Comments on: The Use of Stock Photos on Church Websites

By: Church Web designer

Church Web designer — Fri, 02 May 2008 14:33:51 +0000

I feel your comments… I wouldn’t go so far as to say that using stock photos are hypocritical though. What about the doctors that use stock photos in their publications of happy clients. I hope you don’t think that all the advetisements in papers show people that actually work within the company… most of the time they are hired actors and models who are paid to hold a can of hairspray or smile and point to the car. The photos represent a demographic or type of people who would use the product or attend the business. Its pure marketing and a true marketer would know that.

I do agree that using actual images of people in the business or church is best, but to call these churches that do hypocritical is not fair. The church may not even have a photographer that can capture the images of the people as well as professional photographer can. It may be more affordable for the church to pay the dollar or two to buy a photo of a family. Also the members may feel uncomfortable about having their picture online. What do you do then… publish a boring uninviting site on the web with no pictures or images for people to relate to??

I’ve used stock photos for church websites and never paid more than a $2.00 for them. You have to know how to shop around and be a good stewart of the church’s money. Why does everyone automatically want to beat up on churches anyhow?

By: netroads » Blog Archive » The Use of Stock Photos on Church Websites

netroads » Blog Archive » The Use of Stock Photos on Church Websites — Mon, 05 Nov 2007 00:41:11 +0000

[...] the details here Filed under: stock [...]

By: Emma

Emma — Mon, 24 Sep 2007 00:39:25 +0000

I apologize that I haven’t read all the comments so I may border on repetitive. I help with my church’s website and we’ve only used photos of the congregation, but we didn’t even think about putting stock photos up, because our site is mostly geared towards the actual congregation. We’re doing a building project so a big part of the site is updates on that (which of course we use pictures of the project for). Speaking as a designer, I don’t feel like it’s necessary to have photos of people on every page in a website… it’s more important to have photos that are relevant to that page’s content.

By: Kathi Sharpe

Kathi Sharpe — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 11:26:39 +0000

I’ve used hundreds of stock photos (tho generally not for church sites) and never paid a dime. There’s many websites offering them for free or as linkware – sxc.hu is one big one (they have pay-for photoz too).

Google “free stock photos” and you’ll come up with some sites.

Unless you really, really, really, really, really want a particular picture, you shouldn’t have to pay for it when there’s so many places to get it for free.

By: Shawn Anthony

Shawn Anthony — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 04:22:58 +0000

Stock photos can be expensive, Tim. Very expensive at times. The second part of your comment raises good points too. I’m not totally sure, however, that authenticity is ever a motivator in some of the sites I’ve seen. I think it is purely marketing in most cases (i.e., marketing a very specific but narrow idea or vision of what church is in a particular community setting). This of course opens up the can of theology I’ve been been trying to get at in this post. :)

By: Tim Hoover

Tim Hoover — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 04:14:40 +0000

Interesting question and conversation.
How about is using stock photos on a church website good stewardship of funds? Often they are expensive and better images can be taken with a descent camera and a good sense of composition. As far as authenticity…the only true way to reach this may be candid photojournalism of the congregation in action. Does posing a family from your church, make the message more real than using a posed family from a stock catalog? Probably not. It just makes the people recognizable to others within the congregation.

By: Shawn Anthony

Shawn Anthony — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 01:51:01 +0000

@oh amanda: I can understand your intrigue. I can also understand using a – one – stock photo of a person on a church site. I was talking about a site plastered with a bunch of stock of people no where to be found in the church.

By: oh amanda

oh amanda — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 01:42:02 +0000

I’m really intrigued that this is such a conversation. I guess I understand it a little seeing as you are planting a church. And I appreciate that you are thinking about every facet of your church. But, I just don’t understand why it would be “false” advertising. I don’t think there is a person alive who looks at an advertisement and says, “That guy isn’t really enjoying that food. He’s just an actor.” Pictures are just there to help you visualize or understand…they just ADD TO the rest. So, if I can put up a stock photo that is QUALITY rather than my picture from my disposable 35mm, I’m going to put up the stock photo! Would someone who’s looking to go to your church really come in one day (after visiting your site) and say, “hmmm. I don’t see that guy that was on the website. What a bunch of hypocrites!” Maybe I’m just not understanding the question…

By: Shawn Anthony

Shawn Anthony — Wed, 19 Sep 2007 12:27:55 +0000

@WoshipCity: Great story! I really appreciate the fact that you and your church gave this some thought. I think it is a serious issue that more churches should consider. You and your church are inspirational!

That is a great story. On one hand, it’s quite funny, but on the other hand, it’s a little sad because that guy was looking for something deeper. Well, at least you guys learned and acted on it. Good for you!

By: WorshipCity

WorshipCity — Wed, 19 Sep 2007 04:18:41 +0000

Never, ever, did I imagine I would be considering stock imagery for a church’s website much less the theological implications of such, so thank you! I have utilized some new brain cells :)
As soon as I read this, I checked our website and regardless, what a relief, we do NOT use stock imagery of people on ours! I did bring this up with our Jack-of-All-Trades staffer who does our website and asked her opinion. She said this:
“Hmmm, you know I don’t know if I’ve done that online or not. I sure try not to and can’t remember a time when I’ve done it recently at least. I did it once on a mailer we sent out one time. We fixed a bunch of images on the sidebar of the flier and this guy came to our event. He was hacked off because he got the impression that our church was really diverse and multi-cultural because of the images and it was really a bunch of white people! He made sure to complain to (our pastor) and never came back.”

