already

[Troy Powers @ Sep 23rd 2008 4:38PM]

Tip: Replace the garage sale sofa before going all digital with the photo frame.

[OneImage @ Sep 24th 2008 12:04AM]

It sells online for about $900. WHOA!!!

[Hellaphunt @ Sep 23rd 2008 4:52PM]

If I may quote myself, "That's fucking sweet!"

[John @ Sep 23rd 2008 4:53PM]

SWEET!! Now I can alternate between my velvet Elvis and velvet Kramer prints!

[GreezyG @ Sep 23rd 2008 5:32PM]

This thing must not be very good as they have an analog backup sitting on the table.

[Fanfoot @ Sep 23rd 2008 5:34PM]

Okay, so its supposed to look like a painting, except that you can change it right? Or at least that's one of the obvious uses...

So its a 32" HDTV. Or about 28"W x 16"H. At 1366x768, that's about 48 pixels per inch in both directions. Does that seem like its anywhere near enough to make a still image look good?

I know HDTVs of this size with these sorts of resolutions look perfectly fine, but those have MOVING pictures on them. Movement hides a lot of sins. Just pause the picture on your DVR and look at it carefully for a minute. You'll see all sorts of compression artefacts that you don't see when the video is in motion.

Seems like this would have to be on the order of 200 or 300dpi to really look like a picture, no?

[PhilMills @ Sep 23rd 2008 6:42PM]

There's a big distinction between looking at a freeze-frame from a video vs. a compressed digital photograph.

I have a 40" 1080p television that I do some casual photo editing on. Believe me, the 6MP images from my DSLR look quite nice on that TV.

I think it'll look just fine, except for the glow of the backlight making it look very, um, TV-ee. That's pretty much the big drawback on all of these LCD picture frames: they don't look like a picture as, um, pictured, but like a bright monitor.

[Tictoon @ Sep 23rd 2008 5:40PM]

This would be great in hotels....

[phanbouy @ Sep 23rd 2008 5:50PM]

why?

[Tictoon @ Sep 23rd 2008 6:05PM]

wouldn't it be nice to walk into your room and have an ugly painting there like in many hotels? you could just take your laptop and load the files onto an SD card and insert it into the frame.

[rcappo @ Sep 24th 2008 11:11AM]

I could see hotels using three of them behind the desk. At least at upscale tourist type locations. They could have it look like a window since they are brighter than a picture and just have the same image. At other hotels, they could have various tourist pictures from the area to show the guests what there is to do around the city. Guests could give their pictures and have them put on the screen as well.

[Bob Hernreich @ Sep 23rd 2008 6:06PM]

Didn't the book "1984" have wall size "TV" connectors in every house for info control and spying on the household?.....Hmmm.