Veteran photo researchers will remember the days in the last century when black-and-white photos were the norm. Most early publications were produced in b&w. Color was visually reserved for the cover. Eventually the balance shifted to color.

That meant shuffling transparencies (slides) between supplier, photo editor, designer, printer, back to researcher and eventually returned to the photographer or agency. Color brought new spark to books and magazines, but the handling and distribution wasn't pretty.

"Oh to be back to the easy days of B&W!" a researcher recently said to me. "You never had to worry about the safe return of B&W's. They were expendable. Not so with slides."

Nowadays very few emerging stock photographers, entertain the idea of taking a black & white stock photo. They surmise B&W would be more an experience for the soul, not for the sale.

B&W is no longer popular among photo editors at books and magazines (our targets here at Photosource International). In rare cases (about 5%), b&w still claims attention in commercial photography. And b&w claims even more attention in fine arts photography, where photographers take a day job to be able to sustain their efforts to produce art photography.

If you flip through current newsstand magazines, you’ll see very few b&w photographs. The general public, it was proved long ago, prefers color to b&w. (Is your TV still b&w?) Editors always conform to management’s marketing research.

The change to color started in the mid-80’s, and by the mid-90’s the changeover was almost complete. Only small publications with limited budgets or a special focus use b&w today.

You may wonder how well b&w fared in the early days of stock photography. In my own case, back in the early 60’s I put my b&w photos with one of the few early stock agencies. The agency was called "Photo Researchers." (The agency still exists today.)

When we moved to our farm in 1966, I began also selling my b&w’s via the mailbox. The delivery system was simple, and I encouraged photobuyers at publishing houses to keep my b&w pictures on file at their central library. They would send me a check each time they used one of my pictures. The honor system worked.

When I wrote the first edition of my book, "Sell & ReSell Your Photos," in 1981, I advised photographers to use the mailbox as their delivery system. The system was easy. I would send off a package of my b&w’s "for consideration" to a potential photobuyer whose photo needs matched one of my specialization areas. If my photos were accepted, very often that meant I’d found a client for life, unless the theme of the publishing housed changed, which rarely happened. From time to time, I updated my collection of b&w photos at the publishing house with new 8x10 prints, and the photobuyer returned photos that were no longer needed. These I placed in a file in our barn, which my grandchildren one day can sell to PBS or an historical photo archive.

Slowly, in the mid-80’s the preference for color grew. Photobuyers now wanted color transparencies. This gave rise to the age of "lost images." Many photographers and photobuyers alike, found they were incapable of tracking the transparencies they were handling. Lawsuits multiplied and photobuyers began dealing only with a circumscribed number of stock photographers who were savvy in their business acumen. Veteran photo researchers and photographers who are reading this will well remember the turbulent transparency mess we had to live through before the Digital Era came along and gave us a break.

Superstars began to emerge in the '90's. Photobuyers were willing to pay the high fees of certain stock photographers in exchange for "hassle-free" service, knowing it was safe to deal with them and their valuable transparencies. Photobuyers also placed confidence in the emerging stock agencies of the mid-90’s, who introduced overnight transparency delivery to clients.

And then it all changed in the early 2000’s. Digital delivery made transparency delivery obsolete. The line between superstars and gifted amateur photographers began to dissolve. Anyone with a sensitive eye who could produce high-resolution images with their digital camera became eligible to sell their photos on-line.

Yes, b&w disappeared. Color now rules. Even though b&w prints were easy to distribute and sell to photobuyers in the 70’s and 80’s, digital delivery is even easier in the 2000’s…a lucky happening for the independent stock photographer.

Few stock photographers today specialize in b&w. If they do and are successful in their marketing, they are a rare breed.

Who knows? Maybe someday in the future, the public taste in photography may change back to b&w, if only temporarily.

Rohn Engh is director of PhotoSource International and publisher of PhotoStockNotes. Pine Lake Farm, 1910 35^th Road, Osceola, WI 54020 USA. E-mail: info@photosource.com . Fax: 1 715 248 7394. Web site: www.photosource.com .

Visit the PhotoSource International homepage! Nearly seventy different sections with all the information you're looking for await you. Click here.

This newsletter isn't free. It's Referware. By receiving this, you agree to help someone each week -- on the Internet on our Kracker Barrel http://www.photosource.com/board , in a forum, with Email, or by sending/forwarding this newsletter to photographer friends. The Internet is a treasurehouse for "Free" information. The more everyone gives, the better off everyone is!