Scott Bourne wrote an interesting article recently entitled Five Reasons Why Photographers Should Build A Blog Rather Than A Website. He makes actually 6 really good arguments for blogs over a website and as one who’s done both over the years I thought I’d add a few thoughts.

Scott makes a comment about Flash which got some defensive comments in the “twittersphere” as the Flash argument usually does. I agree with Scott’s position on this. I can’t directly speak for Scott, but for me its not the technology that’s the problem, its the workflow and ease of use that is.

from the 2004 blog

I kept a formal photoblog back in 2004 for a two year run. This was my portfolio. Back then I used MovableType and posted daily. I was at a point where I really wanted to change the style and type of work I was shooting and the blog format allowed me to experiment publicly with new work I was doing. I must say that I got more milage out of that blog and made more friends (who I still keep up with today) than any static portfolio site I’ve done. I wasn’t doing any photo work for a living at that time – I was doing design work only for financial means. So for me it was all about love and making it happen.

I’m in a similar mode of thought today but I am now shooting client work, personal work and doing a podcast. But why did I go back to this format?

First off blogs are really easy to update. So easy that they encourage your attention when you have the drive to write or photograph something. This regular updating sparks conversation which is important. Its a reason people want to come back often to see progress and the reason you might reciprocate and look at someone else’s work. This is not limited to other photographers. I keep up with illustrators, designers and even clients. Blogs keep a stream of communication open. Their ease of use allows you to concentrate more on your work than the site it lives on. This is key.

from the 2005 blog

Static portfolios are just that – they are static. They represent static works created at a point in time and your career. This is not bad, its just not driving any kind of continuity in terms of visits, use or this conversation thing that I talk about.

Flash has the tendency to be over designed most the time. Animations get tedious, music has nothing to do with your work, etc etc. Is Flash bad? Flash as a technology is not bad. Can it be designed well? Yes. But the question here is NOT whether to Flash or not to Flash – the question is does your work need it? If it does you might consider spending more time on your work – not how its displayed. Plus any good designer will tell you the hardest thing about design is knowing what to leave out. Simplicity and minimalism is key – its about your work, not animations or other distractions. I’ve already seen millions of images fade in from the background – I don’t need to see another. A good photography site is more important than a bad flash site.

Portfolio galleries are important as they usually represent the cream of the crop of your own work. The best advice you need though is to get a content management system that makes these easy to update and use. I have a background in web programming, so I built my own for my portfolio (my blog is wordpress). I built my own because I’ve not seen anything that I really felt I was willing to commit to. If you don’t have this kind of background you should consider maybe a tradeout or hiring someone to build you one… but the most important thing, like the blog, is your work – NOT the site. My portfolio uses PHP to read directories on the server, resize the images and render them into HTML so I don’t have to do it with each new image. I just upload a folder of images to the server via FTP and I’m done. I delete the folder to delete the images. Couldn’t be easier. Simplicity is the key.