I’m still laughing at that. It is our church’s stance to be multi-cultural and diverse and we are much more so now. HOWEVER, we were a church plant, planted by middle-aged white couples in an area where predominantly middle aged white people live and so in the beginning guess who was there!

I thought you might get a kick out of that.

By: Shawn Anthony

Shawn Anthony — Tue, 18 Sep 2007 17:49:01 +0000

Jordan – I think your site is an example of a great use of stock images. I have nothing against stock images; they can be used well. I use stock images. What you are doing with them is not the same thing we are talking about here. Pasting fake people up on the site, in an effort to portray something that isn’t a reality at your church, or to perpetuate something a church hopes to achieve, is not the same thing as using aesthetic image stock. I think most people would rather see some great aesthetic imagery rather than stock photos of smiling, happy people that do not exist. Make sense?

Thanks for the thoughts, bro.

By: jordan fowler

jordan fowler — Tue, 18 Sep 2007 17:41:42 +0000

We try not to use them in our header’s etc. However, for some event boxes (like ones we have never done before) their exists no photos, so we have a choice….

waste a bunch of kingdom time to set up a mock scenario photo shoot (which could be equally considered inauthentic and cheesy) or grab a great stock quickly and use it. We often go away from the stock “faces smiling” shot on these as well. (see a sample at http://www.northwoodchurch.org).

By: Lo-Fi Tribe on Church Websites « Inept as Icing

Lo-Fi Tribe on Church Websites « Inept as Icing — Mon, 17 Sep 2007 20:47:17 +0000

[...] The Use of Stock Photos on Church Websites [...]

By: Ben G.

Ben G. — Mon, 17 Sep 2007 01:34:05 +0000

@Billy: I see what you mean. Yeah, we agree then. I just wanted to highlight the fact that what’s on a website should reflect what’s in the church, not what you’d like to see in the church.

By: Billy Chia

Billy Chia — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 21:59:42 +0000

@ Ben G.
I’m not advocating dishonesty or being unauthentic.

If your asking, “How can we minister to out community?” then inviting your friends and simply being a friend are going to be part of the conversation as well as everything else you can come up with to answer that question.

Marketing materials, whether it’s a website, brochure, or mailer always need to reinforce what you’re already doing. You’re right in that they can’t create it for you.

By: Ben G.

Ben G. — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 21:51:34 +0000

@Billy: The problem is that if you really are trying to reach out to Hispanics, why aren’t there any in the church already? Why aren’t people going and inviting all their Hispanic friends to the church?

By and large, if a church doesn’t have any Hispanics in it then it’s only a symptom of people in the church not liking Hispanics to begin with. A fake picture on the Internet won’t change that.

By: Billy Chia

Billy Chia — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 21:51:34 +0000

“relationships in real-time should be the priority”

Absolutely.

All marketing is just that: marketing.

By: Ariah Fine

Ariah Fine — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 21:44:55 +0000

Billy,
Well said, I definitely support your desire for your ‘community’ to reflect your actual geographic community. And I agree images are a great way of conveying messages that text sometimes cannot.
However, I think being geniune is extremely important. Here’s one thought:
work really hard at bringing in your first hispanic member (or family) into the community, then feel free to put a picture of them on your website, along with other pictures.

I think it’s frustrating and does more harm then good when you see a website, decide to visit and then sit uncomfortably because the church you thought you were visiting (based on the website) is nothing like the church your sitting in.

Just my two cents.

By: Shawn Anthony

Shawn Anthony — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 21:43:12 +0000

@Billy: Thanks for the clarification! I hear you now. Sorry for my slowness.

Still, I think it would be better to use text to express that desire for diversity, as it would seem to me, from my personal experiences, a Hispanic might actually be sent the other way by a picture like that, especially if they showed up and everyone in the church was … not Hispanic.

I do not, of course, write the laws on church website design and/or philosophy. So, my opinions regarding the use of text over stock images are my own. Personally, it screams of fake to me but anyone and everyone can choose for themselves, obviously.

As an aside, I think using a website to actually reach people in the community is a detrimental practice. I think relationships in real-time should be the priority. A website is simply a medium in which information regarding the church should be passed to members. So, trying to bring people “into” the church should be discarded for trying to “be church” in the already existing community. that said, I think stock image use is mostly perpetuated by the churches who want to “bring the community into their church.” What other use for this sort of stock is there?

Thanks again, bro!

By: Billy Chia

Billy Chia — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 21:32:04 +0000

Great thoughts Shawn. (and exciting to hear you are planting)

On diversity:

I live in Evansville, IN where the highest growing population demographic is Hispanic. Most churches around here are all white folks. However, a forward thinking group might say, “Wow there’s a lot of hispanics moving into the area, how can we minister to them?”

I would venture to say that a picture of a Hispanic person on a website says, “You are welcome in our community even if you are not white,” in a way that text cannot convey.

(by “community” I mean “the people of the church” as to differentiate from using “church” which often means “the building” or “our Sunday morning service”)