Images in "eco friendly" publications only

It is my usual question for any editor wanting to use my photos to ask about what kind of paper they use to print the publication, especially ones who claim the images would be used in their environmental issues. These issues tend shock every editor because only a treehugger would ask such a silly question.

Illegal logging for all sorts of reasons have decimated forests in Asia, Africa and South America. Then there is the issue of deforestation causing CO2 emissions (up to 30% of greenhouse gas emissions comes from deforestation). I came to the decision a few years back to not allow my pictures to be published on non-recycled paper. I'm wondering how fellow wetpixel members see supplying images to a non-recycled paper publication, especially for big distributions over 1 million copies like newspaper etc.

 

 

PS: Certainly I realize many professionals rely on these publications for a living and I'm not judging them in any way. Often there are no alternatives and for many publications, it's a matter of cost.

Sorry Drew, but I want to be certain that I understood You correctly - If a publication is not printed on environmentally friendly paper, then You do not allow You'r pictures to be published in them - period? Is there really any alternatives left then?!

I'm not (yet) in a position where editors would ask for my photos to be published in theyr publications, so sadly I can't comment how would I react to that. But I have been working in the printing industry (in European market) for the last decade, and seen a bit what paper printhouses use, what paper's editors ask for etc. Environmentally friendly paper is used quite rarely and to get high quality 4 colour pictures (catalogues, art albums, photography magazines etc.) then 100% recycled paper is not even a solution since the quality is not compareable with coated papers. And as You pointed out, the price difference of recycled paper beeing more expensive decreases it's use even more. (Daily newspapers are a different story tough, but we all know the quality of that paper )

Tough I think You'r question to the Editors is justifyed and more professionals should point that out. It's the only way to get them "green thinking", specially if the theme of a publication is environment...

 

Scubamoose

Publishers should be looking at paper stocks like this example, a paper made from combining recovered stock with virgin fibre from plantation forests that are well managed and "cradle-to-grave" accredited by programs such as that administered by the FSC.

 

Recycling is good, but only part of a sustainable solution. Well-managed plantation forests that contain vigorously growing trees that are cut down and then re-grown are good for the environment.

 

The paper trade is a complex one... many publishers may be using stocks that are quite environmentally "friendly", but don't know that they are. I worked on a magazine project a the beginning of the century (this century) when FSC was just getting known. We found a stock that was accredited from a paper merchant in Europe, and later found that the same paper, from the same mill, was sold through different merchants under different names in different markets all around the world, but without the accreditation.

 

I believe at this point in time that any publisher can find quality stock that is from sustainable sources.

Although I come from the old school of having shot film for newspaper and magazine, the 21st century is not treating what is now being termed the archaic way of distributing visual content - ie; print with text.

 

This is a massive paradigm shift that whether other photog's are willing to accept or not, is a reality. Newspapers and magazines have seen dramatic reductions in ad revenue, major pubs are filing Chapter 11 protection, and it was just reported the LA Times is actually making a profit from the web site only - this after several rounds of layoffs. The only place print will be seen is in expensive specialty publications

 

The greenest way to distribute content is not to have it printed at all - no one seems willing to factor in the TRUE environmental costs of the amount of green house gases released from chainsaws, trucking raw logs, type of power and chemicals used in the production of said paper. Then shipping that paper requires more trucking at a minimum - with more green house gases released from diesel fumes being released into the air.

 

Internet publishing can be done - and is already being done so, with server farms being run off of green power. Web distribution is an effective and environmentally friendly means of visual content being distributed. I miss the days of picking up a magazine and flipping thru the pages, but if it means I can reduce my carbon footprint by not consuming then so be it. PDF distribution is the future for magazine. UWP Mag is but one example.

Internet publishing can be done - and is already being done so, with server farms being run off of green power. Web distribution is an effective and environmentally friendly means of visual content being distributed. I miss the days of picking up a magazine and flipping thru the pages, but if it means I can reduce my carbon footprint by not consuming then so be it. PDF distribution is the future for magazine. UWP Mag is but one example.

Absolutely. Services like Amazon Kindle will hopefully make the move to electronic distribution. I loved my Amazon Kindle but my parents have taken over it and there's like a 3 mth wait to get another one.

It'll be interesting how will come into play electronically. Unfortunately I think the issue with logging isn't about just paper but construction. Look at the illegal purchase of illegally logged Merbau wood by China for the olympic village construction.

Interesting discussion about the future of publications, but are there no other suggestions in response to Drew's original question?

 

..... PDF distribution is the future for magazine...

 

I probably agree with this .... in part ... directory/advertorial-driven publications are going this way for sure, but these types of mags have never paid that well anyway so things won't get any better for those wanting to supply content and feed their family too...

