JSouthworth wrote:
In my case it took me approximately 14 months to develop a book which I consider good enough to finalise in it's present form. And here it is;

dude, you weren't published. you were printed.  There was absolutely no editing or curation done by anyone other than your warped mind. That is not publishing.

JSouthworth wrote:
As the photobook companies like to point out in their advertising, their apps enable you to complete in a day, a task that would take a mainstream publishing company five years.
..... EDIT......
In my case it took me approximately 14 months to develop a book which I consider good enough to finalise in it's present form. And here it is;.

And with this I think you may have inadvertently hit on the main point of the post....

Is self "publishing" actually a "publishing credit?
And as much as I think it is great that you can print your own books, the answer is generally no.

What you are doing is printing publicity materials.
It is functionally the same as printing a resume, or postcards.... just in book form.

Chris Macan wrote:
Is self "publishing" actually a "publishing credit?

Does it matter? To publish something basically means to publicise it, to make it publicly available for people to review and purchase. For me, the main purpose of doing that is to make my photography accessible to a wider audience. Things like publishing credits and exhibitions in fashionable venues may be more important to a certain group of people; if you aspire to be part of that milieu then it's a different thing from producing a book.

I've seen some excellent photography exhibitions but they don't usually reach that many people, and in the end I think it has to admitted that much of the funding available for visual art in the UK is wasted through misdirection or just ends up being used to pay salaries and heating bills.

A printed book is a physical object with covers and a certain number of pages, regardless of who produced it. I Have a preference for hardback books, but the quality of the printing is the really important thing with a photo book. I think Blurb books have done a pretty good job with the latest version of my photo book.

https://www.blurb.co.uk/b/12426701-girl … lpha-women

I've just noticed that the preview doesn't show the printed barcode on the back of the removeable dust cover at the bottom below the picture with the ISBN number, neither does it show the Blurb logo on the back endpaper, which can be removed if you pay a small extra fee. They assign an ISBN number to each book you make, if you order multiple copies of the same book they will all have the same ISBN.

JSouthworth wrote:
Does it matter?

Well, that is what the thread is about.

"Patatoe, Potatoe, lets call the whole thing off".


Does it Matter....  it the grand scheme of things, probably not much.
But in reality, Printed and Published really are two completely different things.

You printed a book, which is great.
But as is obvious print on demand has little barrier to entry.
So, it is not the same as having a book "published" which has relatively high barriers to access

Chris Macan wrote:
Printed and Published really are two completely different things.

That's true, many of the books printed by Blurb and other companies are intended for private use and not for publication, a company year book would be an example.

Self-publishing may have fewer barriers to access than traditional publishing, and that's a big advantage but it does mean that you have to do all the work of designing and illustrating the book or magazine yourself, although Blurb books may be able to provide some useful advice, they regularly run interactive web sessions on various aspects of book production and design. Daniel Milnor is their creative ambassador;

https://www.blurb.com/blog/qa-dan-milnor/

https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/r … ;FORM=VIRE

The difference between a photo book company like Blurb, and a printer is that whereas Blurb provide a free downloadable app with which to create the book, a printing company will probably require you to provide a file in PDF format or more specifically, PDF/X format.

PDF/X is a subset with a number of different standards;
https://www.adobe.com/uk/acrobat/resour … pdf-x.html

More information here;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PDF
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PDF/X

If you purchase Adobe Acrobat Pro, this will enable you to convert PDF files into PDF/X files for printing. These videos show you how to do that;

https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/r … ;FORM=VIRE
https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/r … ;FORM=VIRE

Model MoRina wrote:
I laugh when people refer to models and put quotes around it as if those people aren't actually models. But, anyone who stands in front of an artist or photographer is a model. There is no qualifier for calling oneself a model. Just like putting quotes around "published." In the broad sense of where we are today, anything put out on the internet or in print is "published." I can publish photos on my Instagram, no?

True. You can also publish them on Flickr, or Viewbug, or a number of other sites.

Kavyar seems to offer opportunities for people to interact on publishing projects, which would be encouraging for people who want to get their photography or their images into print with minimum hassle;

https://www.modelmayhem.com/4064365

The basic qualifier for a model is a willingness to be photographed. A professional model is a person who gets paid for being photographed. A photographer is a person who takes photographs, and a publisher is a person who publishes, usually that would be assumed to mean that they publish magazines, books or newsletters/newspapers.

I don't know why anyone would really be annoyed by print-on-demand magazines when they simply add to the diversity of published material available. Some time ago I bought a second-hand copy of SIXTY6 (Issue 03) which I thought was quite well put together.

https://www.instagram.com/sixty6mag/