The text addresses the question of whether Couchbase, a database platform, is suitable for storing images and other binary objects, ultimately advising against using databases for such purposes. The author, an experienced architect, argues that storing large, static objects in databases is inefficient due to high operational costs and performance issues, as databases are not optimized for this type of storage. Instead, the recommendation is to use databases like Couchbase for storing metadata and small, frequently accessed data such as thumbnails, while leveraging services like Amazon S3 or HDFS for larger, static objects. This approach combines performance, operational efficiency, and cost-effectiveness by using each tool for its intended purpose. An exception is noted where a specific use case involving streaming audio files into Couchbase exists, highlighting the importance of aligning technology choices with specific application requirements.