Is the web killing good photography?

Steve Nichols of InfoTech Communications (www.infotechcomms.co.uk) thinks that we need to rethink our approach to the use of intranet and internet images. If we don't he suggests we are not doing our job and could be storing up problems for the future.

How much are you prepared to pay a photographer to take a good photograph? I suppose it depends on your budget and the use to which the photograph will be put.

A few years ago we were all producing magazines and newspapers. You had no alternative but to source good imagery. A photograph that appeared across a double page spread had to be sharp, well-exposed and have interesting subject matter.

There was no fudging - it had to be good. Likewise, A4 front covers. A full bleed four-colour front cover is at the limit of what 35mm can usefully deliver and even digital struggles a little at this size, especially if you have to crop significantly.

But the trouble is that many companies seem to be cutting back on their photography budgets. Why? Because they don't see the point in spending good money on an image that will end up two inches wide on a web page.

Intranet and intranet images are seldom more than about 250 pixels wide. Even images that are slightly fuzzy hold up well at this resolution. But lets face it, how many images do you use on the web that would have gone in the bin if you were still using print?

And because the images are so small you don't feel that you can justify the cost of commissioning a freelance photographer to take them.

On nearly all the digital photography courses I run the delegates are there because they have been presented with a digital camera and told to take their own images from now on.

This isn't because digital photography is making it easier to take pictures - a good 35mm camera is just as capable and costs less. The answer is that someone, somewhere in their organisation has decided that lower quality imagery is now acceptable.

But just as a buying a word processor doesn't turn you into a journalist, investing in a digital camera doesn't make you a good photographer.

I maintain that it is now even more important for web images to be better. Why? Because images lift web pages and reams of text are a complete turn-off.

But technology is also going to catch us out before long. At the moment, computer monitors average about 15-17 inches. Their resolution is about 72 - 96 dots per inch. That's why a 250-pixel image appears to be between 2.5 and 3 inches wide.

But monitor technology is improving and will ultimately be comparable with print resolutions. When we have 300 dpi monitors, that three-inch image is going to have to be much better. In effect, we will have gone full circle and will need to put the same amount of thought and consideration into our online photography as we did for print.

And all those grainy, blurry images that we have in our archive are going to be useless.

But wait for the future? Improve the way your images are taken and presented now and your online readers will thank you for it.

Steve Nichols (steve@infotechcomms.co.uk) runs InfoTech Communications and is editor of this ezine. He has run courses on digital photography for AWG, Standard Life, HBOS, Norwich Union, Guinness and others. See www.infotechcomms.co.uk/courses.htm for more details.