Print is Dead. Long Live Print.

by Antonio Marques

Aksgar in Print

Aksgar in PrintPrint is Dead

Yes, we’ve heard it more than once (more than once a day, probably). No future in print media. Bits and bytes and pixels are the new black. Available anywhere, anytime, fated to the quick glances of the masses and living to the whim of the next mouse click.

And in reality, what are traditional publishers doing to contradict the trend? Nothing, really, besides cursing the internets and living in constant tension with the present.

If we look at a so-called normal generic photography magazine, besides the (usually) low price of subscriptions, there aren’t many advantages when compared to a nicely structured website. The opposite is true, actually:

Content tends to be uninteresting: There are exceptions, obviously, but of late the interestingness of articles I’ve read in photography magazines aimed at the general public aren’t able to spike my interest;

More ads than content, or it feels like it: The last generic photography magazine I’ve grabbed had 72 pages, of which 6 had no advertisement. I understand that publication needs to be supported by ads, but then why charge me?

Old news, a month-or-more-old news: Point made.

Print is Dead, really.

Long Live Print

But what about non-generic photography magazines? Magazines that give more importance to real photographic work rather than which camera made it or which software processed it? Projects and essays showing the narrative power of the still image? Would that be worth to have in print?

When I started my collaboration with Aksgar, and knowing the kind of work that we want to feature on the site, I got drawn to the idea of having Aksgar in print, a sort of anthology published a few times a year with the best works featured on the site.

Is it such a wild idea? We are planning to have Aksgar published as pdf anyway, so the design and layout work will have to be done. The question is more one of acceptance and demand.

Would you be interested in reading Aksgar in print?

If we intend to go ahead with print we have two main options:

Print on Demand with a higher consumer cost but without much initial investment;

Traditional Publishing – with a much higher initial investment but much lower per-unit cost;

When large publishing houses are going under and closing magazines due to low readership, we feel a bit crazy in thinking about releasing a print version of Aksgar, but we feel that the quality of the work we publish deserves to be more than just pixels on a screen.

So, time for you to tell us. Would you be interested in reading Aksgar in print?

[poll id=”2″]

Thanks for your opinion. If you have any further comments regarding this topic, don’t forget to leave them below.

About Antonio Marques
Antonio is a photographer and writer, currently based in Edinburgh, UK. Besides his role in Aksgar, he is the producer and host of PhotoNetCast, a photography podcast. Some of his photographic work can be found at, and you can also follow him on twitter. During the day, he still makes the time for a regular job as research scientist for a biotech company.



  • Reply April 17, 2011

    shounak dhar

    a printed matter is always handy and accesible !!! we cannot xpect every person to afford tablets nd android to read and surf web pages !!

    • Reply April 27, 2011


      Yes truly agreed with you.

  • Reply May 30, 2011


    I like print, but it’s easier to consume a PDF via a tablet.


    • Reply May 31, 2011

      Antonio Marques

      Sure Clavel, but can you enjoy it in the same way as with a PDF?

  • Reply July 31, 2011

    shamshad khan


    I think i would surely buy a Photographic Magazine .

    We need ”LIFE” Go for it !!

  • Reply April 3, 2012

    Chris Nagle

    I think a less frequently published magazine may be more suitable for publisher and readers. There’s a lot of photography out there in the big wide world, so specializing could be the key.

Leave a Reply