Why Photo Requests Are Annoying

Or, I let loose my inner curmudgeon

Why Requests for (More) Photographs Are Annoying
I haven’t done a scientific survey, but I’d wager that the number-one, most-griped-about aspect of modern antiquarian bookselling (not an oxymoron) is the never-ending stream of requests we dealers get for more photographs of our books. Most requests for photos don’t result in sales, and booksellers suspect that a lot of the requests are ruses to get a photo for some purpose other than making a buying decision (inclusion in school papers, for example, or to compare to the requester’s own copy).

A good percentage of the people who ask me for photos seem to be looking for copies described as very good that might grade as near fine. And rather than explain what it is they want to know, they ask for pictures.

Part of the reason photo requests grate on booksellers is that photography is a whole new task we now have to do in order to sell books. It used to be that a short catalog description was enough, but the Internet has destroyed the trust collectors used to have in written descriptions. Book photographs started out as a novelty, became a requirement, and are now needed as proof that you have the book and aren’t lying about its condition.

Booksellers are in an arms race, with more and more photos expected by buyers. They want to see the first edition statement on the copyright page; a simple assertion that a book is a first is no longer enough (see my previous rant related to that), nor is what I often do, writing out how I know the book is a first printing. Buyers want to see the boards and proof that the book isn’t price-clipped.

Buyers are not wrong to want this and booksellers have the option of not taking any photos if they are willing to sell fewer books as a result. But it is rather sad that the main purpose of photos now is to prove that written descriptions are accurate.

A (potential) buyer of a $50 book argued customer’s side in this dispute in a series of five (!) emails he sent me when I declined to take more photos for him:

“If you want to be lazy and not provide more in your listings; fine; but for a serious buyer who wants to see for himself—like many serious buyers, as you ought to know—then you should accommodate… You oughtn’t be trying to decide for us, what we should or shouldn't want to know, or want to see.” 

What started out as a nice way for buyers to see books online has turned into a defense against unscrupulous and uninformed sellers (of course, all booksellers make mistakes and there can be differences of opinion about condition, but those used to be settled with the occasional returned purchase).

Taking good pictures requires equipment, practice, and time. Then there’s cropping and adjusting the colors so they look right. Removing backgrounds is yet another task. AI has made this last easier, but it’s not foolproof. Then the images have to be named or otherwise linked to the right inventory item and uploaded to various platforms. Photos are a lot of work.

The demand for photographs is also changing the book market. Later today I am going to look at a large collection of mint condition books, kept in ideal conditions. I looked at them four years ago and passed because the books were too much work. I expect my conclusion now will be the same, only more so. You can’t sell hypermodern firsts without photographs and the prices of most books don’t justify the time required to get the images online.

Most weeks I spend a solid day on photography. Requests for one more photo can put me over the edge. Plus every time I pull a book off the shelf to take a requested photo, there is a chance that it will be misplaced because the phone rings at that moment or the mail carrier comes in with a question about packages, or something else distracts me. Once a book is set down in an unexpected place, it can get lost very easily. If the book has a jacket protector, taking extra photos often requires removing it, increasing the risk of accidental damage and those damned pieces of plastic never really go back on as well the second time.

All this is part of an explanation why this week’s new arrival list is so short, just 22 items, for which I took 91 usable photographs (and many more that I rejected for one reason or another). Twenty-two books is all I could get done for this week.