OpEd: Photography On-Demand

Written on December 6, 2010 by Bryan Formhals in OpEd

photograph ©Hin Chua

Despite how you may feel about viewing photographs on the internet, I think most will agree its allowed us access to a wide variety of photography that was out of reach to the vast majority of us beforehand. I don’t think anybody will argue there isn’t a shortage of interesting photography to view on a daily basis if you do some digging. But even with what for many is an overwhelming sea of imagery on the web, my hunch is that we’re still missing out on an amazing wealth of great photography.

Naturally there’s no way for me to know for sure what’s missing from the web, but something like errata editions Books on Books project, which is “dedicated to making rare and out-of-print photography books accessible to students and photobook enthusiasts” is one signpost that indicates the type of work many don’t have access to, either in print or on the web.

In fact, I’m willing to bet a high percentage of what we might call influential or canonized photography is completely inaccessible on the web, and in many cases probably in print as well. The library is one fantastic resource of course but many cities won’t have an extensive selection. And if you’re in a larger metropolis you can find a wealth of books at certain bookstores and spend hours browsing through entire books (hey, I’d buy them all if money were no object.)

When I think about this, I try to relate it to other mediums. For TV and cinema, you can pretty easily get your hands on just about anything via Netflix. With cinema, it might be a bit more difficult especially with foreign titles, but certainly not as challenging as it is to get your eyeballs on certain photography books. Maybe literature is a close corollary, and certainly painting and sculpture are difficult to gain access to in anything other than re-productions.

This could very easily veer down the path to a discussion about what constitutes the final object with photography. The overwhelming answer today will be the physical print or book. But I don’t entirely buy the argument that when you view photography on the web you’re not really seeing the photograph.

Technology races on and in a few years we’ll be viewing photography on screens we never imagined possible. After all, five years ago I never would have believed that when I wake up in the morning I’d reach for my phone to read the news, check my email and the status of 500 people I’ve known since high school. Call me optimistic about technology.

But really, regardless of technological improvements, photographers will still be faced with a dilemma. What constitutes the final version of their work? A print? A physical book? A digital archive/book/gallery?

I hope photography books don’t go extinct and I don’t think they will. I think it’s important for photography to have beautifully designed limited edition books that end up in collectors hands. However, I also think it’s important for photography to be accessible for study and enjoyment, and not just to the university bound, but to as wide an audience as demand dictates.

If we want photography students (and our culture) to become more visually dynamic, does it really make sense to keep some of the most sophisticated photography locked away and in the hands of only a select few elite? Or worse yet, to allow some of it to simply disappear completely?

Photograph ©Peter Baker

What I think would be awesome would be if there were a Photography on Demand service. A yearly subscription would provide you access to a large database of digitized books, and perhaps even complete archives from certain photographers, viewable on the iPad and next generation HDTV’s.

Now, before you raise objections, this is just a theoretical daydream. Naturally something such as this would have considerable logistical & business nightmares, like Netflix currently demonstrates, but my primary point here is that our visual culture would greatly benefit from having greater access to artistically and culturally important photography.

There’s probably an argument to be made that this would decrease the value of books, but I don’t think that’s true because a well crafted, limited edition photography book by an important photographer will always be coveted by collectors. We’re talking about two different audiences.

I think the enormous benefits of having a vast archive of photography on demand would greatly out weigh the objections. The bigger issue might really be demand. Would there be enough to make something like this financially feasible?

For now, I’ll just stick to my daydream of kicking back back on my couch and taking in a narrated slideshow of Atget or Winogrand on a 60″ next generation smart TV.