 

Have any of these pdf mags started embedding video yet? Maybe when that is mainstream it will be the death of the still image in e-magazines. I hope not.

just thinking out loud. but do you think that magazines would shift from the news stands if they were made from a lower grade material. i am only assuming that the difference would be noticable and i have not been lucky enough to see one of each side by side to compare. like i said, just thinking out loud.

 

stew

Interesting discussion about the future of publications, but are there no other suggestions in response to Drew's original question?

 

 

 

I probably agree with this .... in part ... directory/advertorial-driven publications are going this way for sure, but these types of mags have never paid that well anyway so things won't get any better for those wanting to supply content and feed their family too...

 

Have any of these pdf mags started embedding video yet? Maybe when that is mainstream it will be the death of the still image in e-magazines. I hope not.

Darren - it appears that h.264 and FLV's can be embedded using Acrobat 9 Pro - So the technology exists, now it's up to the publishers. This opens up a whole new realm of creative possibilities AFAIC. The problem is going to be delivery of these large digital multimedia publications. I've read discussions around the use of bittorrent as a means of removing the load off of a single server once a file has been seeded enough by others. This would be a legit and efficient way to deliver content of this type - words, stills, audio and pics embedded in a Digital magazine - this is the kind of platform that physical print publications alone do not provide.

The only problem is that the market would be limited to the broadband internet capable demographic, which is still much smaller than the newstand/book store market. The LDCs would have no hope in literacy. When Kingsley Holgate went round the African continent, he also brought along a container full of books to increase literacy in the rural areas. And they were used books.

I don't think the world is ready for paperless delivery yet, but I'm sure it is ready for recycled paper printing.

just thinking out loud. but do you think that magazines would shift from the news stands if they were made from a lower grade material. i am only assuming that the difference would be noticable and i have not been lucky enough to see one of each side by side to compare. like i said, just thinking out loud.

 

stew

 

Stew, doesn't have to be an issue... you can't see the difference when you make it to A1 (quality not size) blended stocks. darren

The only problem is that the market would be limited to the broadband internet capable demographic, which is still much smaller than the newstand/book store market. ...

 

Yep, that was at the heart of my "agree in part" reply earlier. A fully-fledged digital magazine will be a great thing if the market can download it, but it will be no substitute for those that like reading great articles looking at great pictures on pages (on a toilet in the wilderness when you don't want to waste batteries).

 

Maybe we can look at the mag market in 2 sectors... the mags that are kept/collected (usually high rate of editorial to ads) vs the mags you read and throw away. The latter are probably the first candidates for electronic delivery ... I guess the upside is you can collect/have access to 'em without taking up any bookshelf space...

Yep, that was at the heart of my "agree in part" reply earlier. A fully-fledged digital magazine will be a great thing if the market can download it, but it will be no substitute for those that like reading great articles looking at great pictures on pages (on a toilet in the wilderness when you don't want to waste batteries).

TMI dude! But check out Amazon Kindle, it was great to have in the Banda Sea with no electricity at night (recharged by solar panels in the day). It can keep 200 books.

 

Maybe we can look at the mag market in 2 sectors... the mags that are kept/collected (usually high rate of editorial to ads) vs the mags you read and throw away. The latter are probably the first candidates for electronic delivery ... I guess the upside is you can collect/have access to 'em without taking up any bookshelf space...

Amazon keeps every Kindle purchase available if you lose your device (Apple ... LEARN FROM THEM! That's customer service!). I think consumer handhelds ebook readers will come into play in about 5 years.

It's not about whether the pulp is managed or wild forest. It's the CO2 emissions to cut down and deliver them, vs recycling them. I believe the emissions savings are pretty big with recycling.

TMI dude! But check out Amazon Kindle, it was great to have in the Banda Sea with no electricity at night (recharged by solar panels in the day). It can keep 200 books.

Amazon keeps every Kindle purchase available if you lose your device (Apple ... LEARN FROM THEM! That's customer service!). I think consumer handhelds ebook readers will come into play in about 5 years.

Cool device. Great taste of things to come.

 

It's not about whether the pulp is managed or wild forest. It's the CO2 emissions to cut down and deliver them, vs recycling them. I believe the emissions savings are pretty big with recycling.

 

I guess my opinion is that on the emissions side, growing trees is/are good, as they are said to absorb carbon while they are vigorously growing. The fact that they are in well-managed plantations in a crop cycle rather than old-growth forests being cut down serves to uphold conservation/biodiversity concerns along with emissions issues (I don't think old-growth forests absorb as much carbon as those getting established do).

 

In recycling, there are no built-in offsets for the emissions produced by the process. So ideally all the parts of the process would have to be powered by renewables... that would be good.. if they can do that, then they could also use the same renewables to power the raw pulp process, and get the offsets from growing the trees

 

I agree that lowest carbon footprint is the best result in the long run, just not sure if recycling is the only answer in the market TODAY, which is what the original question was concerned with.

 

High quality paper stock, high conservation values, lowest environmental footprint... bring it on.